CNN’s Erin Burnett Skewers Regime For Scandal Deflections (Video)

Via Twitchy;

CNN’s Erin Burnett seems to be enjoying her newfound freedom to criticize the Obama administration, and on Monday night called out Jay Carney for his well-documented record of evasions and distractions — just two months after Yahoo News compiled its own list. What’s the name of her show again? “Out Front”?

Ace would love the Carney “I’d refer you to” mash-up.

CNN will be airing  “The truth about : An ErinBurnett Special Investigation” on @CNN Tuesday, August 6th at 10pE http://on.cnn.com/12V22G6

Watch with an open mind but remember that this is an Obama friendly news organization.

MORE:

Fox News’ “The Five” piled on….

Via Townhall: Obama/Biden Montage: We “Decimated” Al Qaeda:

 

Here’s what Carney said at Monday’s press briefing – note how he quickly fires back, “that’s just not true” when a reporter calls the Regime out for not clearly stating that it was “al Qaeda core” but not necessarily al qaeda affiliates that were “on the run” and “decimated.”

John Hayward noted how Al-Qaeda is a many-splendored thing  at the Conversation

I see that presidential spokesman Jay Carney did his bit to clear things up, by explaining that there are all sorts of different al-Qaedas, revolving around a “core” al-Qaeda, and it’s very silly to get them all mixed up.  Rest assured that some al-Qaedas are probably on the run, and some of them are probably feeling gosh-darn “decimated” right about now, so what Obama said during the campaign was basically true, from a certain point of view.

But then you’ve got some other al-Qaedas who can drive the entire frigging US diplomatic corps into hiding for a week by exchanging feisty emails.

It’s complicated! Thank God we have Jay Carney to explain it to us.

 

Video: Jeanine Pirro Shreds Regime For ‘Phony Scandals’

Obama and his henchmen gave Pirro plenty of material, last week, when they referred to their mulititude of scandals as “phony” and “pretend”.

Sit back and enjoy – this is Pirro at her best.

The New Hotness: Libs Keep Comparing Conservatives To Islamofascists

nbc-fail

Old and busted: —— eh – there is no old and busted. Golden oldies like calling Republicans raaaaaacist and extreeeeeem never get old as far as Dems are concerned.

But the new hotness is definitely pretending that conservatives are like Islamonazis – basically one step away from imposing their nasty Christian version of sharia law on the populace….which to them would be ten times worse than the cutesy Islamist version. There are worse evils than burying a woman up to her neck in sand and stoning her to death for adultery, ya know.

For instance, here’s a recent headline at Weasel Zippers: MSNBC’s Joy Reid Accuses Republicans Of Imposing “Sharia Law” With Anti-Abortion Legislation…

“I think what probably happened here is that the legislators in North Carolina looked at what’s happening in Texas and other states where women are fighting these laws, where they’re fighting these bills. Where they’re coming out and protesting, and where it’s becoming national news, and they decided to make the world’s most ironic sneak attack.

You know, I’m sure these legislators couldn’t tell you what Sharia law is, but what they think it is, is exactly what they’re doing in these bills, imposing a religious dictate on women.”

Only religious fascists care about what happens to fully formed infants in the womb, you see.

Here’s another one from Monday: MSNBC: Rush Limbaugh An “Egomaniacal Tyrant” Like Moammar Gadhafi…

Via Washington Secrets:

This week’s Mainstream Media Scream features Chris Hayes, host of MSNBC’s “All In” show, lumping Rush Limbaugh in with dictators feted by stars like Elton John.

***

“As one Twitter user put it, on the bright side, Gigli’s no longer the worst thing she’s done. Now, of course, this isn’t the first time a celebrity has performed for an egomaniacal tyrant who uses fear and paranoia to keep followers in line. Beyonce did sing at a New Year’s eve bash to entertain the family of Moammar Gadhafi and Elton John performed at the fourth wedding of Rush Limbaugh.”

What was Elton John THINKING???!11!

Also on MSNBC, an excerpt from what passed for an enlightened discussion about Wisconsin politics onThe Ed Show:

“Anti-women legislation has been their priority, not creating jobs,” Taylor told Schultz. ”This is no different than what I experienced when I went to Turkey and heard of what the women in the Middle East are experiencing with the Taliban trying to silence them for being at the table.”

The state House also passed the ultrasound bill and Walker says that he will sign it, declaring “I think most people think ultrasounds are just fine.”

“Any time you have a Republican governor and a Republican legislature, you’ve had, you’ve had the odd balls in control of what used to be government,” said Papantonio.

Making a woman have an ultrasound before she kills her unborn child? My God –  these “oddball Republicans” are worse than the Taliban who burn schools filled with little girls, and throw acid in the face of women who are not properly covered up.

Yeah.  I’m detecting the beginning of a trend, here, which happens to correlate well with Obama’s war on (Christian) religion. And it’s no accident that it’s all happening on MSNBC, aka “Obama’s Official Network.” This could a coordinated narrative like the incessant race-baiting of last year. Or it could simply be that these MSNBC hosts and guests are “just  a tad deranged”, as Zip suggests.

Time will tell.

Jeanine Pirro: “In God We Trust – In This Government, Not So Much” (Video)

Pirro grabbed hold of the “trust” theme in her opening statement on her Fox Show show, “Justice With Judge Jeanine”, and she didn’t let go. It’s the swift eroding of “trust” people have in this dishonest and corrupt Regime that has made the NSA surveillance  story into such a scandal. We’re seeing  “hookers and drugs in the State Dept, Big Brother invading your privacy, and more vindictive retaliatory acts towards those Americans perceived by this administration as the enemy…” Who can trust such a Regime?

The big question, Pirro noted,  is whether Edward Snowden, “the whistleblower who told us the government collects information about every one of us, a hero or a traitor?”

While the jury is still out on that one, Pirro said she could tell us who the heroes are not.

-”They are not Dir. of Natl. Intelligence, James Clapper, who lied to our faces after swearing to tell the truth in front of a congressional oversight committee.”

-”And Atty Gen Eric Holder…He’s certainly no hero. He took an oath in front of a congressional oversight committee, and he lied to their faces, said he knew nothing about an outrageous search warrant for a reporter’s records and emails when he actually approved the request. You remember him? In over his Head Holder? Who thinks the way to solve gun crimes is to hand over free assault rifles to Mexican drug cartels and then lie and say he knew nothing about Fast and Furious.”

-”And heroes are certainly not people like Hillary Clinton, who said that ‘hateful video’ caused the massacre of four Americans in Benghazi. You remember her? The one who dodged that sniper fire after landing in Bosnia. That was the truth – until footage showed her walking calmly across the tarmac with her daughter. Hillary Clinton, who said 9/11 affected her deeply because Chelsea was jogging around the World Trade Center, that day. That was until Chelsea told the press that she was actually in bed, watching the coverage on television.”

She ran off a list of the scandals and outrages, calling them “unprecedented.”

