Obama On The Beach

Update: Why are the Obama scandals not ending on “End of Obama Scandals Week”? It’s for many reasons we discuss below and for some that are too dumb to check: Holder’s huddle with media on press freedoms will be … off the record. Yup, believe it or not that is the strategy.

We see right through the most transparent president ever and the latest stunt is to have corrupt Eric Holder corrupt the press with an off the record session to explain why it is that his lies are not perjury and why he should be allowed to investigate himself. You really can’t make this stuff up, it is strictly “made in Chicago”.

The shocker in this mess is that the New York Times refuses to go along with this off the truth off the record massage parlor trick. Jake Tapper is on the job mocking the DNC for stating that any news bureau not attending the off the record whorehouse de-briefing “forfeits your right” to gripe.

This is not the way to put down a rabid dog. The Obama scandals which were to be killed this week continue to bark and bite.

—————————————————————–

Last week many in Big Media predicted and pre-celebrated the end of Obama scandals on this Memorial Day week. The reasoning was that with congress in recess and Barack Obama again on tour all would soon be well and the Barack Obama scandals forgotten or at least defanged of bite:

“The golden roar of the Obama scandals may whimper to an end today. As Congress adjourns for Memorial Day recess, a ten-day break from hearings, hearings, and more hearings threatens to push the various controversies out of the public eye, leaving the GOP with an urgent problem: how to maintain intensity over the scandals without any congressional machinery to do so. [snip]

But it’s questionable how far any of these narratives can go without Issa’s hearings acting as their engine. As Politico notes, with some despair, the IRS story appears to have run its course. “Congress has hauled virtually every conceivable witness before several committees to testify on their role in the debacle,” Politico wrote, and while everybody got film of themselves beating up on IRS agents for future campaign spots, no link to the White House was established. [snip]

But as the tap of new information increasingly runs dry, the villains of the scandals may start to look less like the officials called before Darrell Issa, and more like Darrell Issa himself.”

Barack Obama today attempted to demonstrate he is in command and that the skies are sunny. Obama went to the Jersey shore, playground of Snookie. But it rained.

Barack Obama on the beach reminded us not so much of a cheerful watery outing but of the apocalyptic novel/film “On The Beach” whose players await slow moving yet inescapable nuclear doom and death even as all appears pleasant and unending.



On the beach, Barack Obama and his Big Media protectors might rejoice. After all, they effusively write, the Obama scandals thus far have not hurt Obama in the polls. Big Media will acknowledge that the Obama scandals eat time and distract from Obama’s goals. Some in Big Media even advise patience because it takes time for the soup and the scandals to come to a boil. Wait About Two Months, Then Check the President’s Approval Rating.

Barack on the beach might hope the scandals will fade away especially with the planned trips to Africa and today’s moment of aw: Chris Christie wins teddy bear on Jersey boardwalk for best friend. Hanging on the Jersey shore will help Christie and his fellow Republicans in this November’s elections score a win. But for Obama the short lived good feelings will only remind him of wet clothes – if the scandals persist.

Obama on the beach thought this week, with congress in recess, the scandal tide would ebb. But it is a rip tide dragging down Obama. Today on what was supposed to be the end of scandals, Darrell Issa issued subpoenas in the Benghazi scandal. Benghazi is not going away.

It appears Republicans understood that this was not to be a week of slow down but instead they issued orders and had Congressional Staffers Work on IRS Scandal Through Recess:

“Congressional staffers continue to work on the Internal Revenue Service scandal by preparing documents and related materials for lawmakers to be ready when they return from the Memorial Day recess in June.

The Memorial Day recess gives aides time to go through hundreds of pages of documents requested by Congress from the IRS and the Treasury inspector general, as well as gather more materials, The Hill reports.

There are also several IRS staffers that lawmakers want to interview, focusing on the Cincinnati office where the targeting of conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status began.

“Right now, we’re entering this document-collection phase, interview phase,” Republican Rep. Charles Boustany of Louisiana, chairman of the House Ways and Means Oversight subcommittee, told reporters Thursday. “And then there will be more hearings in June when we get back.

Obama on the beach, already drenched, better prepare to be waterlogged. It might be that after five years the dunderheads at the GOP “leadership” might be learning something – they might even have a strategy to keep the scandals from dying this Memorial Day week:

“Congressional Republicans head into next week’s Memorial Day recess armed with a strategy designed to keep the controversies that have consumed Washington in the news back home.

Both House and Senate Republicans will focus on the Internal Revenue Service targeting conservative groups for extra scrutiny as well as the still-open questions about Benghazi. And more and more, they’ll try to tie them together into a made-for-2014 narrative of an unaccountable and out-of-control government.

In interviews on local television and radio programs and with newspapers, Senate Republicans plan to talk about the Obama administration’s “credibility gap.” They’ll throw into the mix Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’s request that health industry officials help fund “Obamacare,” a move Republicans call a “shakedown” of the companies she regulates, according to a Senate GOP leadership aide.

Lawmakers will argue that a “lack of details, stonewalling,” and what they call an “ever-changing White House narrative” on both Benghazi and the IRS have led to a trust deficit with the public, a sentiment reflected in recent polls, the aide said.”

Shock of shocks it appears the Republican leadership actually understands the importance of the scandals as a POLICY ISSUE, not just a scandal issue:

“Part of the aim is to get voters to question how they can trust the administration, and the IRS more specifically, to enforce key provisions of Obama’s health care law after improperly targeting Americans.

This fits into Republicans’ emerging scandal-riding midterm election strategy—one that the GOP’s congressional campaign committees think can blend easily into their anti-Obamacare message to help the party take the Senate in 2014. [snip]

“We’re focused on getting to the bottom of this. What we saw over the last week demonstrates that we need to look further. That we need answers on the who, what, where, when, and why,” the aide said.

House Republicans are working to keep a tight lid on their talking points, emphasizing the known facts and staying out of the White House’s way as it continues to trip over its explanation of what happened at the IRS and who knew what, when.

“The message is IRS overreach,” a senior House GOP leadership aide said. “This is a problem about government inserting itself into your life.”

And right now, no matter what the inquiry finds, Republicans come out ahead. The best case scenario is that the IRS was simply “out of control.” The worst case is that someone in power was intentionally targeting conservatives, the aide said.

And don’t forget the national press. House Republicans seem sure that the other controversy—the Justice Department’s seizure of phone records from reporters and editors at the Associated Press—has as much staying power as the IRS and Benghazi issues.

It’s a “double-barreled attack on the First Amendment,” the aide said, noting that the press, always game to write about itself, is sure to keep both IRS and DOJ in the news for weeks, with little help from the GOP.”

These policy scandals are not going away even if Obama goes to every beach in the country. House committee investigating whether Holder perjured himself in testifying on DOJ leak probes is a good indicator that the Obama scandals are not going away. Holder investigating Holder will assure that the Obama scandals remain the focus of a skeptical public.



The Associated Press and James Rosen DOJ Obama scandals are an attempt to intimidate reporters. The New York Times reports that they too were targets although this appears to be more an attempt to intimidate the whistle-blowers.

This was supposed to be the week that memory of Obama scandals would be wiped clean. Instead today there are new scandals emerging. The latest one is about potential ObamaCare insider trading as reports emerge from WaPo: WH held investor talks on ObamaCare. Today we have new scandals instead of dying scandals.

The Obama scandals were supposed to be forgotten on Memorial Day.

Share

146 thoughts on “Obama On The Beach

  1. Admin: superb article. The color of press coverage of scandals in not red or blue. It is green. There is money in it. And if the respective heads of big media want to sit back and let Fox and friends get all that money and big chunks of their audience—if their loyalty to the fraud goes that far, then sooner or later they will have hell to pay. For make no mistake, the same vultures that are circling over this hyper corrupt administration are circling over the heads of big media too. That is the price you pay when you lose your independence. But the business side of this is highly problematic. As Casey Stengel said, do the math. If 50% of the public wants the truth, then FOX is likely 50% of the market over the course of time, because they are the only ones really pushing these stories. And the remaining 50% of the public who does wants bread and circuses will go to big media as a whole, and they can fight over it like starving dogs. If that 50% is equally divided, then CNN, NBC, ABC and CBS can proudly report to their respective shareholders that they now have a whopping 12% of the market, and the stockholders are then free to skin their executive teams alive.

    I wondered about that Mediate outfit. So I found out who they are. Dan Abrams, former head of MSNBC is their founder. Dan is a left wing zealot, and birds of a feather flock together on his blog. Their approach to this matter reminds me of a two year old, who thinks he can make the monster go away if he just puts his hands over his eyes. Too much conventional wisdom (spelled group think), too much incest and too little common sense from that crowd.

  2. Wbboei, discussed this news from a Breitbart article. The original news comes from a New Yorker article. What has to raise eyebrows at the Obama gangland garages is that the New Yorker is an Obama protecting squad. Is it still?

    http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/05/how-justice-fought-to-keep-rosens-warrant-secret.html

    “The Obama Administration fought to keep a search warrant for James Rosen’s private e-mail account secret, arguing to a federal judge that the government might need to monitor the account for a lengthy period of time. [snip]

    The new documents show that two judges separately declared that the Justice Department was required to notify Rosen of the search warrant, even if the notification came after a delay. Otherwise: “The subscriber therefore will never know, by being provided a copy of the warrant, for example, that the government secured a warrant and searched the contents of her e-mail account,” Judge John M. Facciola wrote in an opinion rejecting the Obama Administration’s argument.

    Machen appealed that decision, and in September, 2010, Royce C. Lamberth, the chief judge in the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia, granted Machen’s request to overturn the order of the two judges.

  3. Correction: it is the price you pay when you are the media and you hitch your wagon to a falling star–in this case, a corrupt, incompetent, lame duck.

  4. What has to raise eyebrows at the Obama gangland garages is that the New Yorker is an Obama protecting squad. Is it still?
    —————————————-

    Amen. It calls to mind the rhetorical question raised by General MacArthur, to who does a general owe his loyalty?

    A temporary occupant of the White House, who in this case happens to be corrupt and incompetent? or

    In the case of big media to the color green.

    Correct answer:

  5. Admin: big media is a problem, which is akin to The Prisoners Dilemma.

    We all know what that is: two co-conspirators make an agreement that if they are ever caught, they will both keep their mouths shut. When they are caught however that agreement is tested by the prosecutor. The first one to confess and implicate the other gets a reduced sentence, and the one who lives by the deal and keeps his mouth shut will do the full sentence. Each of the co-conspirators must now decide whether he trusts the other. If he can trust him to keep his mouth shut, and he keeps his mouth shut, then both of them may walk. But if he keeps his mouth shut and his co-conspirator confesses, then he is screwed.

    Likewise, the scions of big media are wedded to a common narrative, i.e. hail to the first black president, who will wash away our collective sins and create a new heaven and a new earth. Oh sure, FOX will not be a party to this, but the messiah will marginalize them, and the tea parties as well. So the deal is struck, and for that they proceed to betray not the law, but the American People. Then crash, boom, bang come all these scandals. And try as they might, neither the messiah or their propagandists can get the genie back in the bottle. OMG! Fox was right!! Sharyl Attkinsson was right–the only investigative reporter in all their ranks–the one they marginalized she was right. The public is making its deal with FOX and there is nothing we can do about it but break our deal. If we all keep our mouths shut maybe we can weather this storm. But if one of us steps out then the rest of us are screwed. And the audience we have attracted by preaching the virtues of Obama aint gonna like it either way.

  6. I thought McCain was either Gen. Jack D. Ripper or General Buck Turgidson. Dr. Strangelove is one of my all time favorite movies, and I just watched it again with our neighbor two weeks ago.

  7. The sin eaters:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/05/28/fire-eric-holder-column/2367713/

    “Recently, Attorney General Eric Holder appeared before the House Judiciary Committee to answer questions about the administration’s sweeping surveillance of journalists with the Associated Press. In the greatest attack on the free press in decades, the Justice Department seized phone records for reporters and editors in at least three AP offices as well as its office in the House of Representatives. Holder, however, proceeded to claim absolute and blissful ignorance of the investigation, even failing to recall when or how he recused himself.

    Yet, this was only the latest attack on the news media under Holder’s leadership. Despite his record, he expressed surprise at the hearing that the head of the Republican National Committee had called for his resignation. After all, Holder pointed out, he did nothing. That is, of course, precisely the point. Unlike the head of the RNC, I am neither a Republican nor conservative, and I believe Holder should be fired.

    Holder’s refusal to accept responsibility for the AP investigation was something of a change for the political insider. His value to President Obama has been his absolute loyalty. Holder is what we call a “sin eater” inside the Beltway — high-ranking associates who shield presidents from responsibility for their actions. Richard Nixon had H.R. Haldeman and John Ehrlichman. Ronald Reagan had Oliver North and Robert “Bud” McFarlane. George W. Bush had the ultimate sin eater: Dick Cheney, who seemed to have an insatiable appetite for sins to eat.

    This role can be traced to 18th century Europe, when families would use a sin eater to clean the moral record of a dying person by eating bread from the person’s chest and drinking ale passed over his body. Back then, the ritual’s power was confined to removing minor sins.

    For Obama, there has been no better sin eater than Holder. When the president promised CIA employees early in his first term that they would not be investigated for torture, it was the attorney general who shielded officials from prosecution. When the Obama administration decided it would expand secret and warrantless surveillance, it was Holder who justified it. When the president wanted the authority to kill any American he deemed a threat without charge or trial, it was Holder who went public to announce the “kill list” policy.

    Last week, the Justice Department confirmed that it was Holder who personally approved the equally abusive search of Fox News correspondent James Rosen’s e-mail and phone records in another story involving leaked classified information. In the 2010 application for a secret warrant, the Obama administration named Rosen as “an aider and abettor and/or co-conspirator” to the leaking of classified materials. The Justice Department even investigated Rosen’s parents’ telephone number, and Holder was there to justify every attack on the news media.

