Annie Dookhan worked as a chemist for the State of Massachusetts, and it turns out she had close relations with prosecutors.These prosecutors were able to successfully convict innocent Americans because Dookhan would chemically taint the “evidence,” resulting in career boosts for the prosecutors while innocent men and women were torn from their families and locked in cells. Prosecutors praised Dookhan’s work and depended on her to get the convictions they wanted.
Hat Tip and preceding quote lifted from: Filming Cops. Note, Democrat-Run Massachusetts is also where the notorious Fells Acre Child Abuse case was prosecuted; where no actual child abuse took place, but the hysteria was enough to drive criminal sentences and destroy the lives of several people who were … by any objective review of the evidence… almost certainly innocent. Massachusetts Democrats rewarded the prosecutor of this massive abuse of power by running her as a candidate for the United States Senate. (A race she lost not because of her horrible abuse of power, but apparently because she couldn’t fake being a Red Sox fan.)
Leftists often claim that the idea that the Government is “coming for your guns,” is just a paranoid right-wing fantasy. And the idea that gun registration is just the precursor to to gun confiscation is also derided as a silly, invalid “slippery slope” argument.
In New York, where gun registration laws have been in place for years, the Government is indeed coming for your guns. Letters have been sent out to registered gun owners, ordering them to turn in guns that do not comply with new gun laws. Note, owners of illegal and unregistered weapons are exempt.
On Tuesday, Jeff posted a video with clips of the current President of the United States Barack Obama using almost identical language to that of Richard Nixon to describe how each learned about scandals taking place under his watch, with both politicians claiming they had learned about them from news reports.
Today, while tidying my desk, I came across a note I had scribbled over four months ago:
Dem[ocrat]s want to define GOP by Nixon now/fear party being defined by Reagan — hence the silly line that Gipper couldn’t win in today’s GOP.
They’ve even got Bob Dole repeating that Democratic talking point (without providing any evidence to back it up).
If the Democrats continue to stonewall on the various scandals percolating around this administration, the media will have a tougher and tougher time making the age-old Nixon comparisons stick to the GOP.
NB: I had scribbled the note on January 9, 2013, the one hundredth anniversary of Nixon’s birth.
UPDATE: Meant to include this screen capture from the Obama-friendly AOL: (more…)
It would seem that President Tee could choose to go outside the normal chain of command to issue an illegal order by simply telling the head of Union N to inform the union members she leads to pursue the policy, rather than issuing a formal order to the head of the IRS.
Ace spins out an interesting scenario which, given what we know about Chicago politics, does not seem that far-fetched. That said, I’m with Ace who disagrees with the authors of the report he linked; “I don’t think this meeting is a smoking gun,” but I do think it is significant and news outlets should report it.
And journalists should be asking Jay Carney, in his next press briefing, to tell us what transpired in that meeting. And they should ask the president as well. Reporters should be doing what they can to learn what passed between the president and the union boss in March 2010.
UPDATE: Maybe there is nothing to that meeting. But, the time is indeed curious.
The IRS may be “an independent enforcement agency with only two political appointees,” in the words of White House press secretary Jay Carney, but its employees are represented by a powerful, deeply partisan union whose boss has publicly disparaged the Tea Party and criticized the Republican party for having ties to it.
The White House on Monday once again added to the list of people who knew about the IRS investigation into its targeting of conservative groups — saying White House chief of staff Denis McDonough had been informed about a month ago.
Press secretary Jay Carney said again that no one had told President Barack Obama ahead of the first news reports: not his top aide McDonough, nor his chief counsel Kathy Ruemmler, nor anyone from the Treasury Department.
Monday’s revelation amounts to the fifth iteration of the Obama administration’s account of events, after initially saying that the White House had first learned of the controversy from the press.
Various folks that I follow on Twitter have asked important questions over the past few days such as this one:
I want to know the names of the folks who get to decide what Obama doesn’t need to know. What are their credentials? Who elected them?
If as outgoing Acting Internal Revenue Service Director Steven Miller claimed in his testimony before the House Ways and Committee that “politics didn’t play a role” in singling out Tea Party and other groups critical of the Obama administration, could he — or anyone at the IRS for that matter — please identify the “progressive” groups subject to the requests made of right-of-center/libertarian groups, including:
. . . please explain why such snooping didn’t occur while George W. Bush was President of the United States.
And as a bonus, for those constantly blaming that man for wanting to destroy his enemies, please provide evidence of him — or his minions — rooting around in confidential government files for details about his political opponents.
In the Weekly Standard today, Daniel Halper writes:
NBC’s Lisa Myers reported this morning that the IRS deliberately chose not to reveal that it had wrongly targeted conservative groups until after the 2012 presidential election . . .
The IRS commissioner “has known for at least a year that this was going on,” said Myers, “and that this had happened. And did he share any of that information with the White House? But even more importantly, Congress is going to ask him, why did you mislead us for an entire year? Members of Congress were saying conservatives are being targeted. What’s going on here? The IRS denied it. Then when — after these officials are briefed by the IG that this is going on, they don’t disclose it. In fact, the commissioner sent a letter to Congress in September on this subject and did not reveal this. Imagine if we — if you can — what would have happened if this fact came out in September 2012, in the middle of a presidential election? The terrain would have looked very different.”
Via Ace. Barack Obama’s much vaunted commitment to transparency notwithstanding, that Democrat is more interested in winning elections than in opening the books on his administration.
Given the climate of bias, hate and fear that our top leaders and media have sought to foment against the Tea Party for years, is it any wonder that self-important IRS bureaucrats would act unethically toward it?
UPDATE: As long as my list is, I know that I’ve missed some juicy examples of our top leaders and media fomenting bigotry against the Tea Party. Please feel free to add more in the comments.