And although the president says, don’t worry, “these NSA programs are subject to congressional oversight”, Pirro asks why should we should feel comfortable with that when members of his Regime come before congress and lie with impunity?

Pirro had on Ca. Congressman Devin Nunes who’s on the House Intel Committee to discuss the incredible new poll that indicates an alarming distrust of the Regime.

Videos via Mass Tea Party

Washington DC Directed IRS Scandal Darrell Issa Says – “Paid Liar” Jay Carney Working On New Spin (Video)

jay-carney-600x3501

Carney told reporters at a recent press briefing that the White House tries to give out the best information they have, as quickly as possible during rapidly moving stories, and when new information comes in, he updates reporters with the new information. So see – if the story changes – that’s why.

But of course he has it completely backwards. His job as the White House Spokesliar is to present a narrative to the media that pleasing to the Regime. That requires that he stonewall questions, and conceal the truth for as long as possible, (with direct lies if necessary) and when the truth can no longer be concealed, the narrative is updated. I chronicled the evolving White House line on Benghazi, here. They didn’t provide the media with the facts as soon as they knew them. They provided them with malarky that was “convenient at the time.”

But that’s just me – a conservative blogger in flyover country talking.

Here’s Darrell Issa the Chairman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, today on CNN with Candy Crowley, calling Carney a “paid liar”:

“Their paid liar, their paid spokesperson, the picture behind, he’s still making up things about what happened and calling this a local rogue,” Issa told Candy Crowley of CNN on Sunday. “This is a problem that was in all likelihood right out of Washington headquarters,” he said. “We’re getting to proving it.”

Issa blasted away at Carney, stating, “The president’s spokesman – spokesperson – is saying whatever’s convenient at the time. The story changes.”

Harsh but very true, and a reason I think, so many reporters are refusing to go along with the WH spin any longer. The constant, ridiculous lies can no longer be defended.

The Daily Mail reported on the House  investigations:

A committee spokesman sent MailOnline partial transcripts of two interviews with unnamed IRS workers about the agency’s actions in early 2010, on whose testimony Issa based his bombshell statement.

One of those interviewees said it was ‘impossible’ for a few IRS agents to have orchestrated such widespread partisan targeting on their own.

‘Did [your supervisor] give you any indication of the need for the search [for tea party groups], any more context?’ one IRS witness was asked in a closed-door interview.

‘He told me that Washington, D.C., wanted some cases,’ came the reply.

The employee, who said he or she was evaluating 40 such applications for tax-exempt status from conservative organizations at the time, said ‘some went to Washington. D.C. … I sent seven.’

The interviews, which are still ongoing, are being conducted by oversight committee staff in conjunction with House Ways and Means committee staff, and include both Republicans and Democrats.

The employee told those congressional investigators that IRS headquarters had also requested two specific cases for review.

I think most of us who have been paying attention kinda figured out already that this wasn’t orchestrated by two rogue agents in Cincinnati, but now that Issa has publicized what they’ve discovered  from their investigation, thus far, look to hear Jay Carney alter his story, this week, as “new information” has come in.

SEE ALSO: 

Illinois Review: LOIS LERNER TO 1996 U.S. SENATE CANDIDATE AL SALVI: “WE’LL GET YOU!”

Salvi said the FEC controversy filed in 1996 lingered through his 1998 challenge of Secretary of State Jesse White. The Democrats used the questions raised in campaign ads that implied he had been involved in criminal activity.

“I remember getting a pizza with my kids, and looking up to see the TV showing the [Democrat] ad, and I didn’t want to upset my kids, so I distracted them away,” he said. “I’ll never forget the concern that went on for months, affecting my law firm and my business.”

And Salvi said when he thinks of that, he recalls the shock on Lerner’s face when the judge dismissed his case. “We never lose!” Lerner said, and then, he said she distinctly threatened, “We’ll get you!

Salvi said he told his wife right away to get ready for an IRS audit – that it would be coming. He instructed his firm’s accountants to err on the conservative side when filing tax returns, just in case.

But after the May 2000 dismissal, there was no contact from the FEC or from the IRS. However, there was from the FBI. In the fall of 2000, FBI agents knocked on the door of the Salvis’ home and said they wanted to ask him about his mother’s $2000 donation to his 1996 U.S. Senate campaign.

“That visit from the FBI was significant,” Salvi said. “That meant a criminal investigation, not a civil disagreement with the elections commission. And, if a person lies to the FBI, they can go to jail.”

Salvi said he reviewed the situation with the agents, and told them they were being used for political purposes. The two agents visited with his elderly mother and soon after, notified Salvi they were terminating the investigation.

“It was a nightmare,” Salvi said. “People ask me today why I’ve never run for office again after being a state representative for two terms, winning a GOP primary against the sitting lieutenant governor to run for U.S. Senate, and then finally losing an intense campaign against Durbin. All the time this long FEC ordeal continued while I ran for Secretary of State in 1998 and beyond. Why would anyone run for office again after all that? I’m very happy now,

Mission accomplished.

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform: Issa Talks IRS Targeting Investigation, Previews Thursday’s IRS Conference Spending Hearing on CNN SOTU:

WASHINGTON – House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) revealed new testimony from IRS employees in Cincinnati involved with the IRS’s political targeting today on CNN’s State of the Union.

The Committee released excerpts from bipartisan transcribed interviews between Committee Investigators and Cincinnati IRS employees. In these interviews Cincinnati IRS employees reject the White House’s claim that the targeting was merely work of “rogue” agents and say targeting of conservative political groups came from Washington, D.C.

“As late as last week, the administration was still trying to say the [IRS targeting scandal] was from a few rogue agents in Cincinnati, when in fact the indication is that they were directly being ordered from Washington,” Issa told CNN.

Below is an excerpt from the transcribed interviews between Committee Investigators and Cincinnati IRS employees:

One Cincinnati IRS employee interviewed by the Oversight Committee rejects the White House assertion and points to Washington as being responsible for targeting effort:

Gateway Pundit: Breaking: Tea Party Leaders to Testify Before Congress This Week on IRS Scandal …Update: Groups Announced:

Breaking:4Liberty at Free Republic reported – I live in Los Angeles. Our San Fernando Tea Party coordinator will be testifying BEFORE CONGRESS along with 5 or 6 others at 10 AM Eastern to 1 PM Eastern. CSPAN DOES NOT HAVE ANY SCHEDULE SHOWING THEY WILL BROADCAST.

UPDATE: I plan on attending the hearing this week.

UPDATE: I just received this information from the Tea Party Patriots.

Weasel Zippers: Former Top Obama Adviser David Plouffe Say IRS Targeting Conservative Groups “Not Political”…

On Sunday’s broadcast of ABC’s “This Week,” former George W. Bush Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove and former senior adviser to President Barack Obama David Plouffe faced off over whether the Internal Revenue Service’s abuse of its powers to target conservative political groups was a political matter.

According to Plouffe, there were no indications those abuses were politically motivated.