    Yet, at this month’s hearing, the attorney general had had his fill. Accordingly, Holder adopted an embarrassing mantra of “I have no knowledge” and “I had no involvement” throughout the questioning. When he was not reciting the equivalent to his name, rank and serial number, he was implicating his aide, Deputy Attorney General James Cole. Cole, it appears, is Holder’s sin eater. Holder was so busy denying responsibility for today’s scandals, he began denying known facts about older scandals, such as the “Fast and Furious” gun operation.

    In the end, Holder was the best witness against his continuing in office. His insistence that he did nothing was a telling moment. The attorney general has done little in his tenure to protect civil liberties or the free press. Rather, Holder has supervised a comprehensive erosion of privacy rights, press freedom and due process. This ignoble legacy was made possible by Democrats who would look at their shoes whenever the Obama administration was accused of constitutional abuses.

    On Thursday, Obama responded to the outcry over the AP and Fox scandals by calling for an investigation by … you guessed it … Eric Holder. He ordered Holder to meet with news media representatives to hear their “concerns” and report back to him. He sent his old sin eater for a confab with the very targets of the abusive surveillance. Such an inquiry offers no reason to trust its conclusions.

    The feeble response was the ultimate proof that these are Obama’s sins despite his effort to feign ignorance. It did not matter that Holder is the sin eater who has lost his stomach or that such mortal sins are not so easily digested. Indeed, these sins should be fatal for any attorney general.

  8. Issa No Longer Pulls Punches – Issues Subpoena Of Obama State Department Over Benghazi

    by Ulsterman on May 28, 2013 with 18 Comments in News

    Some may not fully understand or appreciate just how much this move will elevate the situation between the Obama White House and Congress regarding the still ongoing Benghazi Massacre cover up. A formal subpoena of the Obama State Department, specifically calling for cooperation from current Secretary of State John Kerry, is a bold move by Congressman Darrell Issa. It appears the gloves are truly coming off

    Issa’s move is certainly good news. That said, as some of you are likely already considering, even with the subpoena the Obama White House could simply swamp Issa’s investigation with piles of redacted papers as it did with the Fast and Furious gunrunning investigation. In that case, even when Eric Holder was found in Contempt of Congress, Holder and the Obama administration simply shrugged and ignored the investigation.

    What differs now though is that the media is not quite so willing to fully cover 100% for this administration.

    Second, a looming midterm election is threatening to remove many Democrats from Congress. Do they want to be caught on the wrong side of history here?

    Lastly, as the scandals swirl around Barack Obama, more Americans (not nearly enough – YET) are questioning if this president has lost the moral authority of not only his own administration, but the entire government. (Of course many of you knew from the very beginning he never had it.) If more people demand answers, sooner or later, even Democrat politicians will at the very least, have to step aside and allow those answers to be found. -UM

  9. admin
    May 29, 2013 at 1:08 am
    ————————-
    Notice how they bend over backwards to cap the problem at Holder. He has become a liability to the president, who of course the president nothing about this. Of course we have only his word for it. But suppose for the moment that all this is true. In that case, the following question becomes material:

    Question: If Holder is a “sin eater”, then what does that make Obama?

    Answer: A potted plant perhaps? If so then he is our first potted plant to be president. And it would be discriminatory to hold him responsible for anything.

  10. The feeble response was the ultimate proof that these are Obama’s sins despite his effort to feign ignorance.
    ———————–
    The most important sentence because it suggests that this leftist rag does buy the plausible deniability that all the worker bees in his administration have been working feverishly to provide for him. Meanwhile I am still waiting to see the written order he gave to save our troops in Benghazi, and I will not accept the explanation that he had it, but the Portuguese water dog ate it, which is probably the next lie we will be hearing out of him.

  11. The Declaration of Independence Opposes Obamaism

    In the Declaration of Independence our forefathers wrote of King George the III that, “He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.”

    This was posed as one of the many reasons that we separated ourselves from Great Britain and became the United States of America.

    Does this complaint not sound like what King Obama is doing now?

    http://www.publiusforum.com/2013/05/28/the-declaration-of-independence-opposes-obamaism/

  12. RUSH (Video at link; transcript here):
    “…But the point is that Obama and Christie want to help. They really want to help! They really want this to be fixed and solved. So it is a case of the good intentions overwhelming any of the results. The good intentions matter far more than the results. Now, this bipartisanship that the media is salivating over? There isn’t any bipartisanship here. Obama has money. Governor Christie wants the money, Governor Christie needs the money, so the people will be helped. So Christie praises Obama.
    It’s a master-servant relationship. That’s exactly the kind of bipartisanship that the Drive-By Media wants. Master-servant. That’s “bipartisan” That’s what’s going on here. (interruption) Master-SERVANT. Master-STAFF. Don’t take it any further than that, Snerdley. I’m not going on going there. I’m just telling you. Obama’s got the money; Christie needs the money. “Obama wants to walk the beach; that’s what we’re gonna do. Obama wants a photo-op; it’s what we’re gonna do….”
    http://dailyrushbo.com/limbaugh-obama-and-christie-a-master-servant-relationship/

  13. GO MITCH!
    ———
    I came back to express some reservations about having quoted Rush here today. My mental background processor has since suggested that what Rush had to say last night might be what fires up the racial card. Which is probably being dusted off as we speak because George Zimmerman’s trial is due to start June 10.

    So I’ll try to think deeper sooner next time and won’t cry if my previous comment becomes invisible.

  14. Leanora
    May 29, 2013 at 5:19 am
    —————————-
    This was my speculation awhile ago. Perhaps I was merely echoing something I read somewhere else, I honestly do not recall. The timeline, the motivation, the m.o., the fixation on the election, all of them point to that conclusion. Big media was well aware of it, and that is why they censored the story. T h e y k n e w. Therefore, we must take with a grain of salt whatever denunciations they may utter as new revelations emerge. Absent the testimony of Hicks, Nordstrom and Thompson they were would have succeeded in keeping a lid on it. Then of course they learned that their own ox was being gored as well.

    But what about the public. Whither goes thou? It is not what is true that determines the outcome of litigation. It is what the jury comes to believe at the end of the trial, which from an empirical standpoint may or may not be true. Same situation here. In the face of mounting evidence, Obama’s best defense to date will be I did not know about ANY of this, I read about it in the newspaper, and I am as outraged as any of you. In other words, the Portuguese water spaniel ate my homework. Is that credible? It depends entirely on who you ask.

    The public at this point is equally divided on Obama, roughly speaking. None of this has penetrated the cerebral cortex of half our population. That is not exactly a vote of confidence on this country, now is it. But it is what it is. What will it take to set them straight? Well, they have two choices. One choice would be to stop judging his character by the color of his skin. The other choice would be to stick with their meme that we are a racist society, but then look themselves in the mirror, lay down their flattering unction and say I too have sinned. I too am a racist. And racism used for any purpose, including defending their I am not a crook messiah, is the last bastion of scoundrels.

  15. I have been meaning to say something about this.

    One clear symptom of the racism that permeates our society is the discrimination we have historically practiced and condoned toward sharks. Sharks are after all God’s creatures, yet they fare no better in our racist lore, than good old Charlie Manson.

    Sadly, this country does not have the guts to have an honest discussion about sharks.

    Well, not me. I believe we must come to a new understanding on this sensitive subject.

    Furthermore, I think Obama should lead the discussion, given his passion for counter cultural belief systems.

    He could divert attention from all the scandals, and really sink his teeth into sharks.

    Or, perhaps, vice versa.

  16. Kim Strassel of the Wall Street Journal reported on the misdeeds of former White House counsel Bob Bauer which consisted of using the threat of enforcement action to dry up contributions of Obama opponents during the 2008 primary.

    However, she did not connect those misdeeds to the ultra vires actions of multiple government agencies targeting the same groups, after Obama took office, and is former campaign counsel became White House Counsel

    To me, the connection was so obvious, that I made several comments on the subject right here on this blog. I speculated that Bob was most likely the one who was in a position to direct these nefarious activities, and most likely did so.

    If so, then his actions manifest a disdain for the rights of American citizens and a contempt for the Constitution that reflects poorly on him and his law firm. They are, at best Nixonian, and at worst Stalinist.

    Now, it seems, conservative pundits are tapping their way to that same conclusion. Why they did not do so immediately, is a mystery to me, but it is better that wisdom come late, rather than not at all. Frankfurter would agree.
    ————————-
    Lerner is probably a small fish in all this. I don’t know that it’ll ever be proven that the IRS abuse was Obama administration policy, but the evidence that Sekulow has collected plus the abuse that was dealt out to Catherine Engelbrecht hint very strongly that it was. You just don’t get so many executive branch agencies going after the same law-abiding person unless someone above those agencies is calling the shots.

    The evidence available at this juncture points at the White House counsel’s office. That’s where Bob Bauer went after calling for the government to abuse Obama’s opponents during the 2008 campaign, both in the Democratic primary and the general election. Bauer later left the White House counsel’s office to head back to the Obama campaign, which among other things called out Romney donors and falsely accused them of breaking laws and being generally bad people. Bauer’s wife is Anita Dunn, the White House communications specialist of “I love me some Chairman Mao” infamy. The pair are the sort of people Barack Obama has always surrounded himself with: hardened ideologues, radical, and intolerant of anything that may ever get in Obama’s way. Bauer and Dunn also aren’t the type who would need marching orders to trash and abuse the president’s opponents. They’re Maoist self-starters.

    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/05/29/irs-abuse-included-lois-lerner-other-higher-ups/

  17. In re. the Judiciary Committee Chairman letter to the Honorable Eric Holder

    Subtext to read:

    The Turning of the Screw?

    Or, perhaps:

    Show Us What You Can Do With This One, Shaka Houdini.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2013/05/29/letter-from-chairman-goodlatte-to-attorney-general-holder-on-fox-news-reporter/

    Yes, Mediate, this will all go away after Congress returns from a long Memorial Day weekend. Just like you promised.

    And hey Eric, don’t sweat it, a general denial will be enough.

    Obama has 100% confidence in you.

    Be happy.

  18. The speech they are crafting right now for when they need it.

    “My Attorney General has come to me with a heavy heart. He assures me that he has done nothing wrong, but neither does he wish to be a burden to me, or to become an obstacle to the accomplishment of a new age Soviet Republic and employment center for Harvard Graduates to which he and I are unflinchingly committed. I begged him to stay. But in a sublime act of fealty and devotion to me he declined. And so I accepted his resignation, which caps a long and distinguished record of public service as an a US Attorney, Judge, and now Chief Law Enforcement Officer of the nation, and successor to Cabana Al Gonzales. Time does not permit me to recount everything he has done for this nation, but the short list of his long and distinguished career would surely include defending United Fruit against scurrilous charges that they arranged for the death of union organizers, securing the pardon of the worst tax cheat in history, terminating prosecution of voter fraud and intimidation of voter fraud and intimidation cases by Black Panthers against (ugh) white people, covering up gun running activities to drug lords in Mexico, being held in contempt of Congress, spying on reporters, and lying to congress, and giving me plausible deniability on everything. Where will I ever find someone like him . . . even Bauer cannot do what Eric could. If you will indulge me on a very private and personal reaction. Not only was Eric a loyal friend, and a trusted public servant. He was also an inspiration. As a young child, I remember the stories about him taking over a building in a student revolt at Columbia University, and I said to myself King Obama, if he can take over a building then you can take over a country. And the rest as they say is history. Thank you.”

  19. The Obama administration — and the United States — is wasting valuable energy getting bogged down in scandals at a time when major global shifts are challenging its crucial role as a beacon of freedom, says best-selling author, biographer and journalist Conrad Black.

    “I don’t think this is, to be fair, a particularly scandalous administration,” says Black, a biographer of Richard Nixon whose new book deals with the history of America’s emergence as a global power. “I don’t think it’s very successful, but I don’t think they’ve done anything that should cause the president to be under a moral cloud.”

    Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/newswidget/conrad-black-book-strategy/2013/05/28/id/506577?promo_code=125BD-1&utm_source=125BDTelegraph_Media_Group&utm_medium=nmwidget&utm_campaign=widgetphase1##ixzz2Ui5TxgXq

  20. to all who make Big Pink “work”: many thanks.
    ———————
    Greta sounding off on IRS culture, ultimately Obama culture. He sets the tone. Always has. From the beginning. So obvious that Senator Casey and newcomer Matt Cartwright took their 2012 campaign cues from BO. Any way – Greta has some IRS news and an opinion.
    Why do we have to pay for THIS? Now the IRS is hiring a LAWYER to help them with the scandal! The IRS is FILLED with lawyers – use one of those! by Greta Van Susteren Posted in: IRS, scandal
    I know….big picture….the cost is not that much….but really, why do we have to pay it? Is there no end? no sense of responsibility? Yes, it is part of the Washington culture but at some point it has to stop.
    We catch the IRS with “its pants down” and what happens? We taxpayers get a bill – for the price of THEIR NEWLY HIRED LAWYER. I think this messed up….what do you think? Why do we have to add someone to the payroll? (And I hope it is added to the payroll and not an hourly hire…lawyers in DC can charge $1,000/hour in those big firms!)
    There are literally thousands of lawyers already working at the IRS – the IRS commissioner could use one of those we are already paying. And don’t tell me those lawyers are too busy — I know there are some that get to work late and leave early (remember the lawyers at the SEC downloading porn during office hours?) I am sure the IRS Commissioner could find a dozen lawyers inside the IRS who could use some more work!

    http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/2013/05/29/why-do-we-have-to-pay-for-this-now-the-irs-is-hiring-a-lawyer-to-help-them-with-the-scandal-the-irs-is-filled-with-lawyers-use-one-of-those/

  21. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/05/29/a-bad-relationship-how-the-press-came-to-love-obama-more-than-itself.html

    A Bad Relationship: How the Press Came To Love Obama More Than Itself
    by Stuart StevensMay 29, 2013 4:45 AM EDT

    As the scandals pile up, the press keeps finding excuses for the president, writes Stuart Stevens.