UPDATE:Rick Santelli points out the logical endpoint of the IRS’ approach – namely, your Obamacare death panel Accountability Board saying “No stent for you!” based on your politics – and predicts that Obamacare will be altered partly to prevent such a nightmare.
“The Tea Party people have known about this and were working on this,” [George] will [said Sunday’s broadcast of ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos"] “But they said — it was just some odd underlings out in Cincinnati who did this and there was no political motive whatever involved. Now the question is, how stupid do they think we are? Just imagine, Donna Brazile, if the George W. Bush administration had an IRS underling, he’s out in Cincinnati, of course, saying we’re going to target groups with the word ‘progressive’ in their title. We’d have all hell breaking loose.”
“Bribery isn’t what it once was,” said an official with one of the major gun-control groups. “The government has no money. Once upon a time you would throw somebody a post office or a research facility in times like this. Frankly, there’s not a lot of leverage.”
If this were a right-wing plot against a top Democrat there would be wall-to-wall coverage on the cable networks and front-page coverage with the magazine involved taking a beating, but don’t expect too much coverage from the MSM or commentary or much of anything from the lefty pundits, who were only interested in the tape’s contents. Like Benghazi, Libya, in their minds’ if they don’t cover it, it’s not news. Gee, you’d think the “media critics” would notice that egregious bias.
It seems Todd Akin’s 6-second crazy gaffe about rape get more coverage than this left-wing dirty trick against the Senate Republican leader.
I’m wondering how the media would be covering the economy if we saw a surging stock market and sluggish job growth during a Republican administration, particularly as gas prices were climbing and incomes stagnant. In the Obama economy, it seems big corporations and the wealthiest Americans are doing quite well as the New York Timesreported last September:
The income gap between the wealthiest 20 percent of American households and the rest of the country grew sharply in 2011, the Census Bureau reported, as an overwhelming majority of Americans saw no gains from a weak economic recovery in its second full year.
Shouldn’t there be some stories about how Obama’s policies favor the wealthy?
Leslie Winner, executive director of the Z. Smith Reynolds Foundation, said she was “surprised and disappointed” by the actions of Blueprint North Carolina.
“(Z. Smith Reynolds) believes in robust debate on issues of public importance, (it) does not support attacking people,” Winner said. “We were disappointed to learn that Blueprint is advocating this strategy…
“We are taking this seriously. We are determining our options and our obligations. We will get to the bottom of it.”
The Foundation is providing $400,000 of Blueprint’s nearly $1 million budget, Winner said.
It is Sunday evening and I’ve had a very nice weekend away from the magnifying glass of politics. It has been a normal weekend: chores, laundry, dog walking & mindless television.
Sometime during the day, I started tweeting a series of ideas about where the Republican House of Representatives should go from here. My conclusion: Give Obama everything he wants.
Let’s pretend this is a parliamentary system. Let’s pretend the Democrats won and Obama was re-elected as Prime Minister. In that system, everything Obama wants would pass.
Let them have it. I’m not suggesting that Republicans of principle silence themselves and not warn about the consequences of Obama’s economic plans. Those Republicans would include Sens. Marco Rubio, Jim DeMint, Ted Cruz, Pat Toomey and Govs. Scott Walker, Susanna Martinez and Nikki Haley. Let them put their stakes of opposition forcefully and vocally in the ground.
But let the House GOP and the Senate GOP get out of the way and allow the Democrats what they want on the economy. No obstruction, perhaps a vote of “present”…. but no other sign of getting in the way.
We, as Conservatives, know that these economic policies are disaster. But Obama is right — Americans voted for higher taxes and more regulation — so let them have it.
We will win the long game. We should have allowed the economy to tank harder than it did in 2008 to begin with. And all that’s been happening since is kicking the can down the road.
So I’m in favor of a hard stop. Let the Democrats’ vision of economic “success” play itself out.
The result will be hardship the likes of which no American has faced since the 1930s. But so be it. Americans voted for it — let them have it.
DNC delegate and partisan Democrat lawyer Gloria Allred attended the “30 Days to Victory” Obama fundraiser at the Nokia Theatre in Los Angeles on October 7th…featuring George Clooney and musical acts Katy Perry, Stevie Wonder, Jennifer Hudson, Bon Jovi and Earth, Wind & Fire. After the fundraiser, Allred admitted to O’Reilly Factor correspondent Jesse Watters that she “just had a few words with the President” backstage, “he had some very kind words for me,” and “knows of my work…” but would not elaborate more on the details of her conversation.
On the record, Ms. Allred needs to elaborate and tell us whether or not the president (or his team) encouraged her to file suit to unseal those divorce records.
In an e-mail to me, our reader Kurt quipped, “That Obama even met with her should tell us even more about him” than he does about her. He’s right. That’s why Ms. Allred needs to come clean, so we can better see what kind of man this Democrat is.
He did it twice in his 2004 race for the U.S. Senate seat from Illinois, first against his strongest primary opponent, Blair Hull, then against Republican nominee Jack Ryan. Now, to be sure, it was the Chicago Tribune, not Mr. Obama (or his team) who filed suit to unseal the records, but it does seem interesting that, in both cases, the paper was looking into sealed information about that Democrat’s opponent.
Videographer James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas caught an official for President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign helping who she thought was an Obama supporter set herself up to vote more than once in November.
Stephanie Caballero is the regional field director for Obama’s Organizing For America in Houston, Texas. Federal Election Commission documents show, according to Project Veritas, that Caballero is a “salaried employee of the DNC [Democratic National Committee].”
Caballero is caught on camera helping the young woman try to vote in Florida and Texas in the upcoming election.
Remember — if this were a Republican Presidential re-election effort…