“There’s been no suggestion — the independent, the prosecutor looked at this, excuse me, the inspector general said there was no politics involved in this,” Plouffe said. “No one has indicated at all that the White House is involved. The IRS director was appointed under President [George W.] Bush, served under both presidents, attested…. So this was not a political pursuit.”

But Plouffe’s remarks drew a sharp response from Rove: “Baloney.” This led to a heated exchange between the two.

I see the strategy has shifted from feigned shock and outrage (It’s outrageous!) at the IRS,  to assertions that the targeting was “not politically motivated.”

Ax was singing the same tune on NBC: David Axelrod Dismisses IRS Scandal On NBC: Too ‘Stupid’ To Be Politically Motivated.

They expect their stooges in the MSM to carry their water on this. We’ll see who’s stupid and craven enough to fall in line.

PREVIOUSLY:

Lois Lerner To Republican Candidate in 1996: “Promise me You Will Never Run Again, and We’ll Drop the (FEC) Case”

Carney: Obama Couldn’t Say Anything About The IRS Abuse All The Years It Was Happening Because of the IG Report He Didn’t Know About (Video)

ABC News’ Jonathan Karl had an interesting exchange with Jay Carney, Monday during the daily press briefing.

Carney: “Nobody’s been more outraged by the reported conduct than the president of the United States”, Carney asserted, (as he likes to do.) No one ever cares as much, works as hard, is more dedicated, more outraged, or more whatever than this president. He’s the POTUS with the MOSTUS.

 Karl: “Jay, with all due respect, the outrage from the president came, last week….”

 Carney: (interrupting) “his outrage came within hours of the release of the report”...(I’m so impressed!)

Karl:” But, but, but what I’m saying is that there were  public reports that this was going on for almost a year before the presidential election. How is it that no one in the White House has a responsibility even before the IG report to say, ‘hey! By the way, this kind of activity shouldn’t be going on…let’s make sure, and take steps to get this to stop?’”

Carney: (bored, resigned tone): “Again, I refer you to the IG, who investigated this matter, the treasury Dept and others who investigated this matter.”

And then he launched into a long dissertation about the IG report, which I’m not going to bother to transcribe, because it was stupid, (and irrelevant.)

(At this point, I would have asked, “HEY DOES THE PRESIDENT NOT HAVE ACCESS TO TV, RADIO, NEWSPAPER, INTERNET? THE NEW YORK TIMES REPORTED ON THE PROBLEM AT LEAST A COUPLE OF TIMES. YOU HAD TO BE LIVING UNDER A ROCK NOT TO HAVE KNOWN THAT THIS WAS GOING ON. A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL LEADER WOULD HAVE SAID SOMETHING TO STOP IT. GEE, MAYBE YOU’RE JUST GIVING US THE RUN AROUND, HERE, BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT DID KNOW, AND WAS IN FACT ORCHESTRATING IT.”

Karl: “You’re missing the point of the question –  public reports almost a year before the election… Is there any responsibility on the part of the administration of saying, “hey IRS, we don’t treat groups differently based on politics.”

Carney: “It is absolutely our view, (crosstalk) but you’re saying accusations, and in response to these accusations there was an IG audit launched. Uh – that was appropriate and the findings are that which we now know. And the president’s response to those findings could not be more clear (finger comes out signalling a huge whopper is ahead) We need to hold people accountable and we have to make sure that this activity doesn’t happen again because it’s very important that the American people believe that the IRS applies our tax laws fairly and neutrally.”

A poll must have told him that, because I doubt anyone in this Regime could have figured that one out on his  own.

So what’s the takeaway, here? Well, apparently, before the President is allowed to say anything about accusations, he must wait until there’s a full investigation, and a report comes out (after an election, of course.)  Because to do otherwise would just be irresponsible, or something.

But this President has used  the bully pulpit like a bully for years. On any number of controversial issues, he was happy to share his strong opinions. Even non-political issues like the professor who was accosted by police when it looked like he might be breaking into a house, (it was his own) and was arrested for behaving belligerently, Obama was happy to share his opinion that “the police acted stupidly,” even before he knew all of the details about the case.  When George Zimmerman shot Travon Martin, (allegedly in self defense,) Obama was happy to share his opinion on the case before it was investigated or litigated. Travon looked just like Obama’s son, if he had one, in case you don’t know.  When Sandra Fluke was insulted by Rush Limbaugh, the otherwise reticent President  jumped right in there! He called Fluke and said, “there there, now”, and then he weaponized her to beat all pro-life Republicans over the head for the rest of the year. (Big coincidence. Pro-life groups were some of the IRS’s targets, too.)

But most of all, Obama constantly voiced his opinions on divisive issues that pitted groups of Americans against each other. Almost like it was a political tactic, or something,.

By April of 2011, one reporter for CNBC wrote:

Will someone please rein in our relentlessly hectoring President? Barrack Hussein Obama has taken his gift for inspirational oratory—one of the traits that got him elected—and turned it into something darker and more insidious.

Bam is a bully. Bad enough that he bashes Wall Street, but this President has gone farther than any in modern history in  the wrong kind of “bully” back into what Teddy Roosevelt had called the bully pulpit.

Obama’s latest broadside came over the weekend, when he vehemently criticized the state of Arizona and its (Republican) governor for passing a tough new law on illegal immigration.

The President called the measure “misguided” and all but labeled it un-American. He even ordered the Department of Justice, before the ink on this bill-signing has even dried, to examine the civil-rights “implications” of the new law. Seems like the courts and rights groups could handle that once any problem actually emerges.

Can you remember any other modern President, wagging a finger from on high, so directly and bitterly criticizing a new law passed by any state?

It’s funny how Obama’s “bully pulpit” has become the new normal, and people now pretty much expect him to pit Americans against each other.

Obama’s visceral dislike of the tea party was noted by Jake Tapper at ABC in May of 2010.

Three days after he decried the lack of civility in American politics, President Obama is quoted in a new book about his presidency referring to the Tea Party movement using a derogatory term with sexual connotations.

In Jonathan Alter’s “The Promise: President Obama, Year One,” President Obama is quoted in an interview saying that the unanimous vote of House Republicans vote against the stimulus bills “set the tenor for the whole year … That helped to create the tea-baggers and empowered that whole wing of the Republican Party to where it now controls the agenda for the Republicans.”

Tea Party activists loath the term “tea baggers,” which has emerged in liberal media outlets and elsewhere as a method of mocking the activists and their concerns.

To those of us who were paying attention during the 2008 election,  this behavior was wholly expected of Obama. In May of 2011, I wrote, Obama Still Poised To Silence Critics.

Very early in Obama’s presidency, on February 19, 2009 to be exact, I wrote a  post about how this thin skinned president was poised to silence critics of his regime.

We already knew about Obama’s history of intimidation, and character assassination.  We knew how he had tried to destroy his political enemies – at least regular readers of this site know, because I covered it while it was happening, here, and here, and here. While projecting an outward appearance of near messianic magnanimity, his underlings, lawyers, and political allies were always working feverishly to steamroll over critics, (and plaintiffs).