    In Dan Brown’s new novel, Inferno, the lead character is struck with amnesia, unable to remember critical events even as he’s trying to save the world. Let’s borrow that useful plot device and imagine if American journalists woke up and couldn’t remember who was president. It would be interesting to ask them a few questions:

    “Some have suggested that that these are difficult days for the administration, but I think not… It’s as if the administration is playing a game to see just how far they can push their true believers in the press corps before some semblance of self-respect emerges and they push back.” (Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty)

    What would you think of a president under whom the IRS targeted his harshest political opponents, during his reelection campaign?

    What would you think of a president whose obsession with leaks and secrecy was so great that he used the Justice Department to obtain phone records of reporters, in violation of Justice’s established procedure?

    What would you think of a president whose head of the Department of Justice signed a criminal warrant against a leading journalist working for the news organization most critical of the president—and monitored the movements of the journalist and even went after his mother’s phone records?

    What would you think of an administration that directed the president’s press secretary repeatedly to deliver false information concerning the death of an American ambassador?

    These are not hypothetical questions—and yet there is an entire class of journalist so invested in a certain moral and ethical image of the president its members are unable to entertain facts that might tarnish that image. They are the pro-Obama equivalent of Birthers, never letting emerging facts cloud the conclusion they’ve already committed to hold.

    It’s your latest primetime drama: “Scandal” featuring President Obama.

    The same journalists who did not hesitate to assume the worst of previous Republican administrations—E.J. Dionne, Walter Pincus, Jack Shafer, to name a few—are now tying themselves in knots trying to explain that there is nothing to see when the IRS probes Obama’s enemies or that the Justice Department secretly seizing the phone records of one of their peers and his mother was really a good thing. One has to wonder if it were their mother and her records, how that mother-son conversation would play out.

    “Well, Mom, you know, the president has to do these things, and I’ve told you time and again not to email Aunt Sally about my sources. Is that any way to keep hope alive?”

    What to make of journalists who have decided that it’s more important to defend the president than to defend their own profession?

    Some have suggested that these are difficult days for the administration, but I think not. Sure, they may put on a grim face now and again before the public, but away from the cameras, they must be giggling like the stoned kids of Obama’s old Choom Gang.

    ‘Well, Mom, you know, the president has to do these things.’

    It’s as if the administration is playing a game to see just how far it can push its true believers in the press corps before some semblance of self-respect emerges and they push back. You can picture White House staffers chortling in amazement as they pick up the Washington Post to read Pincus’s stern defense of criminalizing journalism. They must be asking themselves, “What do we have to do to get these people angry?”

    They might have thought they’d get Mother Jones to justify this, but convincing serious journalists to parrot this line is the stuff they give out medals for in White House communication operations.

    Of course Jay Carney is no stranger to testing the limits of self-respect. This is a man who left a once-great newsmagazine to work for Joe Biden. How bleak does your professional life have to be that you figure it’s a step up to work for the man who stole words from Neil Kinnock? I laugh every time I see some reporter trying to shame Jay into telling the truth. Please. Jay knows that in Washington, shame is for sissies and better to be a Biden stooge than a sissy.

    It’s disheartening to see the Obama administration attack the press in unprecedented ways and the reaction from the press is to accept that blame and then go forth to explain to the world that the president isn’t really like this. Most of the time he is a good guy. He loves us, honestly. He just has these moods.

    By playing the victim, the press empowers not only this administration but also every one to follow. So if you’re okay with Eric Holder going after your mom’s phone records, just remember that you are giving permission to the next AG who might be some Republican you and your editorial board loathe.

    But like Obama destroying the public financing system for elections, once you let the genie out of that bottle, good luck in getting it back inside.

  22. Nothing new here but it is ABC News so low information voters might see it:

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obamacares-irs-connection-2014-rallying-cry-conservatives/story?id=19275388#.UaXmd2RAQYE

    Conservative groups are preparing to use the deepening public distrust of the Internal Revenue Service to discredit the Affordable Care Act, and the Democrats who support it, in the 2014 election cycle.

    Now that the IRS has admitted to unfairly targeting conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status, Republicans plan to make the agency, which is responsible for carrying out much of President Obama’s health care law, the poster child for dysfunctional government, and a giant liability for Democrats.

    “This has certainly been a kind of unwelcome vindication for the Tea Party,” said Dean Clancey, vice president of public policy at FreedomWorks, which spent more than $19 million in the 2012 election. “We consider this a wonderful teaching opportunity to remind people that the IRS is the main enforcement agency of Obamacare; even more so than [the Health and Human Services Department].”

    When it comes to the Affordable Care Act, the mood among conservatives is a lot rosier now compared to what it was in the 2012 election when talking about health care was all but off limits because the Republican nominee for president, Mitt Romney, had signed his own health care bill into law as governor of Massachusetts.

    The 2012 [election] should have been a referendum on that law, but it couldn’t be because of Mitt Romney,” said Keli Carender, national grassroots coordinator for the Tea Party Patriots. “With him out of the way, we can go back to focusing on Obamacare.

    The IRS’s recent troubles have been disastrous for the agency’s popularity, just as it prepares to play a larger role in enforcing the Affordable Care Act’s universal mandate.

    A new Gallup poll found that distrust of the IRS was now approaching lows last seen in the mid 1990s, when the agency endured blowback for its policy of targeting low-income taxpayers for audits and collection of back taxes. [snip]

    Republicans hope that the deeply unpopular agency will become an albatross around the necks of Democratic candidates, especially those in more conservative districts.

    There is no better boogeyman in politics than the IRS,” said one Republican strategist. “So the fact that you can put the IRS on a piece of literature or you can talk about them in a television ad, that’s a good thing for us.” [snip]

    It is exactly that politicization that former IRS Commissioner Mark W. Everson feared in his testimony before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee last year. Everson said that by putting the IRS in charge of executing the health care law, Congress opened the agency up to apolitical “savaging” not unlike what it experienced in the late 1990s when the agency was even more unpopular than it is now.

  23. admin
    May 29, 2013 at 4:48 pm

    Nothing new here but it is ABC News so low information voters might see it:
    —————–
    Yes. But did you notice one thing: they slipped up and called it Obama care. As in Obama, their messiah, their our to death do us part hero. I guess they had to take a hit either way. Suppose for example, they had called it The Affordable Health Care Act. With health care costs rising dramatically due to this legislation, that may have been an even bigger mistake on their part. It is like the Patriot Act. No self respecting patriot would want anything to do with this Orwellian construct. Whether they call an unaffordable act Affordable, or a treasonous act Patriotic, the end result is right out of Animal Farm.

  24. Trouble in Nevada!
    ***

    Developer guilty of illegal contributions to Reid

    RENO, Nev. (AP) — A Nevada powerbroker who headed a billion-dollar real estate company and pulled the strings of state politics as a prominent lobbyist for more than a decade was convicted Wednesday of making illegal campaign contributions to U.S. Sen. Harry Reid.

    Harvey Whittemore, 59, could face up to 15 years in prison and hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines after a federal jury returned guilty verdicts on three counts tied to nearly $150,000 illegally funneled to Reid’s re-election campaign in 2007.

    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_DEVELOPER_CONTRIBUTIONS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-05-29-15-34-55

  25. I wonder whether the Obama/Holder/Bauer cabal gets it. Gets what? Gets the fact that Issa is not someone to be trifled with. His approach is steady, logical and non-partisan. He is building a rock solid case against them from the ground up. Flip the bad actors, and give them use immunity in exchange for testimony against the bigger fish. And I am quite sure that he will not be deterred. There is still the possibility that someone will lean on Boehner, and he will call off these attacks. But that would be a serious mistake. Why? Because sooner or later, people will ask, what happened to my country during this reign of terror. And if Republicans do not have answers—the kind that can only come from the kind of investigation Issa is conducting, then the public will see them as part of the problem and not the solution. And justice will be ill served.

  26. Update: Why are the Obama scandals not ending on “End of Obama Scandals Week”? It’s for many reasons we discuss below and for some that are too dumb to check: Holder’s huddle with media on press freedoms will be … off the record. Yup, believe it or not that is the strategy.

    We see right through the most transparent president ever and the latest stunt is to have corrupt Eric Holder corrupt the press with an off the record session to explain why it is that his lies are not perjury and why he should be allowed to investigate himself. You really can’t make this stuff up, it is strictly “made in Chicago”.

    The shocker in this mess is that the New York Times refuses to go along with this off the truth off the record massage parlor trick. Jake Tapper is on the job mocking the DNC for stating that any news bureau not attending the off the record whorehouse de-briefing “forfeits your right” to gripe.

    This is not the way to put down a rabid dog. The Obama scandals which were to be killed this week continue to bark and bite.

    —————————————————————–

  27. The Associated Press joins the New York Times in refusing to participate in Holder’s off the record whorehouse massage.

  28. …the “group think” consensus buzz word term is “the so-called scandal”…this is the term that the ‘O protectors’ will all repeat over and over to force it into the collective consciousness…

    …by the way…when all of the scandals after Benghazi started to erupt I happened to hear Chris Haynes on MSNBC…he let it slip on his show and in a conversation that (I think when either talking about IRS or AP scandal) that this will get “buried”…as if to say none of us will cover it so it will die on the vine…

    *******************************************

    http://reason.com/blog/2013/05/29/obama-irs-behavior-inexcusable-obamaite

    Obama: IRS Behavior ‘Inexcusable.’ Obamaite Journalists: It’s a ‘so-called scandal’

    Matt Welch|May. 29, 2013 3:01 pm

    Sure, the president of the United States called the Internal Revenue Service targeting of Tea Party and conservative groups “intolerable and inexcusable,” but that hasn’t stopped an army of commentators from claiming loudly and proudly that there’s no there there. Just do a Google News search on “so-called scandal,” and here’s part of what comes up:

    Elizabeth Drew, New York Review of Books:

    References to Watergate, impeachment, even Richard Nixon, are being tossed around these days as if they were analogous to the current so-called scandals.

    David Horsey, Los Angeles Times:

    Sadly, after this so-called scandal has blown over and enough heads have rolled, the cowed IRS will be even more timid in denying tax-exempt designation to any front organization run by partisan political operatives and funded by corporate moneymen who want to keep their names out of the news.

    Thom Hartmann, Truthout:

    The fact is, while the GOP obsesses about so-called scandal, the pressing issues facing our nation are being ignored.

    Nelson Graves, The News Virginian:

    Admittedly, errors in judgment were made in regards to the Benghazi and IRS so-called scandals. But the DOJ was completely within its rights to protect American security.

    And so on.

    snip…

  29. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/tv-ratings-msnbc-falls-below-559923

    TV Ratings: MSNBC Falls Below HLN in May, Rachel Maddow Hits Lows

    Fox News Channel maintains a handsome lead in primetime and total day, while primetime runner-up CNN continues a healthy climb from the lows of 2012.

    Averaging 539,000 viewers in primetime and 175,000 viewers in the adults 25-54 demographic, MSNBC suffered double-digit drops from last May — down a respective 20 and 19 percent. Losses were less substantial in total day, down 10 percent to an average 346,000 viewers and down 7 percent to 115,000 adults 25-54, while all other nets pulled growth in multiple categories.

    The soft start for All In With Chris Hayes has not helped. Hayes, down 32 percent in total viewers from The Ed Show last May, has offered a poor lead-in for MSNBC’s primetime flagship, The Rachel Maddow Show, at 9 p.m. The show delivered its lowest-rated month since it debuted in September 2008 (717,000 total viewers) and its second lowest with adults 25-54 (210,000). Maddow was topped by typical time slot victor Sean Hannity and CNN’s Piers Morgan.

  30. From: DNC

    To: Big Media

    Subject: Your Marching Orders

    cc. Barack Obama

    1. You will meet with Holder at the appointed time and place.

    2. You may not report anything we say.

    3. If you do not attend the meeting, you forfeit your right to complain.

    4. Obama is committed unconditionally to freedom of the press.

  31. This is sooo disappointing! (ACE)
    ********************************************

    Arizona Governor Jan Brewer: The Only Thing I Care About Is Implementing ObamaCare
    —DrewM.

    This story got a little lost over the holiday weekend but it’s worth revisiting because it’s still ongoing.

    Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has decided her one and only priority is expanding here state’s Medicaid program under ObamaCare and she’ll veto all other legislation until lawmakers cave and pass it.

    Gov. Jan Brewer sent five bills to the scrap heap Thursday in a pointed gesture intended to prod lawmakers into a deal on the budget and her plan to expand Medicaid.
    The five vetoes, follow-through on Brewer’s promise to block legislation until her top priorities move forward, capped a tense day that saw some lawmakers receive threats over their support for the plan to provide health care for more of the state’s poor.

    In letters explaining her actions, Brewer revealed a growing impatience with the Legislature, which she noted has been in session for 130days and has only five weeks until the constitutional deadline for a fiscal 2014 budget.

    “I warned that I would not sign additional measures into law until we see resolution of the two most pressing issues facing us: adoption of a fiscal 2014 state budget and plan for Medicaid,” Brewer wrote. “It is disappointing I must demonstrate the moratorium was not an idle threat.”

    Not surprisingly, there are plenty of Repubicans in the state legislature who support Brewer and ObamaCare.

    Cases like this and Marco Rubio’s immigration lies during his campaign are why conservatives are wary of giving an inch of maneuvering room to Republican leaders in Congress.