Mark Hyman of  The American Spectator wrote about Obama’s Chicago brand of hardball politics, recently in an article entitled, Obama’s Enemies List. As many of us feared, the “Chicago way” has found a home in The White House:

In only his third full day as the 44th president Obama personally went on the offensive against a media personality. On January 23rd, Obama warned Congressional Republicans against listening to Rush Limbaugh. The man who offered to sit down with Holocaust denier and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without any preconditions whatsoever views an American radio talk show host as a dangerous threat.

In precedent-setting action, Obama moved his director of political affairs, a highly partisan post, from the Old Executive Office Building into the West Wing. Political operative Patrick Gaspard was given White House access not experienced by his predecessors. Obama official Shauna Daly, a non-lawyer and career opposition researcher described as a “partisan dirt-digger,” was assigned to the White House counsel office. The move signals not only a new low in partisan activities, but suggests the office assignment may be intended to hide Daly’s political activities under the guise of the counsel’s attorney-client privileges.

Fast forward over two years later, and nobody even bats an eye at White House enemies listsliesthreatsintimidationbullyingcorruption, and  opposition research of anyone who looks like a threat to His Highness.

This is the new normal.

Well, the new normal has come up and bit Obama on the a$$. People are sick of  the lies. They’re not fooling anyone, anymore, and what do you know?  The media has been burned , now, so they’re not in the mood to play pattycake with the Regime anymore.  For five years now, they were happy to give Obama a pass. But now, finally, as I’ve previously noted, I’m sensing a change in their reporting which is becoming increasingly unfriendly to their former God King. I don’t want an MSM on any one person or group’s side. I want them on the side of all Americans and on the side of the truth. I suspect an honest search for the truth could lead to a very bumpy ride for Obama in the coming weeks and months.. With an MSM that has an allegiance to the truth and not  some fictional hero President (which Obama never was), the Regime is in big trouble.

The Audacity of Mendacity: The Regime Sends Out WH Toady To Do Damage Control, Fails Abysmally (Videos)

The Regime sent White House Senior Adviser Dan Pfeiffer to appear on all five major Sunday morning news shows  in an all too obvious attempt to do damage control after an exceptionally bad week of exploding scandals.  He did this by going on the offense against Republicans, and alleging that all inconvenient facts were “irrelevant.”

“Irrelevant” was Pfeiffer’s refrain: “The law is irrelevant” on the IRS scandal, he told ABC’s This Week; it’s “a largely irrelevant fact” where Obama was during the Benghazi attacks, he told Fox News Sunday; it’s also “largely irrelevant” who edited the Benghazi talking points to create a misleading picture of the attacks.

On Meet the Press, he told host David Gregory what the Republican playbook is: because they “lack a positive agenda” they’re trying to “drag Washington into a swamp of partisan fishing expeditions, trumped up hearings, and false allegations.”

“We’re not going to let that happen”, he assured Gregory. “The president’s got business for the American people.”  I guess since he was on NBC, he figured he could get away with such hyper-partisan spewage.

But he had a harder sell on CBS with Bob Schieffer, who recently referred to the Regime as “Dumb and Dumber”. 

Pfeiffer dropped the same exact rhetorical turdball on Schiffer, “This is the Republican playbook, here, which is, when they don’t have a positive agenda, they try to drag Washington into a swamp of partisan fishing expeditions, trumped up hearings, and false allegations.”

Schieffer told Pfeiffer his response reminded him of how the Nixon White House responded to Watergate, lol. Not exactly the reaction he was hoping for.

Schieffer also noted toward the end of the interview that the decision to send Susan Rice to go on the Sunday shows with the incorrect talking points was basically a “PR” stunt. And he asked a question that a lot of us have had, ” Why did you do that? Why didn’t  the Sec. of State come out and tell us what she knew, and if she knew nothing, tell us, ‘we don’t know, yet.’ Why didn’t the White House Chief of Staff come out?”, he continued. “And I mean this as no disrespect to you, but why are YOU here today? Why isn’t the White House Chief of Staff here to tell us what happened?”

Yikes, this one did not go smoothly at all.

 On ABC’s This Week, host George Stephanopoulos asked Pfeiffer about the controversy surrounding Benghazi talking points. Pfeiffer had no answer as to why the talking points showed more extensive changes than Jay Carney claimed, last November, so he went on the offensive,  arguing that Republicans owe UN Ambassador Susan Rice an apology.

There are hacks,  toadies, lackeys, flunkies, and yes-men – and then there are guys like Jay Carney and Dan Pfeiffer who are in a class by themselves.

Behold the audacity of mendacity.

On Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace reminded Pfeiffer that Obama didn’t really talk with Secretary Clinton, Secretary Panetta, or Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on the night of 9/11/2012. “He was talking to his national security staff,” Pfeiffer insisted without naming names.

Asked about whether the president entered the Situation Room, Pfeiffer says, “I don’t remember what room the president was in on that night, and that’s a largely irrelevant fact.”

Pfeiffer then argues that Wallace’s questions about the president’s handling of the Benghazi terror attack are “offensive.”

“The premise of your question”, he huffed, “is that somehow, there was something that could have been done, differently”….

Why yes. That’s exactly the premise of his question. And there indeed were things that could have and should have been done differently, as an administration official who was part of the Benghazi response told  CBS News, last week, regarding the Foreign Emergency Support Team: “I wish we’d sent it.”

The list of mea culpas by Obama administration officials involved in the Benghazi response and aftermath include: standing down the counterterrorism Foreign Emergency Support Team, failing to convene the Counterterrorism Security Group, failing to release the disputed Benghazi “talking points” when Congress asked for them, and using the word “spontaneous” while avoiding the word “terrorism.”

The Foreign Emergency Support Team known as “FEST” is described as “the US Government’s only interagency, on-call, short-notice team poised to respond to terrorist incidents worldwide.” It even boasts hostage-negotiating expertise. With U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens reported missing shortly after the Benghazi attacks began, Washington officials were operating under a possible hostage scenario at the outset. Yet deployment of the counterterrorism experts on the FEST was ruled out from the start. That decision became a source of great internal dissent and the cause of puzzlement to some outsiders.

Thursday, an administration official who was part of the Benghazi response told CBS News: “I wish we’d sent it.”

There were no  mea culpas coming from Pfeiffer, however because the Regime thinks they have a way out of Benghazi culpability. Carney and Pfeiffer have both made a big deal about the so called “doctored emails” which he blamed on Republicans, but there is no evidence that a Republican deliberately doctored any emails. We don’t know who Jonathan Karl’s source for the emails he released were, but we do know that the source  had seen the original emails but was not permitted by the White House to make copies of them.

This is how Karl says he reported the contents of that e-mail

…quoting verbatim a source who reviewed the original documents and shared detailed notes:

“We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don’t want to undermine the FBI investigation.  We thus will work through the talking points tomorrow morning at the Deputies Committee meeting.”

The source was not permitted to make copies of the original e-mails. The White House has refused multiple requests – from journalists, including myself, and from Republican leaders in Congress – to release the full e-mail exchanges.

The differences in the two versions are being taken by some as evidence that my source sought to intentionally mislead about the extent of State Department involvement in changing the talking points. The version I obtained makes specific reference to the State Department, while the version reported by CNN references only “all of the relevant equities” and does not single out State.

The White House that’s blaming Republicans and accusing them of “fabricating” emails could clear all of this up by just releasing the original emails. They have chosen not to do that. Instead, they’re adding to the cover-up. Jay Carney should be very, very careful with future actions. Up to now his statements have been excusable as doing his boss’ bidding. Accusing people of fabricating evidence in an ongoing investigation is a very serious charge and could open him up to charges of his own, perhaps obstruction of justice or something along those lines.

This line of attack is a Media Matters standby, by the way – find one flaw, one discrepancy that can be blamed on the enemy (Republicans) and use it to shoot down their whole argument. Because there was a discrepancy between some of the talking points that were released, and the White House version, the White House is now somehow totally exonerated? That’s the Empire’s story, and they’re sticking to it.

Chris Wallace agreed to disagree, but should have followed up with – how about telling your boss to release all of the emails, then? He missed a huge opportunity, there..

 

You can watch Utah Congressman Jason Chaffetz respond to that interview, here.

Trey Gowdy appeared on Fox and Friends Weekend to talk about the scandal eruptions.

He noted that there’s a an Oversight and Reform hearing scheduled for this Wednesday, which should be awesome because there are some firebrands on that committee (Gowdy of course, chief among them.) His message on the House responses to scandals, so far – be patient. Congress has to be disciplined in how they go forward. But they are determined to get answers.

The one area where Pfeiffer feigned outrage at someone besides Republicans was the IRS scandal, which is killing the Regime from a PR standpoint. So Pfeiffer pretended that the very idea of the IRS targeting the very  “teabaggers”  his boss and  media flunkies have been demonizing for the last four years is horribly offensive to them.

OMG, this is such an outrage, there’s no excuse! Who ever heard of such a thing?! That was just awful awful awful bad stuff we would never condone…

It’s  as if  suddenly the tea party conservatives who have been *cough* victimized by two rogue agents in Cincinnati *cough*(who btw, Obama heroically vowed will be “hunted down” and brought to justice just like the Benghazi terrorists) are beloved citizens the Regime wants to protect. It’s really touching how shocked and offended they are about this. And how eager they are to get to the bottom of it.

They might want to check out this Drudge headline, though: Anonymous Cincinnati IRS official: “Everything comes from the top.”

SEE ALSO:

Jonathan Strong, National Review: Pfeiffer Stretches the Truth on Benghazi Emails

On the Sunday shows today, White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer sought to discredit criticism over how the infamous Benghazi talking points were scrubbed of references to terrorism by focusing on the differences between how ABC News described a single White House email and its actual text:

Here’s the evidence that proves the Republicans are playing politics with this: They received these emails months ago, didn’t say a word about it, didn’t complain, confirmed the CIA director . . . right after that. And then last week, a Republican source provided to Jon Karl of ABC News a doctored version of the White House email that started this entire fury. After 25,000 pieces of paper that were provided to Congress, they have to doctor an email to make political hay, you know they’re getting desperate here.

This is wrong in four ways.

Keep reading at the link.

Hot Air: About those “doctored” Benghazi e-mails…

The incorrect versions – and they were inaccurate quotes – were not generated by GOP operatives. They were extracted by ABC’s Jon Karl from notes taken by attendees at the original meeting when the White House refused to initially allow anyone to have copies which could have been used for full referencing. ABC went with the notes, being the closest thing anyone had to an official record, and the GOP worked off those notes. But even then, the “doctoring” wasn’t nearly as significant as the Democrats are making it out to be.

You know what’s scary? High officials at the White House approved of Pfeiffer’s talking points, Sunday.

And they wonder why people don’t trust them.

Video: A Thursday Night Scandalpalooza

I would usually save these for my Saturday Movie Matinee, some of these videos are too good to wait until Saturday.

Especially good is Judge Jeanine Pirro’s opening monologue from her show, last weekend:  Obama Admin Lied To America!!

Mark Levin: Investigate Senate Democrat Carl Levin:

Mark Levin: Obama Scandals Are Examples of a Tyrannical Government:

Mediaite: Megyn Kelly Explodes At Liberal Guest Over Benghazi – ‘Come On! Can We Have Some Honesty?’

Out Come The Baseball Bats – TheBlaze:

 Intim-O-Gate – TheBlaze:

The President Knows Nothing – TheBlaze:

Obama Drama - TheBlazeTV – The Glenn Beck Radio Program – 2013.05.15:

Donald Rumsfeld – TheBlazeTV - The Glenn Beck Radio Program – 2013.05.15:

Dana Loesch v. Leslie Marshall Debate IRS Scandal on Sean Hannity – 5-16-13

Listen to the shamelessly hacktastic Jay Carney try to spin the Benghazi talking points release into a “victory” for the administration, calling the concern over the WH lies a  “faux controversy” drummed up by Republicans: Piers Morgan Grills Jay Carney About IRS, Benghazi: Has This Been ‘Your Toughest Week’ Ever?

ABC’s Jonathan Karl reports on the Obama Administration’s Release Benghazi Emails:

Hat tip Brian B for many of these videos.

After Months of Dishonest Spinning on Benghazi, Jay Carney Clings to ARB Report (Video)

Why does the man still have any credibility?

The Washington Times reported:

White House spokesman Jay Carney cautioned that he could not immediately respond to live testimony from the committee but went on to say that the administration remained unsure of the identity and affiliations of the attackers, noting that Ansar al-Sharia had taken credit for it on Twitter but then later recanted.

“What I can tell you is that it was the assessment of our intelligence community that the attacks were participated in by extremists,” he told reporters at a regular daily briefing. “That’s what I’ve said. That’s what Ambassador Rice said. She said on that Sunday that extremists were involved. What we didn’t know is what their exact affiliation was.”

“As you know, with regard to this group, there was a claim of responsibility, then there was a disowning of responsibility. So anybody who pretends to have known all the facts instantly is just mistaken,” he continued. “And it is always the case that things like this require careful investigation.”

Of course, that didn’t stop Jay, or his boss, or Hillary from making some very definitive statements about Benghazi for days and weeks after the attack.

On September 14, Jake Tapper asked Carney if the anniversary of September 11 might have been a good time to have extra security around diplomat and military posts.

After assuring us that they are always very vigilant on anniversaries like 9/11 (no they’re not), Jay said, but “let’s be clear….these protests were in reaction to a VIDEO that had spread to the region….”

Jake: “In Benghazi?”

Jay: “We don’t know otherwise. We have no information to suggest that it was a preplanned attack.” (Yes they had) “The unrest we’ve seen around the region has been in reaction to a video that many Muslims find offensive, and while the violence is reprehensible and unjustified it is not a reaction to 9/11 or US policy.”