    There have simply been too many times when the GOP/conservatives have not only tactically retreated but outright gone over to the liberal side. There’s little to no trust for most elected Republicans. And for good reason.

  32. admin
    May 29, 2013 at 7:17 pm
    The Associated Press joins the New York Times in refusing to participate in Holder’s off the record whorehouse massage.
    *****************************

    Too funny

    *********************

    Someday I hope this Country is in such a good place that Admin will decide it’s time we all meet and celebrate.

  33. As the resident “village idiot” here, I have a question that is boggling my feeble little brain.

    What is the point of ANY JOURNALIST attending an off-the-record session since they can’t REPORT on it?

    Will the news media, that bastion of trust to the point where they are now ranked lower than attorneys, simply write, “We came, we heard, TRUST US..it’s ok”?

  34. I haven’t seen this posted here, but have been speed reading, due to NEVER ENOUGH TIME, so I may have just overlooked it. If so, just ignore this. From Daily Caller- not a site I frequent, but heard about this on radio, and checked it out. With blinding speed, Lois Lerner approved Obama’s half-brother’s application tax exempt status for the reportedly “shady” Barack H. Obama Foundation less than a month. Then, apparently fearing that she had not crossed the line quite far enough, she made that status retroactive for a couple of years.

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/14/irs-official-lerner-approved-exemption-for-obama-brothers-charity/

    Oh, and VotingHillary, I KNOW you’re not trying to take my place as “resident village idiot”. I haven’t been posting much lately, just reading, but I think that title belongs to me. lol Good to see you.

  35. When Holder testified that prior attempts to punish the press had not been successful, that was an understatement. The First Amendment prohibits the Federal Government from abridging the press, the Federalist Party passed the Alien and Sedition Acts which criminalized speech that brought the President into contempt or disrepute. The public uproar over that was so vociferous that it cost the Federalist Party the election, and signaled its ultimate demise. No small matter that, because the Federalist was after all the party of Washington, Hamilton, Adams, Jay etc.

    The Constitution consists of many parts, but no part has been more enduring than the First Amendment. Thus, when the brilliant Mr. Holder signed off on the secret subpoena of the private information of Rosen, the much esteemed Mr. Holder crossed a bright red line. Today, he stands in No Man’s Land where everyone is shooting at him. Everyone that is except for his boss, who still supports him 100%. There will come a point however where that too will change.
    ———————————————————————-

    Impeachment Hearings? Bring Them On
    Nate Hentoff

    In 1798, only seven years after the First Amendment was ratified as part of the Constitution, President John Adams undermined the First Amendment by pushing the Alien and Sedition Acts through Congress. This law subjected citizens to imprisonment for speech that brought the president or Congress into “contempt or disrepute” (my book, “The First Freedom: The Tumultuous History of Free Speech in America,” Delacorte Press, 1988).

    That led enough angry Americans to deny Adams a second term, bringing Thomas Jefferson, a leading opponent of the Alien and Sedition Acts, to the presidency. In 1786, Jefferson wrote to a friend about one of the anchors of our freedom of speech: “Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”

    But President Barack Obama, since taking office, has continually limited the First Amendment, the most singular and powerful right that distinctly identifies Americans from residents in all other countries on Earth.

    Political speech is our quintessential weapon against imperious presidents towering over the Constitution’s separation of powers.

    In the past few weeks, more Americans have been awakened to the diminishment of theirs and the press’ rights of free speech. Alerted to revelations of the multiple “scandals” of the Obama administration, the Wall Street Journal’s Peggy Noonan writes:

    “In order to suppress conservative groups – at first, those with words like ‘Tea Party’ and ‘Patriot’ in their names, then including those that opposed Obamacare or advanced the Second Amendment – the IRS demanded donor rolls, membership lists, data on all contributions, names of volunteers, the contents of all speeches made my members, Facebook posts, minutes of all meetings and copies of all materials handed out at gatherings.”

    In this land of the free and home of the brave, the IRS asked such questions as: “What are you thinking about? Did you ever think of running for office? Do you ever contact political figures? What are you reading?” (“This Is No Ordinary Scandal,” Noonan, Wall Street Journal, May 17).

    Dig this: One respondent answered that last query simply: “The U.S. Constitution.”

    For an administration that regards the word “Patriot” with suspicion, that must have been disquieting.

    As for the Obama Justice Department, headed by Attorney General Eric Holder, it demonstrated its utter disrespect for the First Amendment’s freedom of the press by how it has investigated leaks of classified information to reporters:

    “The Justice Department subpoenaed a sweeping two months of AP (Associated Press) phone records from Verizon Wireless last year without notifying the news organization – essentially giving the AP no chance to fight back in the courts” (“Obama’s Leak Obsession Leads to Privacy and Free Speech Abuses,” Roger Aronoff, aim.org, May 23).

    Accuracy in Media’s Aronoff quotes Lynn Oberlander, general counsel for The New Yorker, who wrote on the magazine’s website: “Even beyond the outrageous and overreaching action against the journalists, this is a blatant attempt to avoid the oversight function of the courts” (“The Law Behind the AP Phone-Record Scandal,” Oberlander, http://www.newyorker.com, May 14).

    And as a result of the feds invading the privacy of the AP’s reporters and editors, Aronoff writes: “Associated Press CEO Gary Pruitt says that sources are now hesitant to talk to the AP because they’re concerned that they’ll be monitored by the government.”

    Aronoff quotes Pruitt, who says: “Sources, just in the normal course of news gathering, recently, say we don’t necessarily want to talk to you.

    “We don’t want our phone records monitored by the U.S. government.”

    These Americans agree with Pruitt, as he tells Aronoff that the Justice Department’s actions are “unconstitutional.”

    Aronoff cites a Foreign Policy article from last year, in which Trevor Timm reported: “America’s finest journalism is often produced with the aid of classified information.

    “The New York Times’ report on warrantless wiretapping and The Washington Post’s expose on CIA secret prisons, both winners of the Pulitzer Prize, are just two of countless examples” (“Obama’s Secret Hypocrisy,” Timm, Foreign Policy, June 2012).

    Meanwhile, the president has now slickly “ordered a review … of the Justice Department’s procedures for legal investigations involving reporters.”

    He emphasized that “journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs. …

    “Our focus must be on those who break the law” (“Obama, in Nod to Press, Orders Review of Inquiries,” Mark Landler, The New York Times, May 24).

    But, Mr. President, it was the Justice Department that broke the law.

    Can you imagine Thomas Jefferson’s reaction to this news?

    Obama actually had the gall to tell us that Attorney General Holder, a leading law-breaker in this operation, will direct this official fact-finding review! He directly approved removing Fox News’ First Amendment rights when “prosecutors obtained a search warrant for (Fox News reporter James) Rosen’s phone and email records.”

    Next week: I, and other reporters, respond to Obama’s current canny deflections of these charges concerning his extrajudicial commands.

    If Thomas Jefferson were still here, he would have instantly condemned them.

    Regardless of political parties, though, where is there a Jefferson among us today? Someone who would demand an independent commission with due-process rights for the primary witness, President Obama, in a possible impeachment case against him? Mounting evidence, going back to the beginning of his first term, could be examined.

    Should there be an actual fully televised impeachment procedure – which could happen if We the People demanded it – public school students watching might call for a return of civics classes to their schools, newly reminded that they are self-governing Americans.

    http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/impeachment-hearings-bring-em-on/

  36. admin
    May 29, 2013 at 8:21 pm
    …Averaging 539,000 viewers in primetime and 175,000 viewers in the adults 25-54 demographic, MSNBC suffered double-digit drops from last May….

    So about 1 in 700 people watch anything on MSNBC? I guess the other 699 are too busy watching all the gun shows on cable. If they changed to the Gun Network they may could make some money. /s/

  37. Published on the 24th:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/05/24/the_political_ground_is_shifting_under_the_president_118550.html

    The Political Ground Is Shifting Under the President

    Despite a tough couple of weeks, President Obama’s job approval ratings are holding up fairly well. As I write this, 47 percent of voters nationwide offer their approval. That’s little changed from attitudes of late and essentially the same as the president enjoyed during most of his first term in office.

    But if you dig just a bit beneath the surface, it becomes clear that the controversies dogging the White House have had an impact. [snip]

    White House press secretary Jay Carney, speaking on CNN, dismissed “the premise, the idea that these were scandals.” However, voters see it differently. Just over half believe each of the three qualifies as a scandal. Only one out of eight sees them as no big deal.

    Voters also reject the notion that the IRS targeting was the work of some low-level rogue employees. Just 20 percent believe that to be the case. A slightly larger number (26 percent) thinks the decision came from IRS headquarters. But 39 percent believe the decision to target conservative groups was made by someone who works at the White House.

    This isn’t just a case of people believing politicians always behave this way. Only 19 percent think the IRS usually targets political opponents of the president.

    Skepticism is so high that few are convinced the IRS acted alone. Sixty percent believe that other federal agencies also were used to target the tea party and other conservative groups. Ominously for Democrats, two out of three unaffiliated voters share that view.

    So, why hasn’t it hurt the president’s overall job approval? Some believe it has. The theory is that with a recovering economy, his ratings should be higher. Another possibility is that the president’s base may have doubts, but they are still sticking by their man.

    It also may be that the doubts are popping up in other ways. For example, at Rasmussen Reports we regularly ask voters which party they trust to deal with a range of issues including government ethics and corruption. Before the scandals broke, Democrats had an 8-point advantage on this particular issue. But there has been a 10-point swing, and the GOP now has a 2-point edge.

    Among unaffiliated voters, Republicans enjoy a 23-point advantage on the ethics front. Before the controversies, it was a toss-up.

    The last week has seen serious slippage in the president’s numbers when it comes to national security. From the moment Obama took office, he has always received better ratings on national security matters than he did on the economy. However, just 39 percent of voters now give him good or excellent marks in this area. That’s down 7 points from a week ago and the lowest ratings he’s had on national security since Osama bin Laden was killed two years ago.

    There is obviously no way of knowing where things will lead. At this point, however, it’s fair to say that the controversies have had an impact, and the political environment is shifting against the president.

  38. Politico today:

    http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/obama-job-approval-poll-92023.html?hp=f3

    Poll: Obama job approval rating down

    President Barack Obama’s approval rating took a hit amid three controversies surrounding his administration, including an investigation into the IRS unfairly targeting conservative groups seeking nonprofit status, a new poll Thursday showed.

    Obama has a 45 percent approval rating and a 49 percent disapproval rating — compared with a 48 percent approval, 45 percent disapproval rating from May 1, according to the Quinnipiac University poll.

    In particular, Obama plunged among independent voters. Only 37 percent of independents approve of him while 57 percent disapprove, Quinnipiac found. At the start of the month, 42 percent of independents approved and 48 percent disapproved. Nine percent of GOPers approve of Obama, 86 percent disapprove. Among Democrats, 87 percent approve, 8 percent disapprove.

    Quinnipiac’s results stand in contracts to Gallup which has found that Obama’s approval rating has gone largely unchanged since the IRS scandal and other controversies. According to its Gallup Daily Tracking poll, the president has a 50 percent approval and 43 percent disapproval.

    Meanwhile, 76 percent of American voters think an independent prosecutor should investigate the IRS controversy, including 63 percent of Democrats, 88 percent of GOPers and 78 percent of independents.

    “There is overwhelming bipartisan support for a special prosecutor to investigate the IRS,” said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. “Voters apparently don’t like the idea of Attorney General Eric Holder investigating the matter himself, perhaps because they don’t exactly think highly of him. Holder gets a negative 23 – 39 percent job approval rating.”

    The Obama administration has been heavily criticized in wake of concerns that the IRS unfairly went after conservative groups; for the Department of Justice looking at The Associated Press reporters’ phone records; and also for its handling of the Sept. 12, 2012, attack at the U.S. post in Benghazi, Libya, in which ambassador Christopher Stevens was killed.

    Of the three controversies, 44 percent of voters say the IRS probe is the most important, followed by 24 percent who picked Benghazi and 15 percent for picked the DOJ.

    Big Media thinks the DOJ investigation is all that matters because it is about them.

  39. Why did Marxism fail? Ask an economist and he will say it failed because could not compete with capitalism in terms of industrial output. Ask a preacher why Marxism failed and he might say because it assumed that man was an economic animal when in fact there is much more to the story. Ask a political scientist, one who knows what he or she is talking about and he is likely to say Marxism failed because it could no longer explain what was happening in the world, as new scientific inventions, enhance communication, and expanding knowledge rendered the fundamental narrative of Marxism obsolete and unsustainable. It strikes me that the fate of Obama is slip sliding away for the same reason. The myth of Obama–the back Jesus myth who would provide redemption, wash away the sins of Bush, and speak with great moral authority can no longer explain the reality of a faux leader who runs from crises, plots his own political survival in the most cynical terms, and when it comes to governing cannot pour piss out of a bottle when the instructions are on the bottom side. In fact, the entire notion of Messiah Obama can no longer explain what we now see with our own eyes. Being an optimist, I look for a wholesale repudiation of Obama and a concomitant realization that millions of people who ought to have known better were deceived. Being a pessimist, when I behold the magnitude of our debt, the breakdown of our education, the corruption that infests our political system and everything else, I am inclined to say what my friend does, namely that it is too late. The center is always shifting and a former Clinton undersecretary who I listened to last year said it is moving to the East, along with the opportunities which were created here in times past. This will be the real legacy of Obama–failure writ large. Not simply personal failure but national failure too. He did what Kruscheve said he would do but never quite succeeded in doing–he buried us. If I am right, then let us hope that history judges him as harshly as he deserves.