More Jay from Sept. 14 repeating the youtube video drumbeat, “the unrest in the region has been in response to this video”. …”the cause of the unrest was a video…”

Reading from his script, he said “We reject its contents, we find it both disgusting and reprehensible/ America has a history of religious tolerance and has respect for religious beliefs, and that respect goes back to our nation’s founding.”

Jay Carney on Sept. 19, argued that they didn’t have evidence that it was a pre-planned attack. “Bad actors” had come on the scene of a protest armed with RPGs and mortars. “We prefer to have an investigation…”

The reporter, clearly not buying it, said, “so a random crowd that had come together with their heavy weapons – got insulted by the film, and decided to – you know – blow up…”

Carney doubled down with, “there has certainly been precedent in the past where bad actors  -  extremists who are heavily armed who have exploited situations that have developed in order to attack Americans…”

This is the 19th of September now, mind you, and he’s refusing to admit the obvious because that would reflect badly on the regime.

Jay Carney October 10, 2012: Benghazi Terror Attack: Jake Tapper Presses Jay Carney on WH Misstatements on Consulate Attack:

Note how everything that they knew the night of the attack was “still under investigation”. Note also how much faith Carney was putting into the Regime’s ringer “Accountability Review Board” that was looking into the attacks.

“Given the fact, that so much was made of the video, that apparently had absolutely nothing to do with Benghazi, there wasn’t even a protest, didn’t President Obama shoot from the hip?” Jake Tapper asked.

Carney responded that it was a moving picture, and some people were trying to politicize a situation that shouldn’t be politicized.

“There was a lot of talk about the video….” Jake persisted.

On November 9, 2012, Jake Tapper asked White House Press Secretary Jay Carney if and when the White House was going to put out a detailed “tick-tock” surrounding its response to the Benghazi attacks.

Note, Jake asked a specific question about Obama’s actions and whereabouts on 9/11 and Carney launches into a long, defensive answer about “the investigation” that was taking place.

Carney fell back on the Regime’s boilerplate: “Nobody is more interested than the president in making sure the facts are collected, we find out exactly what happened, that we bring to justice those who killed 4 Americans and that we take measures to ensure that what happened in Benghazi does not happen again.”

“We’re never going to get a tick tock” complains one of the reporters.

“That’s not at all what I said”, Carney huffed.

Dec. 20, Carney Gets Testy Over Benghazi Questions:

Here, Carney took a question from Fox News’ Ed Henry, and got huffy at the idea that anyone higher up than a few low level State Department flacks  should be held responsible. “What are you suggesting, Ed, Carney demanded, the disgust and contempt dripping from his voice. Based on the holy Gospel according to the ACB report, some reporting turned out to be wrong, Carney sneered, clearly alluding to Fox News.

As Keith Koffler noted at White House Dossier, yesterday “there is no mention in the report of the what Clinton or Obama did related to Benghazi.”

In fact, Obama isn’t mentioned at all in the document, and Clinton only once – in the context of her appointing the Review Board. There is no suggestion that Clinton or Obama were interviewed or even examined by the investigation.

What’s more, Accountability Review Boards are part of statutory State Department process that is not legally permitted to investigate the president.

It’s not even clear that an Accountability Review Board is permitted to probe the Secretary of State. The purview of a Review Board covers “employees” of the State Department who could be subject to discipline by the Secretary of State, who presumably would not be tasked to discipline herself.

Yet Carney Wednesday suggested the Review Board report exculpated Clinton.

From the briefing:

Q    So the White House is confident that Hillary Clinton acted appropriately throughout this process?

MR. CARNEY:  We are.  And I think I would point you to the Accountability Review Board and what –

Q    Which didn’t –

MR. CARNEY:  I think I would point you to the report the put out.  I would point you to what the two heads of that board, Ambassador Pickering and Admiral Mullen — each highly praised by both sides of the aisle for their long, distinguished careers — put out in a statement this week:  “From the beginning of the ARB process, we had unfettered access to everyone and everything, including all of the documentation we needed.  Our marching orders were to get to the bottom of what happened, and that is what we did.”

Again, this is an unsparing report done by two career professionals, nonpartisan career professionals, that contain within it very serious recommendations, found shortcomings that needed to be corrected, and the State Department acted immediately on that.

Apparently that answer satisfied the reporters in the room. Koffler reports there was no follow up question.

Linked by Ace of Spades, and Rachel Lucas and Bryan Prestanthanks!

Deception: State Department Removed Pattern of Attacks From Benghazi Talking Points (Video)

Victoria-Nuland1

State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland 

Fresh evidence has emerged that senior Regime officials knowingly misled the country about what had happened in the days and weeks before and after the attack.

The Weekly Standard has the exclusive story:

The Weekly Standard has obtained a timeline briefed by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence detailing the heavy substantive revisions made to the CIA’s talking points, just six weeks before the 2012 presidential election, and additional information about why the changes were made and by whom.

As intelligence officials pieced together the puzzle of events unfolding in Libya, they concluded even before the assaults had ended that al Qaeda-linked terrorists were involved. Senior administration officials, however, sought to obscure the emerging picture and downplay the significance of attacks that killed a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans. The frantic process that produced the changes to the talking points took place over a 24-hour period just one day before Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, made her now-famous appearances on the Sunday television talk shows. The discussions involved senior officials from the State Department, the National Security Council, the CIA, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the White House.

Last September at Big Government, John Sexton  highlighted four attacks that had preceded the Benghazi assault which he found mostly in British news sources:

  • A bomb thrown at the convoy of the head of the UN Mission to Libya during a visit to Benghazi.
  • An RPG fired at the Red Cross HQ in Benghazi in May.
  • A bomb thrown over the fence of our consulate on June 6.
  • An RPG fired at the convoy of the British ambassador a week later, also in Benghazi.

The original Regime talking points on the morning of the 14th referred to these attacks according to the Weekly Standard report.

Since April there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British ambassador’s convoy. We cannot rule out the individuals has [sic] previously surveilled the U.S. facilities, also contributing to the efficacy of the attacks.

By the next day, all of that information had been removed because  the State Department was worried it would be criticized, and with a election only a few months away, they couldn’t have that.

an individual identified in the House report only as a “senior State Department official” responded to raise “serious concerns” about the draft. That official, whom The Weekly Standard has confirmed was State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland, worried that members of Congress would use the talking points to criticize the State Department for “not paying attention to Agency warnings.”

In an attempt to address those concerns, CIA officials cut all references to Ansar al Sharia and made minor tweaks. But in a follow-up email at 9:24 p.m., Nuland wrote that the problem remained and that her superiors—she did not say which ones—were unhappy. The changes, she wrote, did not “resolve all my issues or those of my building leadership,” and State Department leadership was contacting National Security Council officials directly. Moments later, according to the House report, “White House officials responded by stating that the State Department’s concerns would have to be taken into account.” One official—Ben Rhodes, The Weekly Standard is told, a top adviser to President Obama on national security and foreign policy—further advised the group that the issues would be resolved in a meeting of top administration officials the following morning at the White House.

Which superior could she have been talking about? What difference does it make, huh?

There is little information about what happened at that meeting of the Deputies Committee. But according to two officials with knowledge of the process, Mike Morrell, deputy director of the CIA, made broad changes to the draft afterwards. Morrell cut all or parts of four paragraphs of the six-paragraph talking points—148 of its 248 words (see Version 2 above). Gone were the reference to “Islamic extremists,” the reminders of agency warnings about al Qaeda in Libya, the reference to “jihadists” in Cairo, the mention of possible surveillance of the facility in Benghazi, and the report of five previous attacks on foreign interests.

What remained—and would be included in the final version of the talking points—was mostly boilerplate about ongoing investigations and working with the Libyan government, together with bland language suggesting that the “violent demonstrations”—no longer “attacks”—were spontaneous responses to protests in Egypt and may have included generic “extremists”.

More via Ace:

Here, Nuland lies to the press — a FoxNews reporter — claiming that Susan Rice’s Sunday Talking Points accurately reflected the government’s “initial assessment,” despite the fact that Victoria Nuland personally had the “initial assessment” changed to suit her “superiors’” political worries.

James Rosen five minutes in:

Carney Accuses Whistleblower Lawyer of Spreading Misinformation as He Spreads Misinformation About Clearance Requests

Since Benghazi happened “such a long time ago” White House Press Sec. Jay Carney obviously didn’t even want to bothered with it today in his daily press briefing.

But Fox News’ Ed Henry asked, so Carney told him “both the State Department and Department of Defense have made clear that they are not aware of any requests for a security clearance for a private attorney.”

Unbelievable since it was only YESTERDAY that House Oversight and Reform Committee Chairman Issa released the FOUR letters he has written requesting that the Administration make information available for lawyers representing Benghazi whistleblowers:

“A lawyer for Benghazi whistleblowers has publicly stated that the State Department is blocking her client’s ability to talk freely with counsel.  Over the past two weeks, I have sent four letters requesting that this Administration make information available about how lawyers – who already have security clearances and are representing Benghazi whistleblowers – can be cleared to fully hear their clients’ stories. I have yet to receive any response from the Obama Administration.

***

4/16/13 letter to Department of State

4/16/13 letter to Central Intelligence Agency

4/16/13 letter to Department of Defense

4/26/13 letter to State Department

Click here to read about a counsel for a State Department whistleblower being blocked from helping her client.

The State Department has also denied that employees were being intimidated if they provided new information about the attacks to Congress, but since members of this Regime lie about everything, why should we believe them?

“The State Department is deeply committed to meeting its obligation to protect employees, and the State Department would never tolerate — tolerate or sanction — retaliation against whistle-blowers on any issue, including this one,” spokesman Patrick Ventrell told reporters at a briefing on Tuesday. “That’s an obligation we take very seriously — full stop.

Uh huh.

Carney actually accused Victoria Toensing, the lawyer who is representing one of the State Department employees, of spreading misinformation and politicizing this issue. {{{Attack-Watch!}}}

Toensing responded to the slander today. She finally got a letter, forwarded to her from Chairman Issa, dated May 1 from the State Dept. responding to the request for clearance of which the White House claims they were “unaware”.  The letter stated they routinely give clearances and referred her to a legal advisor’s office, which thus far has been giving her the run-around.

Toensing also noted that it’s the lawyers who should get the clearance.  “Why are they asking for this employee to come in and expose herself/himself?” she asked.

She said she couldn’t predict whether or not they would be able to get the clearance they need, but she promised that she wouldn’t give up.

Unbelieveable what we’re living through, right now, folks.

A Few Months After Repubs Agree To Raise Taxes, White House Blasts Repubs For Refusing To Raise Taxes

obamaAngry

How much respect does this White House have for  low info Americans? None.  They expect them to have already forgotten that the Republicans agreed to a massive tax hike on January 1.

Via Weasel Zippers;

White House deputy press secretary Josh Earnest whacked Republican lawmakers for their refusal to consider passing more tax hikes, saying that remains the “chief impediment” to progress on a budget and deficit reduction deal.

“For some time now, the chief impediment to reaching a grand bargain has been the refusal of Republicans to ask the wealthiest and well-connected to pay even a dime more to help us deal with our deficit challenges. I’m sad to report that, even months later, that, that continues to be the case, that we are seeing a group of Republicans in the Congress who are refusing to compromise on this,” he said.

I’m even sadder to report that Republicans DID compromise months ago with the Fiscal Cliff tax hike:

The bill raises income tax rates for those taxpayers with incomes more than $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for couples from 35 percent to 39.6 percent. These higher income taxpayers will also pay higher rates on investment income, with rates on dividends and capital gains rising from 15 percent to 20 percent. Add the 3.8 percent ObamaCare surcharge on investment income — another tax that takes effect in January, and the top rate on investment income would rise to 23.8 percent for those high-income households.

The bill also raises taxes on couples earning more than $250,000 a year and single people earning more than $200,000 by limiting personal exemptions and itemized deductions.

Estates taxes will also be increased, with the top rate raised to 40 percent, with the first $5 million in value exempted for individual estates and $10 million for family estates.

The bill also delays the automatic $1.2 trillion draconian sequester spending cuts for sixty days. The sequester cuts, evenly split between defense and certain domestic discretionary spending, were scheduled to go into effect on Jan. 1, 2013. The $24 billion cost of the sequester delay is allegedly made up with a mix of spending cuts and new revenues from rules changes on converting traditional individual retirement accounts into Roth IRAs.

Worse, the bill actually increases the deficit by including:

  • A permanent fix for the alternative minimum tax.
  • A five-year extension of tax credits for college tuition and the working poor, which were enacted as part of Obama’s failed 2009 stimulus.
  • A one-year extension for unemployment benefits, affecting two million people.
  • The long-term unemployed could count on receiving emergency benefits for another year, at a cost of about $30 billion.

More on the tax increases via The Heritage Foundation:

Ordinary Americans, as President Obama often refers to the majority of Americans, were by no means spared the tax increases allowed in the fiscal cliff deal. Americans’ disposable income is getting cut any way you look at it. The higher Social Security payroll tax is just one direct example. Higher taxes on investors and small businesses will trickle down to other Americans primarily in the form of lower wages and salaries and fewer opportunities for career advancement.

Americans dreaming of starting their own businesses will particularly be affected. Among the 13 tax increases for 2013, investors providing much of the capital for start-up firms to get off the ground took multiple hits. The rate on dividends and capital gains increased from 15 percent to 20 percent for taxable incomes over $450,000 ($400,000 for single filers).

Additionally, Obamacare imposed—for the first time ever—a surcharge on investment disguised as payroll tax. It raised a 3.8 percent surtax on investment income for taxpayers with taxable income exceeding $250,000 ($200,000 for singles). This brings the top rate on capital gains and dividends to 23.8 percent. And this represents a second layer of tax on capital gains. Most capital gains in the U.S. are first taxed at the highest-in-the-world corporate income tax rate of 35 percent.