  40. Voters apparently don’t like the idea of Attorney General Eric Holder investigating the matter himself, perhaps because they don’t exactly think highly of him.
    ————————–
    I see it differently. I want Holder to stay on, and on, and on. For Obama, this would provide a rare moment of austerity. Instead of wearing those Oscar de la Renta ties that Reggie picks out for him, we could hang an albatross like Holder around his neck in perpetuity. And big media could revert to default position and compliment his on his new tie, and ask him where they can get one like it.

  41. Conservative Media Predicted Obama’s First-Amendment Scandals

    The Obama administration’s free-speech scandals of today were repeatedly and accurately predicted by conservative pundits during the 2008 election. Obama’s first presidential campaign launched a series of novel and troubling assaults on its critics, leading many conservatives to warn that both the press and political speech would come under attack should Obama be elected president. Some of the predictions about Obama made by conservative writers in 2008 seem uncannily on-the-mark today. . . .

    Last week, Kimberley Strassel argued that getting to the bottom of the IRS scandal requires a look at the Obama campaign’s intimidation tactics of 2008. That context extends much further than the Ayers-ad controversy Strassel discussed. The full pattern sheds light on the Obama Justice Department’s pursuit of the press as well. By refusing to complain, or even report on, what conservatives were up in arms about in 2008, the national media bears some share of responsibility for the troubles it faces today.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/349538/conservative-media-predicted-obamas-first-amendment-scandals-stanley-kurtz

  42. Big Media thinks the DOJ investigation is all that matters because it is about them.
    ————————-
    Which suggests that even though Obama is a text book example of narcissism, he is not the only one who suffers from that disease. I might agree with them if I felt they were really independent. These are not the patriots with printing presses in their basement willing to face imprisonment in order to expose the abuses of King George (here, King Obama). On the contrary, these are rich people who work for huge corporations who have made their faustian pact with a corrupt leader, and now he is welching on the deal. So now, they wrap themselves in the Constitution and proclaim the virtues of the First Amendment.

    Flash forward to the movie The Night of The Generals. An honest German policeman (not Gestpo) meets with his French counterpart hoping to get information about a brutal murder, so he can pin the wrap on a German General. The French counterpart has little information, but tells him of a plot by the military to kill Hitler. When the German policeman shows little reaction, the French policeman inquires why. And he responds that the motive of the military is not as noble as it might seem on the surface. He points out that when the war was going well they were all in favor of their dear leader, but now that it is going badly, they are looking to save their own hides. Not too different really from the sea change we are seeing here.

  43. Leanora
    May 30, 2013 at 10:16 am
    —————————
    Kim’s article is Pulitzer Prize stuff. It has shed new light on the corruption which lies at the heart of the Obama Campaign and Administration. And, if I am right, it will lead ultimately to Bob Bauer who was the Obama campaign attorney and later White House counsel when these seeds were sewn and who is now back practicing law at Perkins Coie. At the end of the day, that is where these bread crumbs will lead, in my opinion.

  44. Democrats who were not Obama brainwashed idiots got the same treatment in 2007 and 2008 and were telling the REPUBLICANS what to expect. They were so happy not to be facing Hillary they let it slide and look what they got. These Obama authoritarians DO NOT just target conservatives. They target anyone who disagrees with them on anything or gets in their way of a total kleptocracy.

  45. Now Senate Leader touched by crime.
    Developer guilty of illegal contributions to Reid May 29, 8:13 PM EDT
    RENO, Nev. (AP) — A Nevada powerbroker who headed a billion-dollar real estate company and pulled the strings of state politics as a prominent lobbyist for more than a decade was convicted Wednesday of making illegal campaign contributions to U.S. Sen. Harry Reid.
    Harvey Whittemore, 59, could face up to 15 years in prison and hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines after a federal jury returned guilty verdicts on three counts tied to nearly $150,000 illegally funneled to Reid’s re-election campaign in 2007….
    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_DEVELOPER_CONTRIBUTIONS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-05-29-15-34-55

  46. Mormaer
    May 30, 2013 at 10:44 am
    ———————–
    Well put. After campaigning across the country for Hillary, and seeing the nomination stolen from her by the Obama thugs, I wrote several white paper detailing their tactics, and gave them to a friend of mine who was head of their state committee, and their national chairman whom I got to know later. I warned them that the political system was facing a new form of political warfare, which we had not seen in the past. It was not a limited war, like the limited wars of the absolutist kings in Europe, but Napoleonic war, which was total war, which would attack the very underpinnings of society precisely as it had done. It was hubris and foolishness on my part to think they would listen. It is has taken them roughly eight years to digest what has occurred and it will take them another eight years to translate what they have learned into an effective set of tactics. As long as the Bush forces–Rove, Rubio, etc. hold the whip hand, there is nothing in the equation for us. If the grass roots can take over the party, and leaders like Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and Mike Lee become spokesman then there is some hope for the party to be delivered back to the people. But that will split the party, because the RINOS will not go down without a fight. I would like to see the same revolution take place in the Democrat Party, but that is less likely to happen. The Benghazi thing gives me little grounds for optimism.

  47. I’m just recalling a remarkable woman named Sharron Angle ? who damned near beat him. She overspent. lost, and had to beg for supporters to cover her. I’d already gone way over my budget for her. Felt bad. But there stands Hairy /snark who lived another day, called Romney a felon, and got away with it when he needed to.

  48. Spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters Wednesday that the State Department has not decided if it will comply with a congressional subpoena demanding documents related to the crafting of Benghazi talking points for Susan Rice.
    ————————-
    They seem to think they have a choice in the matter. The only choice they have is whether they wish to generate a constitutional crisis or not. In that case, it will end up in Roberts lap, and this is not the sort of issue he can duck by saying it is up to the voters. It goes to the heart of the separation of powers, and the duty of congressional oversight. If he waffles on that one, he needs to step down. The problem is he is a waffler.

  49. foxyladi14
    May 30, 2013 at 11:58 am
    ————————
    A very good article. Normalization occurs, if at all, at its own pace. It will not be dictated to by an election calender.

  50. Thanks to Obama, and his cloud cuckoo land foreign policy, we have forfeited one opportunity after another to exert leverage in the middle east. In fact, we have done everything we possibly could have done to nullify our leverage. I could take you through all the missteps but your eyes would glaze over. Thanks to people like McCain, we have eliminated the secular bulwarks against the spread of Muslim extremism, and now wants to bomb them back to the stone age. Meanwhile Messiah Obama, and his butt boy Rhoades failed to come to the aid of incipient democracy movements in Iran, and put their faith in the Muslim Brotherhood, and at other times, al Quaeda, in the hallucigentic belief that this will produce democracy. The truth is we must adjust to the fact that Iran will have a nuclear weapon, and even though the leader who is likely to win the election is a hard liner, we need to work on him. Our bigger problem is we have lost Putin and China is exploiting the vacuum produced by the collapse of our power in the region, and the armies we have deployed in that region are not on the march, but are bogged down. The emerging question, then, is how do we protect Israel in that dangerous venue. That is what we need to be thinking about. I wonder if we are.

  51. Stupidity at it’s best –

    Don’t bite the hands that work for you.

    Obama and thugs betray Hillary, WHILE SHE’S WRITING HER TELL-ALL BOOK.

    Oh and thugs betray MSM, AP…the same folks that have covered his skinny ass for more than five years.

    K.A.R.M.A. is on her way………………

  52. Middle finger salute from the media –

    [snip]

    Holder, who agreed to conduct a review of DOJ guidelines over investigations that involve journalists, had set up meetings with members of the media for Thursday and Friday. He ran into immediate resistance, though, after calling for the meetings to be off the record, meaning the discussions would not be reportable.

    AP media relations manager Erin Madigan White said that if the session is not on the record, the news cooperative will offer its views in an open letter on how Justice Department regulations should be updated.

    If the AP’s meeting with the attorney general is on the record, AP Executive Editor Kathleen Carroll will attend, White said. She said AP expects its attorneys to be included in any planned meetings between the attorney general’s office and media lawyers on the legal specifics.

    New York Times Executive Editor Jill Abramson said in a statement: “It isn’t appropriate for us to attend an off the record meeting with the attorney general. Our Washington bureau is aggressively covering the department’s handling of leak investigations at this time.”

    <bThe Huffington Post also announced it would not attend the meeting at DOJ headquarters. CNN similarly said it would not attend an off-record meeting, but would agree to go if the attorney general made the session on the record.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/30/holder-runs-into-roadblocks-on-off-record-meetings-on-scandals/

    How do ya like dem apples?

    Politico agreed to kiss Holder bum…

    I guess Holder thought he was gonna play the big man card and send the MSM home with a little gift basket of free cell phones for their silence.

  53. The Taranto video sheds new light on what these scandals are ultimately about. On the surface, they can be dismissed as politics as usual, or even government overreaching. However, ultimately, they are about more than that. Much more. The hard left has managed to acquire the pretense of moral superiority which explains their appeal to shallow thinkers. This patina if you will is based on their support for the Civil Rights movement and Watergate, which is why they find occasion to revisit those issues at every possible opportunity, and why the word racism is never far far from their lips. But these scandals, borne of their maniacal quest for bigger and bigger government has produced and the temptation to then use that government for political gain, rather than the welfare of the people, presents a clear and present danger to the moral authority they have always asserted. For those of us who believe in the tragic view of human nature, this lapse into darkness is hardly surprising–it is the inevitable by-product of power, and history has shown that right wing movements armed with the same powers are manifest the same kind of lapses. That is, I submit, the adult view. However, it is not at all the view of the Leftists in the Democratic Party, the media and academia. They deplore the fact that while technological progress has been very impressive social progress has been much too slow. Therefore, the goal of government ought to be far more than to simply reflect the preferences of the people. It must use all means at its disposal to perfect human nature. To us that is a dangerous undertaking which leads to political correctness, to re education camps to firing squads. But to the left it is a heroic endeavor. But in order to achieve their Nirvana they must be seen as morally superior. Jointly and severally, these scandals shatter that illusion, and the power they presume to assert over the rest of us. Bob Bauer is a perfect example of this.

  54. Lincoln said if you want to test a man’s character, give him power. Very soon you will find out who he really is.

    The Left has not had direct access to power for generations–I mean the hard left.

    This meant that their character was never really tested, the way it has been over these past few years.

    The scandals that we see now are no aberration. They are part and parcel about what the hard left is all about.

    The most interesting part of it, however, is they undermine the pretense of moral superiority they have asserted historically.

    Now that they have the power they have behaved rather badly, and that undermines their supposed moral superiority.

    That is the deeper meaning of these scandals.

  55. K.A.R.M.A. is on her way
    ———————–
    I hope so. But that depends on whether she is willing to do what she was unwilling to do during the 2008 primary: criticize a fellow democrat. She did bring up Rezko and the lies which Obama told about her health care plan. But in order to set the record straight in this instance, and to deliver the karma you and I hope she will, it will need to go a lot further. And, I am not sure how far she is willing to go. A simple puff piece will not do the trick. Much depends on whether her goal is to protect the Clinton legacy, or to reform the party, or just be a good democrat–which is the moral equivalent of being a good German, just as it was for the other party when W was in power.

  56. Shadowfax

    “I guess Holder thought he was gonna play the big man card and send the MSM home with a little gift basket of free cell phones for their silence”.

    _______________________________

    Maybe the media – with the exception of a few Obamanuts – have decided to grow a spine, and a couple of other body parts, and take an objective look at the Obama administration. Holder, as much if not more than anyone within O’s tightly knit group of homeboys and girls, has demonstrated antipathy toward this country and its laws and traditions. Had Holder been AG for any other president in the history of this country, He would have been forced out a long time ago.

    Great line about the “basket of cell phones”, Shadow. lol

    And, this is very silly, but I checked out the article because of the title: “It’s Big, It’s Pink, It’s Real”. Those qualities, along with it’s uniqueness are the only qualities this creature has in common with the real Big Pink.

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/giant-flourescent-pink-slugs-140528983.html

  57. Repentance for big media? fine.

    Redemption? No fucking way.

    Back to the prisoners dilemma.

    They made the Faustian Pact with Obama.

    They enabled him to win two successive elections.

    And bury the county.

    Then, he turns of them as well.

    After they have helped him destroy the country.

    Now they want out.

    Now they want redemption.

    Now they want us to believe they are what?

    Journalists, turned propagandists, turned journalists.

    I hope the American People are smart enough to see that it a bridge too far.

    I hope they are not willing to give big media a reduced sentence.

    That would be a profound mistake.

    As Obama goes so goes big media.

    They are in pare delicto.

    Let us therefore hope that is what happens.

    “We have a sick political culture, and that’s the environment Barack Obama came from,” Jay Stewart, the executive director of the Chicago Better Government Association, warned ABC News when Obama ran in 2008. He noted that Obama had “been noticeably silent on the issue of corruption here in his home state.”

    Joel Kotkin, an urban expert who still considers himself a “Kennedy Democrat –– John F. Kennedy,” wrote at Forbes: “Most of us would put up with a bit of corruption and special dealing if the results were strong economic and employment growth. But the bare demographic and economic facts for both Chicago and Illinois reveal a stunning legacy of failure.” Since 2007, the Chicago region has lost more jobs than Detroit has, and more than twice as many as New York. The city’s murder rate is a national disgrace, and its teachers’ union is so powerful that a strike it called last year forced new mayor Rahm Emanuel to back down from his attempt to curb union power.

    The Wall Street Journal’s Market Watch tags Chicago as the fifth most heavily taxed city in the country: Its sky-high effective sales tax of 9.75 percent makes the tax burden on a family earning $25,000 a year the fourth highest in the country. From 1991, two years after Richard M. Daley first took office as mayor, to 2011, the year Emanuel took the reins, the average debt per Chicagoan grew from $600 to $2,600, an increase of 433 percent. As Dick Simpson, a former reform Chicago alderman who now teaches at the University of Illinois, put it: “There’s a significant downside to authoritarian rule. The city could do much better.”

    Conservatives in Chicago, an embattled breed, say the Obama scandals now coming to light — the IRS, the intimidation of journalists, the green-energy boondoggles such as Solyndra — could have been anticipated. “The 2008 Obama campaign perpetrated a fraud that he was a reformer,” says Chris Robling, a former journalist who has served as a Republican election commissioner. “All of the complaints — from the lack of transparency to HHS secretary Kathleen Sebelius’s shaking down corporations to promote Obamacare — stem from the culture of the Daley Machine.” For decades, Robling says, Mayor Daley “encouraged” contributions to his favorite charities, with the implicit understanding that the “encourager” controlled the city’s inspectors and regulators. “That sounds an awful lot like what Sebelius was doing to prop up Obamacare,” Robling notes. “Obama’s ideology may come from Saul Alinsky’s acolytes, but his political tactics come straight from the Daley playbook.” Indeed, friends of Bill Daley, Mayor Daley’s brother, say that one reason Bill left his post as Obama’s White House chief of staff after only one year was that even he thought Team Obama was too much “all politics, all of the time” and not enough about governance.

    Journalists used to know that presidents are in part a product of their past: where their careers were nurtured and where their politics were shaped. They understood this as a given when it came to Ronald Reagan and California; they basically grasped it about Bill Clinton’s Arkansas, and certainly nailed it on George W. Bush and Texas. But when it came to Barack Obama, all that went out the window. Speaking at the University of Southern California, at a post-2008 conference on the election, Mark Halperin, then of ABC News, said that the media’s treatment of Obama had been “the most disgusting failure of people in our business since the Iraq war.” It was “extreme bias, extreme pro-Obama coverage,” he concluded.

    That media failure continued throughout Obama’s first term. Perhaps now, as Obama’s “Chicago Way” is coming into focus, the media will want to redeem itself. With Obama, it’s become all too clear: You can take the politician away from the machine, but you can’t take the machine out of the politician.

  58. 43 percent? My question is why is it still so high?
    ***

    On ‘Day 1041,’ Obama approval rating falls below Carter’s

    One thousand forty-one days into his presidency, Barack Obama’s approval rating is lower than any other U.S. president in modern history at this point into a first White House term.

    At 43 percent, according to Gallup’s daily presidential approval rating tracking poll, Obama’s approval has sunk even below Jimmy Carter’s approval at this point in his presidency. Carter had a 51 percent approval rating during this period.

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/30/on-day-1041-obama-approval-rating-hits-record-low/

  59. Hillary Clinton: CFDA Awards 2013 Presenter!

    The Huffington Post | By Ellie Krupnick Posted: 05/30/2013 1:39 pm EDT | Updated: 05/30/2013 2:05 pm EDT

    HIllary Clinton CFDA Awards 2013, Hillary Clinton Fashion, Style News

    What’s Hillary Clinton been up to lately? Hanging with the fashion crowd, that’s what.

    PR agency KCD confirmed today that Clinton will present the CFDA Founder’s Award to Oscar de la Renta at Monday’s CFDA Awards. The news, which came via tweet, verifies rumors that started circulating earlier this week.

    It will be a tad unusual to see the former Secretary of State hobnobbing at a fashion industry event; unlike First Lady Michelle Obama, Hillary was not famous for her love of designer fashion or close friendships with industry heavyweights. But she did always favor Oscar de la Renta, choosing his designs for the 1997 inaugural ball, her 1998 Vogue cover, her daughter’s wedding in 2010 and the 2002 CFDA Awards (where de la Renta was her date).

    In fact, last fall, the William J. Clinton Presidential Library and Museum announced it would be mounting an Oscar de la Renta retrospective exhibition.

    And now Hillary will be presenting the designer with the Founder’s Award this Monday at the 2013 CFDA Awards. We think it’s safe to assume she will wear Oscar de la Renta to do the honors. Stay tuned for photos!

    on Twitter…

    @KCDworldwide
    KCD
    We are pleased to confirm that Secretary Clinton will present the @CFDA Founder’s Award to Oscar de la Renta at Monday’s #CFDAAwards

    May 30, 2013 4:47 pm via web ReplyRetweetFavoritettp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/30/hillary-clinton-cfda-awards_n_3360625.html

  60. F and F returning. 🙂

    A new report from the Department of Justice (DOJ) Inspector General has confirmed that Dennis Burke, former U.S. attorney for Arizona, leaked a document that was intended to smear John Dodson, a special agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), the Department of Justice agency which launched the operation that saw thousands of

    http://mb50.wordpress.com/2013/05/29/doj-criminality-deepens-as-report-shows-targeting-of-fast-and-furious-whistleblower/

  61. Shadowfax @ 1:11 pm New York Times Executive Editor Jill Abramson said in a statement: “It isn’t appropriate for us to attend an off the record meeting with the attorney general. Our Washington bureau is aggressively covering the department’s handling of leak investigations at this time.”
    —————–
    Correct that there is some karma with Jill. Wasn’t she the Wellesley (?) grad speaker he bumped a few years back?

  62. New York Times Executive Editor Jill Abramson said in a statement: “It isn’t appropriate for us to attend an off the record meeting with the attorney general. Our Washington bureau is aggressively covering the department’s handling of leak investigations at this time.”
    —————————-
    Their goal is to isolate the problem and construct an impenetrable wall to protect Obama, before FOX can get there. That is what they are “aggressively” doing. The truth is far less important to them than protecting their narrative and the pretension of moral superiority that goes along with it, plus the abiding fear that they will bet scooped. They start from so far behind the eight ball, after five years of abject denial of anything negative about this administration that the only way they can catch up is through another leak, and in that case they must be wary about being manipulated.

  63. It is simply incredible that a news organization like NYT which has been a sycophant for this administration to the days of the 2008 campaign can reverse course over night and become an honest critic. This is all about damage control, mainly for themselves. That means they will still bury incriminating evidence, but more to protect themselves than to protect him. Lord help them if FOX or Breibart or WSJ get there first. That is what they have got to worry about. They no longer have a monopoly. In fact, a growing segment of the country places no stock in their opinion and stops listening at the mere mention of their name.

  64. many journalists scratching their heads as to how “hope and change” seem to have been supplanted by “arrogance and fear.” Perhaps it’s time they revisit one of their original premises about Barack Obama: that he wasn’t influenced by the Chicago Daley machine. You know: the machine that boosted his career and whose protégés — including Valerie Jarrett, David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel, and his wife,

    http://nationalreview.com/article/349610/obamas-chicago-way-john-fund

  65. foxyladi14
    May 30, 2013 at 4:16 pm

    many journalists scratching their heads as to how “hope and change” seem to have been supplanted by “arrogance and fear.” Perhaps it’s time they revisit one of their original premises about Barack Obama: that he wasn’t influenced by the Chicago Daley machine. You know: the machine that boosted his career and whose protégés — including Valerie Jarrett, David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel, and his wife,

    ________________

    Yep!

  66. wbboei
    May 30, 2013 at 3:58 pm

    It is simply incredible that a news organization like NYT which has been a sycophant for this administration to the days of the 2008 campaign can reverse course over night and become an honest critic. This is all about damage control, mainly for themselves.
    _________________

    Exactly right wbb. It’s not like NYT has suddenly grown a conscience, nor have they developed concern about violations of the rights of conservative groups and individuals. It is strictly CYA time. I hope a few Obama lovers who have so obviously covered and apologized for him – SOLEDAD, TINGLES, and other offenders- will find it necessary to CYA, as well. They could never really function as honest, objective reporters of the truth about Obama, but they might, at least, have to play one on TV. lol

  67. It was Barnard. Not Wellesley.
    Obama Will Speak at Commencement at Barnard College
    By TAMAR LEWIN
    Published: March 3, 2012
    …Word of Mr. Obama’s appearance at Barnard, a 123-year-old women’s college in New York City, comes as the White House and Democrats have seized on Republican attempts to block a requirement for contraception coverage in the new health care law, saying it amounts to a “war on women.”
    Democrats believe the issue could be an effective rallying point with women voters in a presidential election year, and the decision to appear at the prestigious women’s school could provide a high-profile forum for the president on that front.
    An Obama administration official confirmed on Friday that the White House had called Barnard to offer the president as the commencement speaker… A month ago, Barnard College announced that Jill Abramson, the executive editor of The New York Times, would be its graduation speaker, but those plans changed with the call from the White House. Ms. Spar said that Ms. Abramson had said she would be happy to speak at Barnard in the future.
    The college’s last three commencement speakers were Sheryl Sandberg of Facebook, the actress Meryl Streep and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton…
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/04/us/politics/obama-will-speak-at-barnard-graduation.html?_r=0

  68. Which Four Bombshell Actresses Are In Running To Play Hillary Clinton In New Movie?
    ——————————–
    It has become a standard practice for those who control Hollywood to use the dream machine they operate to re-cast politicians they intend to support as heroes, and those they oppose as villains in some kind of faux morality play. They do this for two reasons: access and influence. First, they did this with Obama. Now they are doing it with Hillary. And I for one deplore it. History suggests why. When Rome passed from the status of a republic to that of a dictatorship similar honors were bestowed inter vivos on their leaders. This was done for the banal purpose of turning those politicians into living gods and goddesses. This is antithetical to the notion that the people are sovereign and politicians are public servants, not masters. Also, it feeds the inflated sense of self politicians already have, and is to that extent unhealthy. Public decency demands that this beautification be bestowed posthumously if at all.

  69. BAR:

    “Perpetual War – and Obama’s Perpetual Con Game”

    Wed, 05/29/2013 – 14:01 — Glen Ford

    “Barack Obama is a master trickster, a shape-shifter, and a methodical liar. The man who has arrogated to himself the right to kill at will, anywhere on the globe, accountable only to himself, based on secret information and classified legal rationales, now says he is determined that Washington’s “perpetual war” must one day end – sometime in the misty future after he is long gone from office. He informed his global audience of potential victims that he had signed a secret agreement (with himself?) that would limit drone strikes to targets that pose “a continuing, imminent threat to Americans” and cannot be captured – a policy that his White House has always claimed (falsely) to be operative. He promises to be more merciful than before, “haunted” as he is by all the nameless deaths, although he admits to having done no wrong.”
    ***
    ” Instead, the president defended his own maximalist interpretation of the law, and claimed that the legal basis for his kill-at-will authority is firmly rooted in the Congress’s 2001 Authorization of Military Force (AMUF). Although he made vague reference to changes that Congress might make in the AMUF, there was no substantive indication that he sought to impose restrictions on his own or any other president’s authority to wage war precisely as he has for the last four years.

    Obama’s blanket interpretation of AMUF – the legal logic – had previously been considered a state secret. It was news to much of the U.S. Senate, too, until assistant secretary of defense Michael Sheehan, in charge of special operations (death squads) at the Pentagon, told lawmakers earlier this month that the AMUF allows Obama to put “boots on the ground” anywhere he chooses, including “Yemen or the Congo,” if his classified logic compelled him to do so.”
    ****
    “Obama is very good at flipping pages, changing subjects, hiding the pea in his hand while we try to figure out which bowl it’s under. His call for Congress to come up with a substitute for AMUF – without yet offering his own version – is a ploy to more explicitly codify those powers assumed by Bush and expanded upon by the Obama administration. Or, the Congress can do nothing – a very likely outcome – and Obama can pretend to be the reluctant, self-restrained global assassin, preventive detainer and regime changer for the rest of his term.

    Not a damn thing has changed.”

  70. SHV
    May 30, 2013 at 7:26 pm
    ————————–
    Another accurate analyisis by BAR:

    The U.S. Press and Repression in the Obama Era: A New Awakening or Political Theater?
    Tue, 05/28/2013 – 14:04 — Ajamu Baraka

    by Ajamu Baraka

    The corporate media only cried foul when their own perceived privileges are threatened, even as President Obama’s “approach to civil liberties turned his administration into act three of the Bush administration.” The bourgeois press are now discovering that marginalized peoples are not the only targets of the national security state.

    The U.S. Press and Repression in the Obama Era: A New Awakening or Political Theater?

    by Ajamu Baraka

    This article previously appeared on the author’s web site, A Voice from the Margins.

    “Where was the outrage when the target of the State was the ‘usual suspects’ of Black, Brown and poor folks and their ‘radical’ sympathizers?”

    We are supposed to take seriously the outrage coming from members of the corporate press in response to the revelation that in the Obama administration’s ever expanding use of executive powers to intimidate and crush dissent it had turned its focus on the U.S. press.

    But those of us who have consistently struggled to defend the human rights of the victims of the repressive national security state have a few very simple questions for the press – where was the outrage or even concern when the target of the State was the “usual suspects” of Black, Brown and poor folks and their “radical” sympathizers? Why was there so little concern expressed by the Press when Obama’s national security apparatus conducted raids on oppositional organizations, expanded the infiltration of lawful organizations and increased domestic electronic and communication surveillance? And when this administration shamelessly claimed the power to be the judge, jury and executioner of anyone that ended up on one of its kill lists, including U.S. citizens, why didn’t this incredible abuse of State power garner at least some serious concern from the press, let alone outrage?

    Of course only the most unprincipled sycophants of the Obama administration would disagree that focusing the repressive state apparatus on working journalists and the outlets they work for is a dramatic abuse of Executive power. Yet in the run-up to this moment of outrage the press seemed reluctant to seriously consider what was so obvious to many of us. That the Obama Presidency, from the beginning, was clearly committed to maintaining and even building on the trajectory of expanding Executive power which began during the Bush administration that narrowed the range of constitutional and human rights of individuals and groups in the U.S.

    “Why was there so little concern expressed by the Press when Obama’s national security apparatus conducted raids on oppositional organizations?”

    The liberal press was so caught-up in this cult of personality that was so much a part of the Obama phenomenon, it did not see or chose to ignore that the Obama administration’s approach to civil liberties turned his administration into act three of the Bush administration. So While the Obama administration used the espionage act to clamp down on whistle-blowers, its Department of Homeland Security coordinated the national repression of Occupy Wall Street and its lawyers defended the Bush administration’s position that opposed allowing individual suites against the government agencies and telecom companies accused of engaging in warrantless electronic surveillance, the only voices of concern came from the marginalized radical press.

    And even though the press was warned that the legal theories advanced by the Obama administration in the criminal investigation of WikiLeaks could be easily applied to criminalize the acts of mainstream journalists, the press chose instead not to defend Julian Assange and Wikileaks. For the bourgeois press, it appears that they believed that since they gleefully parroted the government line on issues from Libya to the need for deficit reduction, the government would never turn its repressive attention on them.

    But now with the attack on Associated Press and the designation of James Rosen as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in the government’s persecution of Stephen Kim, some mainstream journalists are finally giving a little more attention to the dangerously expanding power of the national security state. When many of us were attempting to educate the people on the threat posed to civil liberties and human rights by the National Defense Authorization Act, the corporate press never made the connection that under the NDAA’s allowance of the indefinite detention of Americans that one day it could apply to members of their profession.

    Even today with the new outrage from the press on the abusive use of power by this administration, the press still does not seem to understand the dangers inherit in the unchecked power of the State. It gave scant attention to the recent declaration by the administration that it has the right under the morally dubious “Authorization for Use of Military Force” legislation passed by the U.S. congress, to wage global war for a period into infinity. And the press still dutifully presents anonymous government sources in a one-sided, pro-war perspective on the situation in Syria.

    “The corporate press never made the connection that under the NDAA’s allowance of the indefinite detention of Americans that one day it could apply to members of their profession.”

    It has only been those of us from the margins who have been trying to signal the alarm to the American people that the country is perilously close to normalizing police state practices. We raised the alarm primarily because we understand and have experienced first-hand the awesome power of the State’s repressive apparatus. And while we know that we are the first to be targeted – the message communicated with the designation of Assata Shakur as a “most wanted terrorist” was clear for us in the radical Black movement – we also know that we are not going to be the only targets this time around.

    So even with all of the limitations, we welcome the questions that are finally being raised by some elements of the corporate press. We certainly don’t have illusions that the corporate media will help the people to understand the economic and political stakes in play during this period but the increased attention by the press with the imperial presidency of Barack Obama might reveal to some the extent to which democratic and human rights have been eviscerated over the last decade under President Bush and now President Obama.

    Paulo Freire, the radical Brazilian educator, reminded us that taking action against oppression is only possible when the people have developed critical consciousness. In this strange and surreal period that characterizes U.S. politics where left-wing radicals are compelled to align with right-wing libertarians to defend traditional bourgeois rights against the encroachments of an oppressive state supported by liberals and traditional conservatives, we can only hope that the latest revelation of government abuse will finally begin to shake people out of the media and Obama-induced fog so that in fact a new critical consciousness will develop along with a people’s movement.

    Ajamu Baraka is a long-time human rights activist and veteran of the Black Liberation, anti-war, anti-apartheid and Central American solidarity movements in the United States. Baraka is currently an Associate Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) in Washington D.C. and is editing a new book on human rights in the U.S. entitled: “The Struggle for People-Centered Human Rights: Voices from the Field.” He can be contacted through his web site: http://www.Ajamubaraka.com.

  71. wbboei wrote:

    Which Four Bombshell Actresses Are In Running To Play Hillary Clinton In New Movie?
    ——————————–
    It has become a standard practice for those who control Hollywood to use the dream machine they operate to re-cast politicians they intend to support as heroes, and those they oppose as villains in some kind of faux morality play. They do this for two reasons: access and influence. First, they did this with Obama. Now they are doing it with Hillary.

    ——————-
    From what I have heard of this film, it is typical Hollywood sleaze. It does not portray Hillary in a positive light. It’s more akin to something you’d find in the National Enquirer than in a serious biopic. You can read a synopsis of the script here:

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/05/13/some-of-the-juiciest-bits-of-rodham-the-hillary-clinton-movie-biopic-sex-scandal-more.html

  72. Deplore x 2

    Wbb, I’m with you about who should play Hillary.

    I hate the idea of anyone making a movie about Hillary, to me it’s as if her story is over and it’s time for Hollywood to put it’s stamp on her life.

    Hillary’s story isn’t frickin’ over dimwits…her best is yet to come. So spin writers, put down your laptops and pay attention, for once.

  73. Why did IRS Shulman visit the White House so often? A special prosecutor can get the answer:

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/30/pressure-mounts-for-irs-special-prosecutor/

    76 percent”– The portion of registered voters in a Quinnipiac University poll who believe that a special prosecutor is needed to investigate the targeting of conservative groups by the IRS. Sixty three percent of Democrats agreed.

    What in the heck was former IRS boss Douglas Shulman doing at the White House campus 157 times in less than 5 years? [snip]

    That’s a lot of Peeps – particularly for a guy whose predecessor says he only visited the White House one time during his tenure and especially for the head of an agency that is supposed to be quasi-independent so as to avoid, ahem, political entanglements.

    The IRS is not a cabinet agency. It, like the FBI, is deemed so powerful and in need of protection from executive meddling that it is granted special status and a special director whose term outlasts the one of the president who appoints him or her. The job Shulman held is a law enforcement post. Just ask anyone who’s ever done prison time for tax evasion.

    Obama officials explain that since much of President Obama’s focus has been on taxes – raising them, reforming the tax code and putting the agency in charge of enforcing Obama’s health insurance law – it is logical that he and his staff would need lots of consultation with the nation’s top tax collector.

    The assertion from Shulman and the White House is that this unprecedented degree of intimacy was innocent and not related to the targeting of the president’s political enemies by Shulman’s agency. If that’s true, it is a tragic coincidence.[snip]

    An attorney general accused of abusing his power can hardly investigate abuses of power at another agency. When the victims are individuals and groups opposed to the president and singled out for presidential denunciation, not even a widely respected attorney general could carry the weight. [snip]

    Given the public outrage over IRS abuses, he will not be able to persist in this course. Every day Obama resists outside insights on the IRS is another day in which suspicions will grow over the extent and elevation of the wrongdoing.

    If Obama is dragged into disclosure it will only make it worse.

  74. Leanora
    May 30, 2013 at 3:03 pm
    43 percent? My question is why is it still so high?
    *********************

    I agree, it shouldn’t be that high. Then again, he should never have been president.

  75. Dick Morris has something smart to say about why Shulman visited the White House so many times:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/05/31/full_dimensions_of_irs_scandal_emerge__118624.html

    The revelation that acting IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman visited the White House at least 157 times during the period in which conservative groups were being targeted with tax audits gives us the first real indication of the extent to which this scandal reaches into the White House.

    The incredible frequency of the visits — essentially weekly — indicate that President Obama must have been deeply involved with the inner workings of the audits and harassment of conservative groups. If Schulman was in the White House every week, what was he there to talk about?

    Not Obamacare. Not without having Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in attendance, you wouldn’t. About Treasury issues? Deficit reduction? Not without Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner.

    The obvious reason is that Obama was following the IRS audits with an obsessive, personal involvement.

    Apparently, the Citizens United scandal so galvanized him into action and tapped so deeply into his psyche that he was determined personally to supervise the castration of the wealthy people and groups whose access to the political system was opened wide by the Court.

    To see a man who held a subordinate, non-policy making position 157 times, you have to be a president on a mission.

    It transforms one’s sense of the scandal from a rogue agency to a rogue president using the agency as his personal instrument. An instrument of vengeance, self-defense and political influence.

  76. I am reasonably certain that a number of those meetings were with Obama and White House counsel Bob Bauer for the purpose of setting the policy of targeting, and the rest of them were with Bauer only to supervise the execution, cover tracks and give Obama plausible deniability.

  77. This song would in large doses drive anyone stark raving mad. But somehow it expresses my fond hopes for Holder as he becomes big media’s favorite pinata de jour. He is a liability to Obama, and that is why I want him to hang on, and on, and on.

  78. Actually 157 trips to the Oval is more than once per week considering all the time Oh has been gone on vacations, campaigning, and away from the WhiteHouse.

    Morris is right, this is an ongoing conversation about something that either started on the first day Shulman started working, even before the HellCare bill was passed.

    Is it a bromance too?

  79. My odds are with Jarrett doing the IRS targeting with the full assistance of Bauer. Obama doesn’t do “consistency”. He is too lazy. He gave full approval though. This is right up her alley.

  80. A Very Serious Report.
    ***

    Fukushima meltdown – Caldicott says Japan may become uninhabitable – media silent

    Yesterday – the same day Germany announced it would close all its nuclear plants because of Fukushima, and dangerous levels of radiation were reported in Japanese clean-up workers – Independent Australia did a straw poll of 50 random people at a metropolitan shopping centre in Queensland. Each of them was asked: “were you aware that there had been a nuclear meltdown at Fukushima in Japan”. Almost all of these respondents recognised the name Fukushima but only 4 of the 50 – a mere 8 per cent – said they had heard of any meltdown.

    This rough poll points to deficiencies in popular media reporting in Australia of what some say has the potential to become the most devastating man-made disaster the world has ever known.

    http://www.independentaustralia.net/2011/business/media-2/fukushima-meltdown-caldicott-says-japan-may-become-uninhabitable-media-silent/

  81. Mormaer
    May 31, 2013 at 7:13 am

    My odds are with Jarrett doing the IRS targeting with the full assistance of Bauer. Obama doesn’t do “consistency”. He is too lazy. He gave full approval though. This is right up her alley.
    —————————
    I could be wrong about this, but here is the way it looks to me: there were at least three parties to this conspiracy to target conservative groups: Bauer, Schulman and Obama/Jarrett. And within the IRS there were two senior people who were deeply involved in the execution, i.e. Learner and Ingram.

    Bauer looks good for it because he did precisely this kind of thing for the campaign, as campaign counsel. Kim Stassel’s article leaves no doubt about that. The fact that he did this before makes it more than likely that he would do it again when he became White House Counsel. And knowing that targeting of this nature was always the Obama way, and that Obama was fixated on the 2012 election, with the full backing of big media, it is not unlikely that Bauer was chosen to be White House Counsel for precisely this reason. In short, what is past is prologue. Beyond that, however, this is precisely the kind of activity that Obama would seek legal guidance on in order to implement such a strategy. He would want legal advice to avoid the unseen pitfalls, to arrange credible defenses, and to give him the protection of attorney client privilege. Therefore, the law of probability proves that Bauer is good for it.

    Shulman looks good for it as well. He was head of the agency that did the targeting. Contrary to initial reports, multiple offices of his agency were involved. He made 157 visits to the White House, which is seven times the number of any other agency head, and that gave him not just access, but continuing access to Bauer and Obama/or his surrogate during the period of time when this targeting was being planned and implemented. Contrary to his initial testimony to Congress, there was targeting going on and he was aware of it. Then, in his subsequent appearance before Congress, his testimony was evasive–one might even say Holderesque on all the key points. And apart from his evasiveness, he was sarcastic and condescending toward Congress, like the time when he said he could not recall why he made all those trips except for the one involving the Easter Egg hunt. This condescension may have had something to do with the fact that certain members of the Congress who expressed shock over this nefarious practice (i.e. Schumer, Durbin, Backus) wrote letters directing the IRS to go after conservative groups. But those senators are unlikely to go to jail for it. Schulman on the other hand very well could. Or he could remain silent, like Uncle Tony did.

    The target is Schulman. He is the one who can implicate Bauer and Obama/Jarrett. Issa will need to get Learner to roll over on Schulman. So far, she has pleaded the Fifth. And before that can happen he must get junior employees at the IRS to roll over on Learner. Then and only then, he can offer her use immunity. His investigators will be interviewing those employees next week so those forces are in motion. They may also implicate Ingram, in which case, she can be offered a similar deal. Bauer will never implicate Obama and will raise the veil of attorney client privilege if he is asked about this. Therefore, Schulman must be the target.

    Now Little Lindsay Graham is demanding an independent counsel, which will drive the investigation underground and the public will be left in the dark. Issa’s response to him was therefore appropriate. Don’t tell me how to do my job. If I need additional help I will ask for it.

  82. Interesting. Tom Browkaw says these scandals are no big deal.

    Question: who gives a flying fuck what Tom Browkaw says?

    He is a journalistic has been, he sits on Soros Boards, and he rejoices in the fact that Washington is now the new Versaille.

    Whose side do you think he is on?

    Tom Sowell offers the best advice on how to deal with these self annointed big media has beens: don’t listen to them.

  83. The word I was searching for to describe Browkaw was “Faux Éminence Grise”. His comments are not directed at the public in general. Rather, they are aimed at his erstwhile colleagues in big media, who are inclined to chase these scandals. His goal is to dissuade them from doing so, or to slow them down, in order to protect Obama. At one time, Browkaw was a respected journalist. But whenever he speaks these days, his motives are highly suspect.

  84. Obama says no special prosecutor is needed on IRS abuses. Why not? Because he will appoint new secretary in 30 days, tell him he is outraged, and the new secretary will conduct a fair and impartial investigation. And, best of all, public confidence in the IRS will be restored just in time to implement Obamacare.

    But today we learn that the scope of abuse extends beyond the discriminatory delay of applications for tax exempt status by the IRS, the secretion of private information by the IRS to the likes of Goolsbee, and the invasion of privacy of these organizations. For now we also see that other agencies of government, such as the FBI, the ATF, and others were sicked on the same victims. And they were subject to discriminatory audits.

    How do we know this? We know it because of the investigative journalism of Sharyl Atkisson and another source.

    And what about the rest of big media? Bystander syndrome. They remind me of the tragic case of Kitty Genovese who was raped and murdered outside her apartment complex in Queens in 1964, while her neighbors watched and failed to lift a finger to help her. http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/predators/kitty_genovese/1.html

    Figuratively speaking, big media today is doing the exact same thing, while Obama and his surrogates murder the Constitution. They heed the implicit advice of Browkaw which says in effect don’t get involved. These people may be many things, but journalists they are not.

    ————————————
    McClatchy: IRS targeting of conservatives may go beyond tax-exempt applications
    posted at 8:41 am on May 31, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

    Could the situation at the IRS get any worse? McClatchy joins CBS News in postulating that the scandal may well expand to more than just applications for tax-exempt status. Both news agencies are starting to take complaints about predatory and punitive audits and other actions and put them into a very ugly pattern — and ask some very difficult questions of the Obama administration:

    While the developing scandal over the targeting of conservatives by the tax agency has largely focused to date on its scrutiny of groups with words such as “tea party” or “patriot” in their names, these examples suggest the government was looking at a broader array of conservative groups and perhaps individuals. Their collective experiences at a minimum could spread skepticism about the fairness of a powerful agency that should be above reproach and at worst could point to a secret political vendetta within the government against conservatives.

    The emerging stories from real people raise questions about whether the IRS scrutiny extended beyond applicants for tax-exempt status and whether individuals who donated to these tax-exempt organizations or to conservative causes also were targeted.

    Former IRS leaders have apologized for inappropriate scrutiny of conservative organizations. They haven’t to date, however, divulged who developed the criteria, how they were developed or when and how they extended to groups associated with conservative causes that didn’t have “tea party,” “patriot” or similar catchwords in their names.

    Widening congressional investigations and federal lawsuits are likely to reveal more about the scope and intent of the inappropriate treatment of conservative groups by the IRS. The House Ways and Means Committee plans a hearing Tuesday to allow victims to testify for the first time. In earlier hearings, one IRS official pleaded the Fifth to avoid answering questions.
    McClatchy includes the case of Catherine Engelbrecht, which CBS News’ Sharyl Attkisson co-reported yesterday. That case, of course, goes far beyond the IRS; Engelbrecht’s business got harassed by the FBI, ATF, and OSHA as well, which would mean coordination far above the Treasury Department. They also include the case of an anti-abortion group that was told they couldn’t picket Planned Parenthood locations if they wanted to keep their exemption, and a Nebraska veteran who got hassled in an IRS audit over his donations to his church once he began donating to conservative causes.

    That may end up being the undercard next week, however. The House Oversight Committee will hold hearings over the next two weeks to take testimony from the low-level employees in Cincinnati that Lois Lerner and her former bosses Douglas Shulman and Steven Miller tried to turn into scapegoats:

    House investigators will interview four Internal Revenue Service employees over the next two weeks, POLITICO has learned.

    The House Ways and Means and Oversight committees hope the four front-line employees from the agency’s Cincinnati office will help lawmakers better understand how the IRS targeting of conservative groups first began.

    A committee aide declined to name the employees to be interviewed. But House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said earlier this month he wants the IRS to make available five employees for transcribed interviews including John Shafer, a screening group manager, Gary Muthert, a screener in the tax-exempt division, Liz Hofacre, a former case coordinator from April to October 2010, and Joseph Herr, a former advocacy group manager.
    What will be the likelihood that these five will fall on swords and swear that no one told them to target these groups? I’d put the odds on the low side for that outcome.

    John Eastman wants a closer look at an already-known outrage in this scandal, too (via Instapundit):

    In March of 2012 the Human Rights Campaign published a confidential tax return of the National Organization for Marriage, which was immediately republished byThe Huffington Post and other liberal news media outlets. The HRC and NOM are the leading national groups on opposing sides of the fight over gay marriage. HRC wants to redefine marriage to make it genderless, while NOM wishes to preserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

    My organization was not the only conservative-linked political group or business that appears to have faced shady actions from IRS employees. ProPublica reported this week that the IRS handed over to them confidential documents of nine conservative organizations whose applications for non-profit status were still pending. Among them: Crossroads GPS, a key group backing Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign.

    Our case was particularly egregious because the IRS leak of confidential information fed directly into an ongoing political battle. For months before March 2012, the pro-gay marriage HRC had been demanding that my group, NOM, publicly identify its major donors, something that NOM and many other non-profits refuse to do. The reason is simple. In the past, gay marriage advocates have used such information to launch campaigns of intimidation against traditional marriage supporters. …

    At this stage, nobody is accusing the White House or the Obama re-election campaign of illegal activity. But there is a serious question about whether there was communication or possible collusion between the IRS and the HRC, and if there was, whether anyone at the White House or the Obama re-election campaign was involved.

    It is imperative that congressional investigators get to the bottom of the issue. If the IRS can get away with leaking NOM’s confidential tax return to its chief political opponent, then no taxpayer is safe from political retribution by the federal government.
    The retribution part has already been established. We need to know who ordered it, and how that information got networked.

  85. The word I was searching for to describe Browkaw was “Faux Éminence Grise”


    Oh yea Wbb, I was just using that expression the other day when I was at the coffee shop.

    Not-

    You crack me up Wbb with all your worldly expressions…I often have to Google it. 😉

  86. Engelbrecht’s business got harassed by the FBI, ATF, and OSHA as well, which would mean coordination far above the Treasury Department.
    ———————————
    That is the key point, is it not?

    If it were just the IRS, then big media could defend Obama by saying the IRS was simply responding to the letters of three democrat senators, who asked them in writing to focus on conservative groups.

    But the fact that other agencies were attacking the same conservatives simultaneously, should prove to anyone with an IQ over 60 that this harrassment effort was guided and directed by the White House.

    Notice how every potential defense that Obama raises here collapses as more facts come out.

  87. Engelbrecht’s business got harassed by the FBI, ATF, and OSHA as well, which would mean coordination far above the Treasury Department.
    ——————
    It is scorched earth we are talking about here. For Obama, it was not enough to silence their voices in the 2012 election. No, it went far beyond that. His goal was to put them out of business and wreck their lives. He has more in common with Alphonse Capone, than Abraham Lincoln.

  88. Seeing this, it becomes easier to understand how he could let our soldiers in Bengazi die, rather than lift a finger to help them. Their lives meant nothing whatsoever to him. They were expendable. What was not expendable was his election campaign. Nothing else matters. Nevertheless, 43% of our benighted electorate still think of him as the cats meaoow. Where the hell is Mel Brooks and Zero Mostel when we need them. This could be the sequel we have been waiting for to Springtime for Hitler.

  89. Faux Éminence Grise” translation: phoney old fart who should be put out to pasture.

    Hehe, I thought it was: Self righteous biddy, hiding under the desk, pulling the puppet’s strings.

  90. Obama will sign UN anti gun treaty on June 3rd.
    ————————-
    Will he apply the law retroactively and indict himself for gunrunning to Mexican drug cartels, and to al Quaeda forces in the Middle East, causing thousands of innocent deaths? If so, then I would encourage him to sign it post haste. That shit has got to stop. And because he appointed Holder to investigate Holder, it is only logical that he should direct Obama to indict Obama.

  91. Seeing this, it becomes easier to understand how he could let our soldiers in Bengazi die, rather than lift a finger to help them. Their lives meant nothing whatsoever to him. They were expendable. What was not expendable was his election campaign. Nothing else matters.
    ____________

    I have been wondering when the beans that Paula Broadwell spilled will get stirred in to the scandal stew. Remember, she said the CIA annex was actually a prison – the kind that isn’t even supposed to exist anymore under Obama’s era of enlightenment. Did Obama intend for those prisoners to be rescued by the terrorists? Or did he just sacrifice US lives to keep the prison out of the press with the election around the corner? I would not be surprised if he and ValJar were cooking up the whole “blame it on the video” strategy as the attack occurred.

  92. This fine article by Larry Johnson raises a troubling question: if all of them are corrupt, then what can we expect to achieve from any investigation? Will it produce the truth, or will it merely reveal which of the transgressors is left without a chair when the music stops? The question is rhetorical. Even if all of them are guilty, there are differing degrees of culpability. In that case, you must look to the position of president, white house advisor to the president, white house counsel and head of the agency for answers. Otherwise, justice can never be served. You cannot expect the American People to abide by the edicts of an ever expanding federal government where no one is responsible for its violations. That is Kafka on steroids. That may be an acceptable outcome for Chief Justice Roberts. God forbid he should have to render a controversial decision that could sully the Court’s majesty and robes. But it is unacceptable to most of us, I pray.
    ———————————————————————

    Larry Doyle’s Sense on the IRS

    By Larry Johnson on May 28, 2013 at 2:52 PM in Current Affairs

    Our old friend, Larry Doyle, who has made his mark as the author of Sense on Cents, is out with a new post that merits your attention. He hones in on one of the IRS Commissioners, Doug Shulman, who apparently is suffering from early onset Prefrontal Lobe Dementia. How else to account for his inability to remember anything that happened while he was Commissioner.

    Anyway, here’s Brother Doyle (or you can check him out here).

    Have you ever read a passage or a line from a speech and thought, “He didn’t actually say that, did he?”

    I had just that experience this morning in reading a delivery made by Douglas Shulman. Who is Mr. Shulman? The former commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service during the time when the targeting of selected conservative groups was launched. For those who care about truth, transparency, and integrity I can only hope that we learn all the details of that activity.

    What about Shulman himself, though, and his past? Where did he work prior to joining the IRS?

    Under the heading of “you just can’t make this stuff up,” Shulman was vice-chairman of Wall Street’s favorite self-regulatory organization FINRA prior to being appointed chairman of the IRS by President Bush in early 2008. Oh boy!!

    As many employees and managers of small broker-dealers have informed me over the last few years, those running FINRA have been notoriously well known for targeting small broker-dealers while letting the big fish swim free.

    As if that were not enough, Shulman himself then puts a twist on Shakespeare’s line from The Tempest, “What’s past is prologue,” in a delivery in late 2007 while still at FINRA:

    We like to say that in the area of markets, we no longer chase bad guys . . .

    I just spilled my coffee. How might any regulator ever issue a statement such as that? Stupid is as stupid does.

    Shulman is actually referencing the fact that so much of the markets have become technically orchestrated by computers that regulators need to be more focused on these aspects than the individuals per se. He then goes on:

    While of course this is an exaggeration, the key for market participants is to put into place the proper controls to ensure that their computer systems are compliant with rules and regulations and are operating as intended. This will only become more important over time, as the world becomes more and more automated.

    Let’s stop here for a second. Certainly, the world has become more automated. Regulators have been way behind the curve in keeping pace with the technology utilized by Wall Street banks. But rather than delving into that, is Shulman’s statement about “no longer chasing bad guys” really an exaggeration?

    Shall we ask those investors victimized by Bernie Madoff, Allen Stanford, the flash crash, the bad apples who stuffed ARS into client portfolios, those manipulating Libor, naked short selling, robo-signing, and predatory lending? What about the small broker-dealers themselves who were “picked off” to the tune of anywhere from $180-370 million by FINRA’s own execs and the large broker-dealers in the merger of the NASD and NYSE Regulation to form FINRA?

    Were all of these massive financial transgressions orchestrated by computers or were they overseen and executed by individuals, that is “bad guys“?

    Perhaps, just perhaps, some member of Congress may want to inquire of Mr. Shulman what he might share on these fronts and connect the dots and target the truth that has taken such a beating from the Wall Street-Washington incest.

    And that is no exaggeration.

    Navigate accordingly.

    Thoughts, comments, and constructive criticisms encouraged and appreciated. If you think this story is worth sharing, please do so as transparency remains the great disinfectant.

    I want to ad to Larry Doyle’s questions. Who was Doug Shulman’s “sugar Daddy” or “sugar Mama.” How did a guy identified as a Democrat merit a plum job during the Bush Administration? Who in the Hell in the George W. Bush camp signed off on this joker. Tea Party targeting started under the watch of a guy appointed by George W. Senators signed off on his nomination. Everyone needs to be held to account as we unfold this despotic mischief by the IRS against conservatives.

  93. I would expect the hard left to fight to the bitter end to protect Obama the icon. They must do so in order to protect their own claim to legitimacy and moral superiority. This claim is based on their prior support for two particular causes: the civil rights movement, and Watergate. Today, they have their man in the White House. On the surface, he is the living example of what they were striving to achieve. But now they are confronted with an ever increasing body of evidence which contradicts, denies and negates their premise. And now, they are content to adopt the very tactics of those they opposed before. Today, they are perfectly content to judge people by the color of their skin rather than the content of their character, beginning with him. And today, they are willing to adopt many of the same tactics as the Nixon people were to protect him. Therefore, their legitimacy is contingent on his. They cannot afford to throw him to the wolves. The result of this is a pre-ordained certainty: they are destined to lose their legitimacy and the public will come to see them for exactly what they are.

  94. Obama and thugs are snakes. We have known this since 2008, and we have watched them drag American values into the black hole. [Racist?] 😉

    No Big Pinker should be surprised about anything corrupt that these toxic donkeys will try to get away with.

  95. foxyladi14
    May 31, 2013 at 5:38 pm
    Bachmann took out two candidates
    —————————-
    Who it appears, were nterested in the battle but not the service.

  96. Is the fall coming? Obama’s polls have shown amazing resiliency in the light of alot of information about how malevolent he actually is. Simply attributing it to the media and the nature of his support does not really explain it. One thing I have noted over the years is that his polls are highly influenced by the economic indicators like the DJIA that are kept inflated by running the printing presses. However, some knowledgeable people are saying that the DJIA is so over-inflated that it is due for an “adjustment”. It dropped over 200 points today.

Comments are closed.