Someone tell Josh, the REAL impediment to reaching a “grand bargain” is Obama’s intransigence on spending.

By the way, you tea partiers out there: remember back in 2009 when liberals kept telling us that Obama was a big tax cutter? All us “tea-baggers” were crazy to be saying “taxed enough already” because Obama was the biggest tax cutter the country had ever seen, and  he wouldn’t raise taxes “one single dime.” Remember how we laughed and laughed because we knew that he was going  to raise taxes big time to pay for the already bloated government leviathan he was so hellbent on expanding?

Yeah. Me too.

Bill Whittle on Obama’s Sequester Scheme: “Making It Hurt” (Video)

Bill Whittle puts into words as only he can, the diabolical sequester scheme of the Narcissist in Chief,  which he says  is the most “petty, malicious, mean spirited, cowardly and hateful thing” he’s done, so far.

“He’s deliberately inflicting as much pain on the American people as he can possible muster so he can accelerate our way into bankruptcy,” Whittle says.

Obama and his cohorts are doing lasting damage to this country, and these ruthless Alinskiites won’t stop until the people wise up…and that probably isn’t happening anytime soon…

Hat tip: Moonbattery

Obama Regime Busted On More Lies: Jeanine Pirro Whips Out The Ruler (Video)

I don’t know why we make light of this. It really isn’t funny. The Regime lies to the American people every day, and hardly anyone gives a damn. There have been so many sequester lies, it’s hard to keep track of them all.

They were caught, last week  lying about who decided to cancel the White House tours. Carney admitted it was the White House while Obama tried to pass the buck to the Secret Service.

But the most egregious sequester lie had to do with the DHS illegal immigrant prisoner releases. The Regime said they were “low risk, non criminal detainees”. LIE. As Pirro established last week, they wouldn’t have even be detained if they didn’t pose some kind of risk to the general public – per ICE written policy.

The Regime also maintained that only “a few hundred detainees have been released (“as you know”,  Jay Carney likes to tell reporters.) No we don’t know, Skippy. It turns out the original reporting was correct. It was over 2,200.

Jay. Quit already. If you have an ounce of decency, dignity, self respect — if you have a soul – QUIT.  This has got to be eating you up – going out there and lying to everyone’s faces like that every single damn day. I don’t know how these people sleep at night. I really don’t.

There”s also the Fast and Furious lies, the Benghazi lies, and their lies about the debt crisis – (there is no crisis.)

Pirro had Congressman Randy Forbes (VA) to talk about the problem of this administration’s non stop lies.

Video via Massteaparty

Video: Jeanine Pirro Rips Obama Regime For Letting Dangerous Illegal Immigrant Criminals Walk – “I Call It The Obama Amnesty Program”

On tonight’s Justice with Jeanine Pirro, the Judge started off the show by commenting on the Regime’s decision to release 2000 dangerous illegal immigrant detainees.

“The first order of government is the protection of its citizens”, she said. “But what is unbelievable is how reckless this administration has been in releasing dangerous criminals onto our streets.”

She played a clip of White House Spokesdweeb, Jay Carney back-peddling, prevaricating and deferring blame.

“That less expensive form of monitoring”, Jay Carney mentioned,  “is opening up the prison doors and letting them walk,” Pirro asserted.

The Regime has been claiming that they’re low risk – non-criminal detainees.  “Jay, if they’re low level low risk detainees, why are they in custody?” Pirro queried. Somebody’s lying.

Echoing what KS Sec of State Kris Kobach said on his radio show, last Sunday, she said, “they wouldn’t be in custody if they weren’t dangerous. They are the worst of the worst.”

How does Ms. Pirro know this? She produced the memo written by Ice’s “top dog”, John Morton, to field office directors and all special agents, providing guidance to on when to issue detainers against illegal immigrants charged with crimes.

The list of persons subject to ICE holds includes:

  • persons charged with felonies
  • persons with three or more prior misdemeanor convictions
  • persons charged with assault, DWI, unlawful flight from the scene of an accident
  • drug distribution or trafficking
  • sexual abuse or exploitation

In addition, an ICE hold can only be placed on a person who appears subject to removal or deportation.  There are others who may be subject to ICE holds, including persons who have been previously deported or convicted of illegal entry.

There are, however, some notable exceptions to the list of persons subject to ICE holds.

Notable exceptions: Persons not subject to ICE detainers

First, ICE may not place holds or detainers on persons charged with minor misdemeanors or traffic violations, as long as they have a clean immigration history.  Thus, a person arrested for littering, with no previous deportation order, is not subject to an ICE hold.

Second, a person charged with misdemeanor drug possession, with no allegation of distribution or trafficking, is also not subject to an ICE detainer.  This category will include thousands of non-citizens charged every day for possession of small amounts of marijuana.

Pirro offered her own theory as to what’s going on. “This release plan was hatched and acted on even before the mandated cuts were signed into law – it’s part of what I call the Obama Amnesty Program.”

She played a clip of Napolitano complaining that she can’t pay for the beds of so many illegal immigrants, because — sequester.

“How do you pay for them?!” Pirro Asked incredulously. “That’s your question?!!

At the end of this year, it’s estimated that they will have a carry over of nine billion dollars.  How about the 70 million you have in unobligated user fee balances?

And I have an idea…How about you reduce staff bonuses and performance awards. How about you spend those unspent funds from state and local grant programs instead of releasing criminals. How about you NOT spend money on ridiculous things like that $98,000 for an underwater robot for Columbus OH, where there are no major rivers and few lakes near by. And that $24,000 for a latrine on wheels in Ft. Worth Tx, and by the way  if you release those detainees, make me feel better – give them a bill for those transgender hormone treatments, those new teeth and those abortions they had while in our custody.”

…”But no problem! – These criminals are going to voluntarily come back to face their own deportation – the same ones who snuck into the country and have been determined to be a danger to the rest of us. Hope springs eternal, doesn’t it?”

She had Iowa Congressman Steven King and Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu on to talk about the issue.

King said that he would like to get John Morton to appear before the House Judiciary hearings to explain the prison releases.

Some of the detainees, Babeu noted had been “convicted not just charged – convicted for weapons violations, drug smuggling, (these are cartel members, these are narcotic traffickers!), drug dealers, these are people who have been in fights,  and aggravated assaults against police officers…. How in the world can you say these are low risk, non criminal detainees?!  These are the worst of the worst. These are people who have been convicted of child molestation! We have people who have been released, I’ve been told by ICE agents, who have been  charged with man-slaughter.”

Pirro brought up the whistleblowers who want to come forward and expose what’s going on. But Babeu said several memos have been sent out to ICE agents about the prisoner releases -  anyone who talks about it “outside our agency shall be disciplined up to and including termination, creating an atmosphere of fear and intimidation.”  He said, “these federal agents, who swore an oath to protect our country, are being intimidated from doing the right thing.”

Via Massteaparty

  • Blog Stats

    • 4,474,137 hits
  • free counters
  • Is your cat plotting to kill you?
  • Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 464 other followers

    %d bloggers like this: