• Home
  • Mission
  • Federalist Papers
  • Foundation
  • U.S. Constitution
  • Bill of Rights

Federalist Press | Defending Liberty — Informing America

Breaking News and Political Commentary

  • All Stories
  • Economy
  • Elections
  • Entitlement
  • Ethics
  • Foreign
  • Gender
  • Religion
  • Sci-Tech

‘CULTURE OF COVER-UPS’: Outgoing IRS Boss

May 17, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

obama_irs_2The outgoing commissioner of the IRS apologized Friday for his agency’s practice of targeting conservative groups, calling the actions “foolish” while claiming it was not motivated by partisanship.

“As acting commissioner, I want to apologize on the behalf of the Internal Revenue Service for the mistakes that we made and the poor service provided,” Steven Miller, the outgoing commissioner, said at the first congressional hearing on the scandal. “The affected organizations and the American public deserve better.”

He said he doesn’t think the agents responsible were motivated by partisanship, but said “foolish mistakes were made by people trying to be more efficient.”

A top Republican also claimed at the start of the hearing that the details that have emerged about the IRS’ targeting of conservative groups are “just the tip of the iceberg.”

Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, ripped the tax-collecting agency over the practice at the start of the hearing. “Now we know the truth — or at least some of it,” he said. “We also know that these revelations are just the tip of the iceberg. It would be a mistake to treat this as just one scandal.”

He questioned how high the scandal went, and also suggested there was other targeting of conservatives that has not yet been acknowledged by the agency. He called it part of a “culture of cover-ups.”

“This systemic abuse cannot be fixed with just one resignation, or two,” he said. He said the problem is not just personnel, but the size and scope of the IRS.

The inspector general who released a scathing report on the agency also testified Friday. J. Russell George — the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration — said his findings raised “troubling questions” about the agency, while claiming some of the wrongdoing was apparently done with no-to-little supervision.

But he said all three allegations against the agency turned out to be true — that it was using “inappropriate criteria” to screen conservative groups, it was delaying applications and it was asking unnecessary questions.

Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., the top Democrat on the committee, said the agency’s management “completely failed the American people.” At the same time, he urged Republicans not to use the hearing to “score political points.”

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are sure to have plenty of questions for Miller, as they search for who was responsible for the program. Outrage mounted after lawmakers learned that the IRS official who led the tax-exempt organizations unit when the targeting took place — Sarah Hall Ingram — has since moved over to the IRS office responsible for ObamaCare.

“Stunning. Just stunning,” Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said after learning of the move.

The acknowledgement comes after the administration announced that Ingram’s successor Joseph Grant — who had only been on the job a few days — would be retiring.

The agency released a memo Thursday night written by Grant. In the memo, Grant acknowledged “errors” but said the program was started to deal with an influx of applications, as well as allegations that some of the groups were engaged in political activity that would be “impermissible” under the tax-exempt status they were seeking.

President Obama, meanwhile, maintained Thursday that he didn’t know about the investigation into the IRS program until it was made public.

The ObamaCare official now drawing scrutiny had been serving as commissioner of the office responsible for tax-exempt organizations from 2009 to 2012 — the division included the group that targeted Tea Partiers — and has since left to serve as director of the IRS’ Affordable Care Act division. That unit is responsible for enforcing parts of the health care law, including the fines associated with the so-called individual mandate — the requirement to buy health insurance.

Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn, citing her current position and history with the scandal-marred unit, reinforced his call Thursday for the IRS to be blocked from implementing the health care law. “Now more than ever, we need to prevent the IRS from having any role in Americans’ health care,” he said.

Obama also appointed a new acting commissioner — White House budget officer Daniel Werfel — after the prior IRS chief announced his resignation.

The revelations at the Friday hearing could add more headaches for the Obama administration, as it tries to juggle its response to several scandals at once.

It’s unclear whether more officials will resign at the IRS in the days to come. This week’s clean-up at the agency is part of the Obama administration’s mad dash to save face and regain footing after being hammered by a series of scandals this week, including new questions over the Benghazi terror attack and the Justice Department’s seizing of journalists’ phone records.

Published May 17, 2013 / FoxNews.com

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Ethics, Religion

IRS Official Who Oversaw Unit Targeting Tea Party Now Heads ObamaCare Office

May 16, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

A woman walks out of the Internal Revenue Service building in New YorkWASHINGTON –  The IRS official who led the tax-exempt organizations unit when Tea Party groups were targeted is now in charge of the IRS office responsible for ObamaCare, two Capitol Hill sources told Fox News.

The acknowledgement comes after the administration announced that the official’s successor — who had only been on the job a few days — would be retiring. And it fueled criticism of the agency, as the outgoing IRS commissioner prepared to face lawmakers’ questions at a hearing Friday morning.

“Stunning. Just stunning,” Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said in reaction to the latest development.

President Obama, meanwhile, maintained Thursday that he didn’t know about the investigation into the IRS program until it was made public.

The ObamaCare official in question, Sarah Hall Ingram, had been serving as commissioner of the office responsible for tax-exempt organizations from 2009 to 2012 — the division included the group that targeted Tea Partiers — and has since left to serve as director of the IRS’ Affordable Care Act division. That unit is responsible for enforcing parts of the health care law, including the fines associated with the so-called individual mandate — the requirement to buy health insurance.

Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn, citing her current position and history with the scandal-marred unit, reinforced his call Thursday for the IRS to be blocked from implementing the health care law. “Now more than ever, we need to prevent the IRS from having any role in Americans’ health care,” he said.

While still the commissioner of the Tax-Exempt and Government Entities Division, Ingram was assigned to head the implementation of ObamaCare at the IRS in 2010 after the law was enacted. It is not clear when she stopped being the head of the tax-exempt office or how active her role was there while she was implementing ObamaCare.

But the official who succeeded her, Joseph Grant, is now leaving the agency in the wake of the scandal. His retirement was announced Thursday, even though he only took the job May 8.

Meanwhile, President Obama appointed a new acting commissioner after the prior IRS chief announced his resignation.

That official, Steven Miller, will be in the hot seat Friday when he is scheduled to testify before the House Ways and Means Committee in the first congressional hearing on the IRS scandal.

Also scheduled to testify is J. Russell George — the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration — and the man whose report released this week exposed the IRS practice that led to Miller’s ouster (though Miller was apparently planning to leave the agency anyway).

The revelations at the Friday hearing could add more headaches for the Obama administration, as it tries to juggle its response to several scandals at once.

It’s unclear whether more officials will resign at the IRS in the days to come.

An internal memo Thursday stated that Grant — at the tax-exempt unit — will retire on June 3. Grant oversaw the IRS division being called out for holding up applications from Tea Party groups applying for tax-exempt status. He was appointed to his position on May 8 by Miller.

The Senate side holds its first IRS-related hearing on May 21.

This week’s clean-up at the agency is part of the Obama administration’s mad dash to save face and regain footing after being hammered by a series of scandals this week, including new questions over the Benghazi terror attack and the Justice Department’s seizing of journalists’ phone records.

On Thursday, Obama appointed senior White House budget officer Daniel Werfel as acting commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service.

“Throughout his career working in both Democratic and Republican administrations, Danny has proven an effective leader who serves with professionalism, integrity and skill,” Obama said in a statement. “The American people deserve to have the utmost confidence and trust in their government, and as we work to get to the bottom of what happened and restore confidence in the IRS, Danny has the experience and management ability necessary to lead the agency at this important time.”

Allegations that the IRS had been targeting conservative groups that applied for tax-exempt status date back years but a government report released this week backed up the claims.

“Americans are right to be angry about it, and I am angry about it,” Obama said.

Republican leaders were quick to call out Obama for being too passive with the situation and demanded more be done.

“This is runaway government at its worst,” McConnell said Thursday. “Who knows who they will target next? The truth will come out. It always does.”

However, the president knocked down the prospect of appointing a special prosecutor to investigate the IRS, saying the congressional investigations and a separate Justice Department probe should be enough to nail down who was responsible for improperly targeting Tea Party groups when they applied for tax-exempt status.

Asked whether he previously knew about the IRS practice, Obama said Thursday: “I can assure you that I certainly did not know anything about the (inspector general) report” beforehand.

The president, though, did not say whether he was previously aware of the IRS’ actions, which allegedly started as early as 2010, well before the inspector general’s office began to investigate. Republican lawmakers were inquiring about the alleged targeting of Tea Party groups by the IRS more than a year ago.

But White House Press Secretary Jay Carney has said no one in the White House knew about the practice.

 

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Ethics

ICE: Hundreds of Illegal Immigrants With Criminal Records Released

May 16, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

People are taken into custody by U.S. Border Patrol near Falfurrias, TexasHundreds of illegal immigrants with criminal records were released earlier this year as the Obama administration prepared for budget cuts, according to newly released data that challenged claims the program involved “low-risk” individuals.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement released the figures to two top senators, after a three-month delay and under the threat of congressional subpoenas.

Of the 2,226 detainees that were released in February, the department revealed, “622 have been identified as having some type of criminal conviction.”

A statement from Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Carl Levin, D-Mich., who received the stats, said 32 of them had multiple felony convictions. The department then “re-apprehended” 24 of those, the senators said, after realizing the “seriousness” of their crimes.

McCain called for those responsible to be punished.

“ICE’s reprehensible actions put Arizona at risk by setting free into our communities hundreds of detainees who were guilty of criminal offenses,” he said. “The ICE officials responsible for this must face disciplinary action and must take all actions necessary to ensure that this never happens again.”

At the time, ICE officials defended the decision as one made in order to stay within budget — as a prior budget resolution expired and the sequester was set to kick in.

Those detainees released were still said to face deportation and be under supervision. But administration officials downplayed the threat they might pose after leaving the local immigration jails.

In late February, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said: “As ICE made clear yesterday, the agency released these low-risk, non-criminal detainees under a less expensive form of monitoring to ensure detention levels stayed within ICE’s overall budget.”

But according to McCain and Levin, some of those released had lengthy rap sheets.

One of them released in Phoenix had a second-degree robbery conviction and convictions for prostitution and solicitation for lewd conduct.

Another had been convicted of an “extreme” case of driving under the influence, harassment, and causing criminal damage to property. And yet another had prior convictions for carrying a gun, felony possession of drugs, burglary, vandalism and trespassing.

In the letter to the senators, a Department of Homeland Security official said detainees “without a criminal history were prioritized.”

Nelson Peacock, assistant secretary for legislative affairs, said ICE focused on those that “posed no significant threat to public safety.” He said 1,604 of those released had no known criminal convictions and reiterated that the agency faced a 7 percent budget cut which required “significant reductions.”

In a statement Thursday, ICE said “these decisions were made on a case-by-case basis, by career law enforcement officials in the field, in order to ensure that ICE maintained sufficient resources to detain serious criminal offenders and other individuals who pose a significant threat to public safety through the end of the continuing resolution.”

Fox News’ Doug McKelway contributed to this report.

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign

In Wake of Scandal, Obama Fires IRS Boss — Who Was Leaving Anyway

May 16, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

obama_irsPresident Obama announced Wednesday that acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller would resign in the wake of the agency scandal in which conservative groups were targeted — though Miller was apparently set to step down anyway.

An official close to Miller told Fox News, shortly after Obama’s brief announcement, that the IRS chief was “set to resign the position of acting commission as of early June.” He was planning to leave the IRS entirely a “couple of months later, regardless of the current controversy,” the source said.

These details were not mentioned by the president as he announced Wednesday evening Miller was resigning. Obama spoke following a meeting with Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew  and other top department officials in which they reviewed a highly critical inspector general’s report on the practice. The report concluded poor management allowed agents to improperly target Tea Party and other groups for more than 18 months, starting in 2010.

Obama said Lew asked for the resignation and Miller agreed, after being on the job since November 2012.

“Americans have a right to be angry about it, and I’m angry about it,” Obama said from the White House.

Republicans, who along with Democrats have slammed the IRS for the practice, welcomed the resignation Wednesday but made clear they would continue to investigate and press for accountability.

Rep. Vern Buchanan, R-Fla., said the resignation “is a necessary first step but more heads need to roll.”

Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., reacting to the claim that Miller was leaving anyway, said it seemed like he was a “perfect scapegoat” for the administration.

Miller’s resignation was part of three-step plan Obama outlined to fix the problem.

The other steps are to put in place the safeguards recommended in the IG report and to work with Congress as it investigates.

“The good news is we can fix this,” Obama said.

Miller became acting commissioner after Commissioner Douglas Shulman completed his five-year term. Shulman had been appointed by President George W. Bush.

The president has proceeded cautiously since the IRS controversy was made public Friday. While he initially said the accusations were “outrageous,” he also said he wanted to wait until the report was released before addressing what should be done to hold accountable those responsible.

Obama said he would hold a press conference Thursday.

The report lays much of the blame on IRS supervisors in Washington who oversaw a group of specialists in Cincinnati who screened applications for tax-exempt status. It does not indicate that Washington initiated the targeting of conservative groups, but it does say a top supervisor in Washington did not adequately supervise agents in the field even after she learned the agents were acting improperly.

The Justice Department is also investigating the IRS targeting, as are three congressional committees.

Sources told Fox News that Miller will remain on the job “for a couple of weeks.”

The House Ways and Means Committee said after the announcement of Miller’s resignation that he still will attend a hearing Friday.

And the House Committee on Oversight and Government Affairs sent a letter Wednesday afternoon to the IRS  requesting five employees named in the IG audit be made available for transcribed interviews by committee staff.

The Republican-led committee wants to start the interviews Monday.

The names and titles of the IRS employees requested are Holly Paz, a director; John Shafer, a manager; Gary Muthert, a screener; Liz Hofacre, a case coordinator; and Joseph Herr, a manager.

“The resignation of Steven Miller is a positive and important step as this agency struggles to try to regain the public’s trust,” said Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee. “A clean slate at the IRS with new leadership is imperative to fix this egregious encroachment on the lives of honest, hard-working Americans whose only sin was that they want to express their beliefs.”

Earlier in the day, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney sidestepped a question about whether Obama still had confidence in Miller, saying he wouldn’t discuss personnel matters. He said Obama has expressed his overall view that IRS personnel had acted inappropriately.

“He wants to see that the actions taken, as revealed by the Treasury report, that are inappropriate, are met with consequences,” Carney said. “He will make clear to Treasury Department leaders that he expects action.”

Carney said Obama wants the public to “understand and believe that the IRS applies our tax laws in a neutral and fair way to everyone.”

Published May 16, 2013 / FoxNews.com / The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Ethics, Religion

Federalist Press Celebrates 1 Year, 150,000+ visitors

May 15, 2013 By Editor 1 Comment

1_year_federalist_pressFederalist Press online news service and political commentary celebrates its first year online today, May 15, 2013.

Federalist Press celebrated its 150,000th online visitor just a few days ago, marking a major milestone for the young online news service.

We thank all of our loyal readers who have contributed, commented and supported us in this service, and made our success possible.

Federalist Press looks forward to another banner year, and pledges itself to bringing you the most important news and analysis available.

Thank you!

PUBLIUS

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Religion, Sci-Tech, Uncategorized

Democratic Sen. Levin Pressured IRS to Investigate Conservative Nonprofits

May 15, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

Sen_Carl_LevinSen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., repeatedly pressed the Internal Revenue Service to investigate the tax-exempt status of specific conservative nonprofit organizations in letters to then-IRS commissioner Doug Shulman and director Lois Lerner in 2012.

Levin said he was concerned nonprofit organizations were abusing their tax-exempt status and engaging in partisan politics and requested information from the IRS on 12 organizations.

“Organizations are using Internal Revenue Code section 501(c)(4) to gain tax exempt status while engaging in partisan political campaigns,” wrote Levin in one letter on July 27, 2012. “Making the problem worse is that the IRS knows there is a problem because of the public nature of the activity but has failed to address it.”

He asked whether the 12 organizations “applied for [tax-exempt status]; and if so … received the described exemption for political activity from the IRS.”

Levin’s list contained nine conservative groups, including Club for Growth, Americans for Tax Reform, and Americans for Prosperity. It also included two liberal groups and one centrist group.

The IRS officials were reportedly already aware that the agency had been targeting conservative groups for special scrutiny during the time Levin was corresponding with Shulman and Lerner.

Published May 15, 2013 / Washington Free Beacon

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics

White House Doing Damage Control as Scandals Pile Up

May 14, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

obama_scandalsThe White House was in damage control mode Tuesday morning as an escalating series of potential scandals raised questions about whether officials abused their authority — all while threatening to undermine President Obama’s second-term ambitions.

The latest controversy to hit the headlines was the allegation that the Justice Department secretly obtained two months of phone records from Associated Press journalists. The AP went public with the charge Monday, and quickly earned sympathy from lawmakers on both sides who widely agreed that the record grab appeared to be unnecessarily intrusive.

House Speaker John Boehner’s office said “they better have a damned good explanation.”

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, a Democrat, said he’s “very troubled” by the allegations.

Attorney General Eric Holder is sure to come under heavy questioning on the matter when he appears on Capitol Hill for a hearing Wednesday, and could face questions during an unrelated press conference Tuesday afternoon.

The AP allegations amounted to the second controversy that raised concerns from members of both parties and could not be easily dismissed by the administration as a partisan attack. The other was the acknowledgement Friday by the IRS that it inappropriately singled out Tea Party and other conservative groups for scrutiny.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., a Tea Party-aligned lawmaker, said those responsible should be fired.

“Anybody who was aware of, and approved of targeting people for their political beliefs and speech, needs to be fired, never in this position again, and made an example of,” he told Fox News on Tuesday.

Those two controversies came on top of a revived clamor in Washington over the Benghazi terror attack. Three whistle-blowers brought the issue back to the fore with their dramatic testimony last week. Further, newly published email excerpts show that a top State Department official pressed the intelligence community to water down its initial story line on the attack in the days before a top diplomat went on television to explain the attack to the public.

And amid that controversy, FoxNews.com and other news organizations reported that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has been reaching out to private-sector executives seeking donations for nonprofit organizations that help enroll people in ObamaCare.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee has already launched a probe into the solicitations. Republicans on the committee voiced concern that the department could be soliciting donations from firms that are also doing business with HHS.

Together, the scandals threaten to distract from Obama’s second-term agenda. He recently suffered a defeat on gun control, but was hoping to align with influential Capitol Hill Republicans to push for an immigration overhaul in the coming weeks.

Obama, in a press conference on Monday, downplayed the scandals. He called Benghazi a political “sideshow” driven by partisan motives. As for the IRS, he made clear that he found the alleged conduct to be unacceptable and would not tolerate it.

But the administration has distanced itself from that controversy, attributing it to the actions of low-level staffers. The White House also distanced itself from the AP phone record grab, referring questions to the Justice Department.

Published May 14, 2013 / FoxNews.com

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Religion

IRS DC Officials in Loop on Tea Party Targeting

May 14, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

irs_troubleNewly obtained documents show the current IRS chief knew about the agency’s targeting of Tea Party groups as early as May 2012 and other officials in Washington were clued in more than a year before that, as the scandal continued to spread.

The additional details were provided in a timeline from the office of Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, based on briefings by the inspector general’s office investigating the case. Together, they challenged the agency’s initial claims that the practice of flagging conservative groups for additional scrutiny was contained to low-level staffers at a Cincinnati office.

The timeline shows that Steven Miller, the acting IRS chief who at the time was a deputy commissioner, was briefed on the practice on May 3, 2012. Despite this briefing, Miller wrote letters to members of Congress at least twice to explain the process of reviewing applications for tax-exempt status without disclosing that Tea Party groups had been targeted. On July 25, 2012, Miller testified before the House Ways and Means oversight subcommittee, but again did not mention the additional scrutiny — despite being asked about it.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., blasted Miller over the revelation.

“It is almost inconceivable to imagine that top officials at the IRS knew conservative groups were being targeted but chose to willfully mislead the Committee’s investigation into this practice,” he said in a statement.

Further, the timeline shows that managers, after compiling a list of Tea Party and other cases, decided to send their report “up the chain in Washington” in April 2010. The timeline says this report was shared with two executives in Washington, including Lois G. Lerner. Lerner heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt organizations and is the official who first revealed the controversial practice on Friday.

The timeline suggests she knew about the practice even earlier than previously thought. Further, it suggests other Washington officials were aware early on. Meanwhile, The Washington Post reported that IRS officials at the D.C. headquarters were sending inquiries to conservative groups on their donors, and in at least one case an application came under review in Washington.

Miller’s actions are sure to come under increased scrutiny.

At the June hearing, Rep. Kenny Marchant, R-Texas, told Miller that some politically active tax-exempt groups in his district had complained about being harassed. Marchant did not explicitly ask if tea party groups were being targeted. But he did ask how applications were handled.

Miller responded, “We did group those organizations together to ensure consistency, to ensure quality. We continue to work those cases,” according to a transcript on the committee’s website.

Earlier, Rep. Charles Boustany, R-La., had raised concerns with the IRS about complaints that tea party groups were being harassed. Boustany specifically mentioned tea party groups in his inquiry.

But in a June 15, 2012, letter to Boustany, Miller said that when the IRS saw an increase in applications from groups that were involved in political activity, the agency “took steps to coordinate the handling of the case to ensure consistency.”

He added that agents worked with tax law experts “to develop approaches and materials that could be helpful to the agents working the cases.”

Miller did not mention that in 2011, those materials included a list of words to watch for, such as “tea party” and “patriot.” He also didn’t disclose that in January 2012, the criteria for additional screening was updated to include references to the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.

The House Ways and Means Committee, chaired by Camp, is holding a hearing on the issue Friday and Miller is scheduled to testify.

The Senate Finance Committee announced Monday that it will join a growing list of congressional committees investigating the matter.

The IRS apologized Friday for what it acknowledged was “inappropriate” targeting of conservative political groups during the 2012 election to see whether they were violating their tax-exempt status. In some cases, the IRS acknowledged, agents inappropriately asked for lists of donors.

The agency blamed low-level employees in a Cincinnati office, saying no high-level officials were aware.

When members of Congress repeatedly raised concerns with the IRS about complaints that tea party groups were being harassed last year, a deputy IRS commissioner took the lead in assuring lawmakers that the additional scrutiny was a legitimate part of the screening process.

That deputy commissioner was Miller, who is now the acting head of the agency.

Camp and other members of the Ways and Means Committee sent at least four inquiries to the IRS, starting in June 2011. Hatch, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, sent three inquiries. And Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., chairman of the House oversight committee, sent at least one.

“This was a targeting of the president’s political enemies, effectively, and lies about it during the election year so that it wasn’t discovered until afterwards,” Issa said Tuesday on “CBS This Morning.” The fact is this is the kind of investigation that has to be open and transparent to the American people.”

None of the responses they received from the IRS acknowledged that conservative groups had ever been targeted, including a response to Hatch dated Sept. 11, 2012 — four months after Miller had been briefed.

In several letters to members of Congress, Miller went into painstaking detail about how applications for tax-exempt status were screened. But he never mentioned that conservative groups were being targeted, even though people working under him knew as early as June 2011 that tea party groups were being targeted, according to an upcoming report by the agency’s inspector general.

The IRS issued a statement Monday saying that Miller had been briefed on May 3, 2012 “that some specific applications were improperly identified by name and sent to the (exempt organizations) centralized processing unit for further review.” That was the unit in Cincinnati that handled the tea party applications.

When Lerner responded to inquiries from the House oversight committee, she also didn’t mention the fact that tea party groups had ever been targeted. Her responses included 45-page letters in May 2012 to Issa and to Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, who chairs a subcommittee.

Published May 14, 2013 / FoxNews.com / The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Ethics

Twin Scandals Sap Obama Credibility

May 13, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

obama_tax_hike“…statements in the [group’s] case file criticize how the country is being run.”

— One of the criteria used by IRS investigators to target small-government groups for special scrutiny, according to an agency audit provided to congressional investigators.

Team Obama has always known how to make the most of critics in order to make the least of criticism.

The best recipes for Lame Duck Soup call for a healthy scoop of scandal. Obama just got himself a double helping.

During the 2008 campaign, it was “Stop the Smears,” an Obama effort to single out those who made claims about the candidate’s nativity, faith or personal conduct, rounding up the most slanderous and paranoiac claims, publicizing and then refuting them.

Then when more credible individuals would get near the subject, the campaign could strike back. Recall Hillary Clinton back in March 2008 on CBS strenuously defending then-Sen. Barack Obama against claims that he was a Muslim but then leaving the door open just a bit by saying, “As far as I know.”

Obamaland went on the attack over those five words, and Clinton paid dearly.

And so it went in office. The best example was how much attention was paid to the small number of people focused on the idea that President Obama was born someplace other than Hawaii. They even had coffee mugs made with the president’s birth certificate.

For weeks, as John Boehner or Mitch McConnell went out to talk about tax policy or spending, they would have to face questions about the president’s birth certificate. Before the GOPers could talk about their problems with Keynesian economics, righteous reporters would make Republicans first discuss Kenya.

There was also the effort to elevate Rush Limbaugh as the de facto spokesman for the Republican Party, with the White House press secretary demanding that reporters inquire of Republican office holders whether they agreed with the conservative radio host who had said he hoped Obama would fail because the new president’s agenda was so destructive. The reporters did just that and much squirming was the result.

Or how about the White House encouraging supporters to collect claims made online about what would become Obama’s 2010 health law? As the implementation of the law has shown, there was much reasonable cause for concern with the legislation. But that’s not what the White House was hunting for. Team Obama wanted the grainiest sediment from the bottom of the can of mixed nuts.

Obama favors a similar technique in policy speeches, having built enough straw men over the years for every pumpkin patch in history.

This approach has helped the president keep his personal approval ratings above those of his individual policies and allowed he and his political team to depict critics, even legitimate ones, as racist, xenophobic, kooky and stupid. The president’s credibility and reasonableness have been enhanced and his detractors have been delegitimized – enough so that Obama won what once looked like an improbable second term.

So what happens when that stops working? We’re about to find out.

Obama used the same playbook when defending himself against claims of ineptitude and cover-up concerning a September raid by Islamist militants on a U.S. diplomatic outpost. What might have been a disaster for the president was turned around in a neat bit of political jujitsu with the help of Candy Crowley and a tentative challenger.

The line held for a long time, with the administration able to dismiss critics on the subject as obsessed conspiracy theorists or politically motivated phonies. But the evidence of hiding the facts from the public eventually became so great that Team Obama has had to begin a long, painful backward march.

When an official is found to have scrubbed talking points about the attack expressly to deny Republicans the opportunity to criticize the administration, it becomes clear that Obama was wrong when he said his administration was being forthcoming. It also opens the door to the next round of questioning about whether Obama and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were willfully misinformed or willfully spreading misinformation. Neither is good.

With reporters plenty embarrassed by having been badly burned by Team Obama on the Benghazi attacks, a new scandal comes into view: the deliberate targeting of conservative groups by the IRS.

The agency tried to get out ahead of the scandal by going public just before congressional investigators released their findings. The timing, though, is even worse for the White House.

A government agency going after groups that oppose the president’s agenda and, most disconcertingly, support constitutional principles, would never be a good thing for an administration. But having the admission come at the exact moment the administration’s credibility is badly damaged for misleading the public on another subject is dire.

Just a few months ago, claims of a Benghazi cover up and the government hassling and intimidating the president’s critics were dismissed as kooky. Now both have been revealed to be true, leaving the president’s team unable to use the old jujitsu and retreat to the old-school techniques of compartmentalization (“isolated incident in a single agency”) and insulation (“the president did not order…”).

The best recipes for Lame Duck Soup call for a healthy scoop of scandal. Obama just got himself a double helping.

By Chris Stirewalt / Power Play / Published May 13, 2013 / FoxNews.com

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender, Religion

IRS Targeting Went Beyond Tea Party

May 13, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

irsAn IRS campaign to apply additional scrutiny to conservative groups went beyond targeting “Tea Party” and “patriot” groups to include those focused on government spending, the Constitution and several other broad areas.

The additional guidelines created by the agency were part of a timeline, obtained by Fox News, from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, which is looking into the controversial IRS practice. IRS officials apologized Friday for the scrutiny, but new information suggests senior leaders were apprised of the effort as early as 2011 despite public denials from the top.

Republican lawmakers have vowed to investigate and hold hearings, calling the revelations deeply troubling.

“The conclusion that the IRS came to is that they did have agents who were engaged in intimidation of political groups,” Michigan Rep. Mike Rogers told “Fox News Sunday.” “I don’t care if you’re a conservative, a liberal, a Democrat or a Republican, this should send a chill up your spine. It needs to have a full investigation.”

The internal IG timeline shows a unit in the agency was looking at Tea Party and “patriot” groups dating back to early 2010. But it shows that list of criteria drastically expanding by the time a June 2011 briefing was held. It then included groups focused on government spending, government debt, taxes, and education on ways to “make America a better place to live.” It even flagged groups whose file included criticism of “how the country is being run.”

By early 2012, the criteria were updated to include organizations involved in “limiting/expanding government,” education on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and social economic reform.

Taken together, the findings of the IG and the initial admissions by the IRS Friday are fueling complaints from Republicans on Capitol Hill.

Evidence that the IRS was flagging such groups in 2011 was included in a draft inspector general’s report obtained Saturday by Fox News and other news organizations and expected to be released in full later this week.

That information seemingly contradicts public statements by IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman, who told congressional investigators in March 2011 that specific groups were not being targeted.

Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins on Sunday also called the IRS activities chilling and said she was disappointed that President Obama had not condemned the actions.

“This is truly outrageous and it contributes to the profound distrust that the American people have in government,” Collins told CNN’s “State of the Union.” “It is absolutely chilling that the IRS was singling out conservative groups for extra review. And I think that it’s very disappointing that the president hasn’t personally condemned this.”

At about the same time, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney released a statement saying: “If the inspector general finds that there were any rules broken or that conduct of government officials did not meet the standards required of them, the president expects that swift and appropriate steps will be taken to address any misconduct.”

Michigan Republican Rep. Dave Camp, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, said Friday his committee will hold a hearing on the issue.

The IRS said Friday that it was sorry for what it called the “inappropriate” targeting of the conservative groups during the 2012 elections.

Lois G. Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt organizations, said the practice was initiated by low-level workers in Cincinnati and was not motivated by political bias.

But on June 29, 2011, Lerner found out that such groups were being targeted, according to the inspector general’s report.

She was told at a meeting that groups with “Tea Party,” “Patriot” or “9/12 Project” in their names were being flagged for additional and often burdensome scrutiny, the report states.

The 9/12 Project is a group started by conservative TV personality Glenn Beck.

Collins also said she does not believe the activity was limited to “a couple of rogue IRS employees.”

“After all,” she added, “groups with `progressive’ in their names were not targeted similarly.”

Published May 13, 2013 / FoxNews.com / The Associated Press contributed to this report.

 

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Gender, Religion

Carney Overwhlemed with 46 Questions on Benghazi, IRS Scandals

May 12, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

jay_carneyMost people are happy to declare “Thank God it’s Friday.”  On Friday May 10, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney was not one of them. Carney got a “case of the Mondays” a few days early as the Obama administration’s lies about Benghazi and potentially criminal acts at the IRS all caught up with them at once.

ABC Senior White House correspondent Jonathan Karl started the day off revealing that the famous Benghazi talking points were “dramatically edited by the administration” a total of 12 different times. Those changes included the removal of all references to Al Qaeda initially approved by the CIA.

That public relations disaster was followed by another later in the day. The IRS admitted that conservatives had been right all along and that right-wing groups had indeed been targeted by the IRS. In true Nixonian language, the IRS admitted “mistakes were made,” but denied they were political, convincing absolutely no one.

Fridays, famously called “take out the trash day” in the lefty TV show “West Wing,” are supposed to be days when the administration hides news. On May 10,  the trash bin was overflowing and even the press noticed. Carney couldn’t dump garbage fast enough. He fielded at least 38 questions on Benghazi and another eight on the possible crimes at the IRS.

Throughout, he dodged, weaved and blamed – especially blamed. He blamed former President George W. Bush, the CIA, the IRS, Congress, Mitt Romney and, of course, Republicans. “Congress” got blamed 28 times and Republicans got mentioned 20 times by Carney as he tried to spin his way out of trouble.

He began by reminding the press that the White House did “have a background briefing” earlier for 14 news organizations. That meeting, held following these types of PR disasters, had to be spinning like a carnival ride. And the spinning had just gotten started.

The IRS questions were easier since even Carney admitted he wasn’t in the know. He stressed “two things” to pass the buck – that the IRS was an “independent enforcement agency” and “the individual who was running the IRS at the time was actually an appointee from the previous administration.” In other words, blame Bush. I think he learned that one from his boss.

When it came to Benghazi, Carney claimed the White House made a “non-substantive factual correction” to the talking points. He continued: “I must say that all of this information was provided months ago to members of Congress,” adding sarcastically, “which they have leaked now to reporters.” This, after the White House just had a background meeting with 14 different news organizations so they could leak, er, give background information

At several points, Carney embraced his inner Candy Crowley and claimed, inaccurately, that Obama had called the attack “an act of terror” during his Rose Garden speech. (Kudos to Tim Carney for that catch.) However, that’s completely untrue. Even CBS News admitted in 2012 that the transcript “shows that the president did refer to ‘acts of terror’ – but not specifically in reference to the Libya attack. Instead, he made a broader statement about American defiance.” The Team Obama shorthand has created a fictional narrative that is largely accepted by the media.

During the briefing, question after question pounded Carney on his previous comments that only “stylistic” changes had been made to the Benghazi talking points, when that obviously was not true.

The questioning grew heated and it appeared to show on Carney, as first his ears and then his face reddened to the point where people on Twitter were mocking it. Twitchy captured some of the more fun comments including one saying he was trying to “defend the indefensible.” That was an understatement.

Hilariously, Carney made multiple positive references to the famous interview of UN Ambassador Susan Rice where she made the bogus comments about the “heinous and offensive” video about Islam.

It took 37 minutes into the press conference for one of the reporters to ask a question that didn’t involve one of the day’s two big scandals. Carney seemed to breathe a sigh of relief when it happened.

But it wasn’t over. One of the later questions was telling. “Don’t this series of e-mails now I suggest that your discussion of the video was speculative. You were cherry picking,” asked one reporter. Others pointed out a key flaw in Carney’s defense, calling him out for saying the talking points were what we were sure we knew, but reminding him that the initial talking points said the CIA wrote “we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa’ida participated in the attack.” Carney’s response was to direct that inquiry to the “intelligence community.”

If the questioning was a true sign of media interest, Carney can look for many more red-faced press briefings. Perhaps he needs more make-up next time. He should try cover-up. It’s perfect.

Dan Gainor is the Boone Pickens Fellow and the Media Research Center’s Vice President for Business and Culture. He writes frequently about media for Fox News Opinion. He can also be contacted on Facebook and Twitter as dangainor.

Dan Gainor is the Boone Pickens Fellow and the Media Research Center’s Vice President for Business and Culture. He writes frequently about media for Fox News Opinion. He can also be contacted on Facebook and Twitter as dangainor.

By Dan Gainor / Published May 11, 2013 / Associated Press

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Religion

Demand for Ammo Empties Shelves

May 12, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

ammunitionSteve Warholic spends nearly his entire workday at a Nevada ammunition store scouring the Internet, and the owner puts in even more time online. Both think they need to spend more time on the web.

They’re trying to find bullets for their customers at Stockpile Defense and the store’s sister school, where 50,000 people are trained every year in firearms handling. Shelves that once held the most popular calibers, like .22 and .45, are bare. There are waiting lists as long as two months and students are requested to bring their own ammunition. Pre-orders are no longer allowed.

“We’re buying everything we can find and we still can’t bring in enough.” – Steve Warholic, employee at Stockpile Defense

“We’re buying everything we can find and we still can’t bring in enough,” said Warholic. “It’s a constant battle.”

Demand for guns and ammunition has cleaned out stores nationwide, leading to waiting lists and early morning lines outside of gun and sporting good stores for ammunition shipments. Common calibers routinely sell out within minutes of appearing on store shelves and prices have soared as much as 70 percent.

After the Newtown elementary school massacre, gun enthusiasts, already anxious President Obama’s re-election would translate into harsh controls on gun ownership, have packed stores, buying as many firearms and as much ammunition as they can find. Moves to expand background checks and limit firearm and magazine sales have added to the hysteria. Massive government purchases, including a plan by the Department of Homeland Security to buy more than 1 billion rounds of ammunition, have further stoked fears – and suspicions.

“People buy ammunition when they see it even if they don’t need it,” said Mike Bazinet, spokesman for the National Shooting Sports Association, which represents firearms and ammunition manufacturers. “It becomes self-fulfilling over time.”

Although Warholic in Nevada has ferreted out new supplies through his online work, he can barely keep up. He has 50 million rounds of ammunition on order this year, but will consider himself lucky to get 10 million. And he’s one of the lucky ones: Competitors ask to purchase his supplies so they can restock their shelves.

“The running joke with our distributor is that we tell him, ‘You don’t need to come to work anymore. We’ll take everything on your list,’” said Warholic.

The run on ammunition has also hit law enforcement agencies, notably smaller ones that don’t have the funds or supplies of larger organizations. Some have stopped using bullets altogether for training. In Richmond, Calif., the 200-member force once trained on the range every month using live ammunition. They’ve since switched to dry fire exercises, laser guns and Airsoft pistols, which fire plastic pellets, to simulate live fire exercises — and to save money.

“Ammunition has tripled in price over the last decade. We now have to wait a year to eight months for a shipment,” said Capt. Mark Gagan, spokesman for the Richmond Police Department.

This year, concerns over a federal government bid to purchase large amounts of ammunition sent gun enthusiasts back to the stores. The Department of Homeland Security put out bids for up to 1.2 billion rounds of ammunition, leading many gun enthusiasts, including Sen. Tom Coburn , R-Okla., to question if the agency’s five-year purchase plan was fueling the national shortage.

“These round totals are simply a ceiling,” said Peter Boogard, DHS spokesman, in an email. “It does not mean that DHS will buy, or require, the full amounts of either contract.”

Over the last three fiscal years, the agency, which oversees the U.S. Secret Service, Coast Guard and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, actually bought fewer rounds of ammunition each year. The number of rounds purchased has fallen from 148.3 million in fiscal 2010 to 103.2 million rounds in 2012. The agency, which includes more than 100,000 law enforcement personnel, uses about two-thirds of the ammunition for qualifications or training purposes.

Gun enthusiasts and elected officials also grew concerned that DHS was purchasing hollow-point bullets, which expand upon contact. Although police departments use different types of ammunition, most use hollow-point bullets because they have greater stopping power and carry less danger of passing through the target, said Darrel Stephens, executive director of the Major Cities Chiefs Police Association.

Background checks for firearms soared following the shooting at the Newtown elementary school in Connecticut, as people feared some guns would be banned. The week following the Dec. 14 massacre, the FBI reported its busiest week ever for background checks since it started recording figures in 1998. Even the day of the killings, the number of background checks was among the ten highest in the last 15 years. The figures do not reflect denials or the number of firearms purchased.

The spike in demand isn’t new. The sour economy has also played into personal safety fears that crime will rise. Surges in gun and ammunition purchases have been ongoing since President Obama, like many Democrats, a vocal advocate of gun control, was elected in 2008 and then re-elected last year. In an October 2009 Gallup poll, 55 percent of gun owners said they thought the president will attempt to ban gun sales.

Despite the rush to buy ammunition and guns, household gun ownership among Americans has declined modestly since the 1970s. In 2012, 34 percent of Americans had a gun at home, down from 50 percent in 1973, the first year University of Chicago researchers started tracking gun ownership for the General Social Survey. A 2012 Gallup reported a more modest decline from 50 percent in 1968 to 43 percent last year.

These surveys, however, don’t track how many firearms a gun owner has. While there is no data, retailers and ammunition dealers say ammunition and firearms sales have been to gun owners, and not to those who have never owned a firearm.

With such little supply, retailers have slapped restrictions on the number of boxes of ammunition customers can purchase. In January, Walmart limited ammunition sales to three boxes per customer, per day. Dick’s Sporting Goods and Cabela’s imposed a three and ten box-restriction on purchases, respectively.

At Dick’s Sporting Goods in Bee Cave, Texas, a line of 10 to 15 people wait in the early morning hours outside for the store to open every Wednesday and Friday despite the three-box limit. On those days, new ammunition shipments come in and though they don’t know what’s coming off the truck, gun enthusiasts still show up. Any ammunition calibers that are difficult to get, like 9-mm., .22, .45 or .223, are routinely bought within minutes, leaving shelves bare. Only shotgun shells can routinely be found.

“We’re getting in anything that we can and we still sell out,” said Payton, a salesman at Dick’s. “People panic, that’s all.”

The surge in demand for firearms and ammunition is also reflected in the bottom line of big retailers, like Cabela’s and Walmart. At Cabela’s, a national chain of sporting goods stores, first quarter profit skyrocketed 73 percent, fired by strong sales of guns and ammunition. The company’s stock hit an all-time high last week after reporting its results and blowing apart analysts’ expectations.

“It’s no surprise guns and ammunition were going to be strong in the first quarter,” said Thomas Millner, Cabela’s chief executive officer in an earnings call last Thursday. “Supply is still tight. It is still constraining ultimate demand because we simply — in some categories, like .22-caliber ammunition, it’s very, very tight.”

Ammunition manufacturers are reporting record profits and sales, with increases that number in the double and sometimes triple digits. Olin, which owns Winchester, reported last week the company’s first quarter earnings climbed 190 percent over the same period last year. Federal Premium Ammunition’s annual earnings for ammunition last year climbed 24 percent over 2011.

“Our sales are only limited by the amount we can produce,” said Joseph Rupp, Olin chairman and chief executive officer in a conference call last Friday.

Ammunition manufacturers are struggling to make enough and have hundreds of millions of dollars in backorders. They’ve added hundreds of employees and equipment and increased overtime, and, in some cases, are running factories around the clock. Producers have posted notes on all their web sites assuring customers they are working as fast as they can.

“We are producing as much as we can; much more than last year, which was a lot more than the year before. No one wants to shop more during this time than we do,” a note on Hornady’s site said.

Producers did not return repeated emails and calls.

“Manufacturers are doing what they can, but it’s not enough to keep up. It’s a supply-and-demand issue,” said Nima Samadi, a senior analyst who tracks the guns and ammunition industry at IbisWorld, a market research firm in Los Angeles.

While demand is strong, manufacturers consider it temporary and aren’t planning to build new factories or make substantial changes that would cost a lot of money and take a lot of time to train people and buy new facilities. The last “surge” in demand only lasted six quarters, and this one, though manufacturers changed their expectations in the last month, now expect demand to remain strong through the end of the year. Some even wonder if it will extend into the new year and beyond.

“I think the honest answer is,” said Millner, Cabela’s chief executive officer. “I don’t know when it’s going to loosen up.”

By Kristina Shevory / Published May 12, 2013 / FoxNews.com

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Ethics

House Committee Ready to Grill IRS Over Targeting Tea Party

May 12, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

Lawmakers Trying To Avert Fiscal Cliff To Prevent Short-Term Shock To The EconomyThe House Ways and Means Committee this weekend released a timeline of interactions with the IRS and a list of 10 questions it will ask agency officials in an upcoming hearing — following the agency acknowledging Friday that it targeted conservative political groups during the 2012 election season.

“The IRS absolutely must be non-partisan in its enforcement of our tax laws,” committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., said late Saturday. “The committee …will hold the IRS accountable for its actions.”

The tax-collecting agency on Friday acknowledged it flagged the groups for additional review to see whether they were violating their tax-exempt status.

On Saturday, a draft of an inspector general’s report, to be released in full later this week, shows senior Internal Revenue Service officials knew agents were targeting Tea Party groups as early as 2011. That information seemingly contradicts public statements by the IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman.

The timeline shows that Louisiana Rep. Charles Boustany, chairman of the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Oversight, sent a letter to Shulman on Oct. 6, 2011, requesting information “regarding the tax-exempt sector.”

The timeline ends with a March 12, 2012, entry stating the IRS responded “with no mention of knowledge of targeting conservative groups.”

“Since the inception of this investigation, the Ways and Means Committee has persistently pushed the IRS to explain why it appeared to be unfairly targeting some political groups over others — a charge they repeatedly denied,” Boustany said Saturday. “My greatest concern is what would have come from this blatant abuse of power if Ways and Means, as well as others, had not spoken up.”

Camp said within hours of the IRS acknowledgement Friday that his committee would hold a hearing on the issue.

Among the expected question, according to a committee document obtained by Fox News is: What steps, if any, has the IRS taken to ensure that the targeting of individuals and organizations does not occur in the future?

Another question is: When was the IRS commissioner made “aware of these unlawful practices, what steps were taken, if any, to halt the harassment of conservative organizations? Who was disciplined regarding these practices, if anyone?”

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Ethics, Religion

BOMBSHELL: Mayor Sarah Palin Denied Police Protection To Family, Resulting In Their Murder

May 10, 2013 By Editor 2 Comments

TV-Fox-News-Sarah-PalinIf Sarah Palin had any 2016 presidential aspirations, this story might deal a significant deathblow to them.

It begins in Wasilla, Alaska, in late 1998, when a family of four–a single mother and her three daughters–began, according to police reports, receiving untraceable, sexually perverse telephone calls from an unknown man.

Over a period of six weeks, the calls became more frequent, and so the mother requested and received from the telephone company a change of number. The calls stopped for a while, and the family was now able to live in peace.

Until two months later.

That’s when the same man, having finally, somehow, discovered the new phone number, began his phone calls again. But now he dropped from his calls the sexuality and replaced it with threats of violence against the woman and her three children.

This is when Sarah Palin entered the picture.

The mother allegedly (there is no proof) went to Palin’s office to put in a formal request for 24-hour police monitoring of her house.

The request was allegedly denied for some yet unknown reason.

The next month, the family’s home was broken into and all four of them were murdered.

Naturally, this caused heavy unease in Wasilla, and the citizens wanted to hear from Mayor Palin on the matter.

Palin, busy with her re-election campaign, directed all questions to her spokesman, who continually told local reporters that the murder had nothing to do with the harassing phone calls of previous months. “It was just a spontaneous burglary,” said the spokesman, “that culminated, unfortunately, with a murder.”

Murder is a federal issue, of course, so, several months later, Sarah Palin herself was questioned before Congress on what exactly transpired with regard to the stalker, the family of four, and their murder. (If you were up until this point unaware of these congressional hearings, that can be attributed to Palin’s not being a major figure in politics at that time.)

Under oath, Palin claimed that no security of any kind was ever requested. At one point, the strain of being questioned having evidently taken its toll on her, she attempted to deflect the questioning and suggested it doesn’t matter who is to blame. “What difference, at this point, does it make?” she erupted indignantly.

The questions ultimately ceased, both by Congress and by the news media, who were content with not knowing the answers.

But now a white paper of the mother’s formal request of that 24-hour police monitoring has been released, along with the formal denial of that request. The damning revelation: Sarah Palin’s signature is on that denial.

This is proof–not evidence, but proof–that Sarah Palin, Mayor of Wasilla, was requested security; that Sarah Palin, Mayor of Wasilla, did deny that security, which resulted in the deaths of four women and children; that Sarah Palin, Mayor of Wasilla, committed the crime of perjury before Congress; and that Sarah Palin, private citizen and potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate, can kiss any political future goodbye and start preparing to live the rest of her days in an 8-by-10 prison cell.

That is, if the media cares enough to report on this atrocity.

I assume you have now figured out what this post is really about. For the record, all the claims made about Sarah Palin in this post are fictional and written for satirical purposes. The post is really about Hillary Clinton and the Benghazi scandal. If Sarah Palin or any Conservative had done anything remotely similar to this they would have been crucified by the media.

clinton_hillary

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Gender

Gun crimes drop, despite public perception

May 9, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

woman_pointing_gunA spate of high-profile shootings has left Americans with the perception that gun crimes are on the rise, but a new study shows the opposite appears to be true, according to a study.

A Pew Research poll released this week found that 56 percent of adults believe that gun crime is more common now than 20 years ago. But a report by the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics seems to show that crime involving firearms has fallen dramatically over the last 20 years, with the rate of homicides committed with guns cut in half since 1993. The rate of the violent crimes fell even more, and is now just a quarter of what it was.

“When people respond in opinion polls, it’s shaped from what they’re getting through the network news, the New York Times, the Washington Post.” – Alan Gottlieb, The Second Amendment Foundation

In the Pew poll of 924 adults, just 12 percent correctly answered that gun crime fell over the last 20 years. Gun rights advocates say media coverage of gun violence has distorted the public perception.

“This doesn’t surprise me in the least,” Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation told FoxNews.com. “When people respond in opinion polls, it’s shaped from what they’re getting through the network news, The New York Times, The Washington Post. And for them, ‘if it bleeds it leads’ – if there’s a tragedy, that becomes the lead story.”

But supporters of tighter gun control laws say it is modern medicine, not a more peaceable public, that is behind the numbers.

“More people are being shot in America, but fewer people are dying,” Erika Soto Lamb, the communications director for Mayors Against Illegal Guns, told FoxNews.com. She cited CDC data which show that, since data has been kept in 2001, the rate of people being assaulted and shot during the assault has risen 25 percent.

In other words, the data since 2001 tell a slightly more complex story: Fewer people are being attacked with guns, but slightly more people are being shot with guns – yet at the same time, fewer people are being killed with guns.

“A number of factors are believed to have contributed to this, but mostly, improved medical care is helping to save more lives,” Soto Lamb said. “The latest studies should not be taken as proof that this country does not have a gun violence epidemic. We do.”

Still, the biggest trend over the last 20 years is the reduction in gun-related attacks and killings, and Gottlieb blames the media for ignoring that story.

“The Second Amendment Foundation has been tracking the data year-in and year-out, and each year, we put out a news release about how gun crime is down. But the media just doesn’t want to hear it if it doesn’t further their anti-gun agenda,” Gottlieb said.

The idea that public perceptions don’t match up with the numbers is hardly surprising, said Bryan Caplan, an economist at George Mason University who researches public opinion.

“The public perceives rising crime in general… [so] I don’t think anti-gun bias is a good explanation,” Caplan told FoxNews.com.

Gallup polls show that Americans overestimate crime in general. In 15 out of 16 Gallup polls conducted in the past 20 years, Americans incorrectly said that crime had risen compared to the previous year.

While gun crime fell dramatically over the last 20 years, crimes committed without guns fell just as fast.

Gottlieb had an explanation for that.

“All crime has basically been going down. And that’s because more people have firearms to protect themselves,” he said.

While firearm ownership rates have been relatively flat according to survey data, many more people now have licenses to carry guns on their person. The number of states with laws that give people a right to carry handguns outside of the home – known as “shall-issue concealed-carry laws” — has increased dramatically over the last 20 years, going from 16 states in 1993 to 43 now.

Estimates show that guns are used in self-defense between 100,000 and 2 million times each year. Overlooking that, Gottlieb said, is the media’s biggest error.

“You never hear about defensive gun uses. Every time there’s a tragedy, there’s a call for gun control. But every time a gun is used in self defense – usually it doesn’t make the news, and you never hear a call for relaxing the gun laws so more people can defend themselves.”

By Maxim Lott / Published May 09, 2013 / FoxNews.com

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Ethics, Gender, Religion

$6.3 TRILLION TO FUND AMNESTY

May 6, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

illegals_crossing_fenceThe comprehensive immigration overhaul being taken up in the Senate this week could cost taxpayers $6.3 trillion if 11 million illegal immigrants are granted legal status, according to a long-awaited estimate by the conservative Heritage Foundation.

The cost would arise from illegal immigrants tapping into the government’s vast network of benefits and services, many of which are currently unavailable to them. This includes everything from standard benefits like Social Security and Medicare to dozens of welfare programs ranging from housing assistance to food stamps.

The report was obtained in advance by Fox News.

“No matter how you slice it, amnesty will add a tremendous amount of pressure on America’s already strained public purse,” Robert Rector, the Heritage scholar who prepared the report, said in a statement.

The numbers could raise additional concerns for Republicans as a Senate committee prepares to consider the legislation later this week.

The comprehensive study also factored in the cost of public education and other services like highways and police. The government is already providing some of those services to illegal immigrants, so the $6.3 trillion figure would not represent all new costs.

Illegal_ImmigrationBut most of that cost would be new spending, according to Heritage, as illegal immigrants gain access to additional government benefits. The study acknowledges that, for a 10-year period, illegal immigrants seeking a reprieve would be barred from these benefits. After that window, though, Heritage forecasts the costs skyrocketing.

On an annual basis, the report estimates the cost will be $106 billion after the interim phase is over. In the course of their lifetime, the report estimates that illegal immigrant households would receive an average of $592,000 in government benefits.

The $6.3 trillion figure is based on what illegal immigrants would cost the government over the course of their lifetime. It factors in the expected taxes they’d pay to the government.

Supporters of immigration legislation have been skeptical of efforts to assign a cost to the immigration bill. Proponents argue that the value of bringing millions of illegal immigrants out of the shadows and presumably into the taxpaying workforce is immeasurable.

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., a key co-author of the legislation, has also stressed that illegal immigrants applying for legal status would not have access to federal benefits while they are applying.

Their eligibility, though, would change once they get a green card.

The legislation also might not legalize all 11 million illegal immigrants. Some could be disqualified if they have a felony record or other problems in their background

Heritage claims its estimate is on the conservative end.

“Those who claim that amnesty will not create a large fiscal burden are simply in a state of denial concerning the underlying redistributional nature of government policy in the 21st century,” the report said.

Published May 06, 2013 / FoxNews.com

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Religion

States: ‘Blindsided’ by Plan to Shift Obamacare Costs to Them

May 4, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

Luis Gutierrez, Javier HiriartThousands of people with serious medical problems are in danger of losing coverage under President Obama’s health care overhaul because of cost overruns, state officials say.

At risk is the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan, a transition program that’s become a lifeline for the so-called uninsurables — people with serious medical conditions who can’t get coverage elsewhere. The program helps bridge the gap for those patients until next year, when under the new law insurance companies will be required to accept people regardless of their medical problems.

In a letter this week to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, state officials said they were “blindsided” and “very disappointed” by a federal proposal they contend would shift the risk for cost overruns to states in the waning days of the program. About 100,000 people are currently covered.

“We are concerned about what will become of our high risk members’ access to this decent and affordable coverage,” wrote Michael Keough, chairman of the National Association of State Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans. States and local nonprofits administer the program in 27 states, and the federal government runs the remaining plans.

“We fear…catastrophic disruption of coverage for these vulnerable individuals,” added Keough, who runs North Carolina’s program. He warned of “large-scale enrollee terminations at this critical transition time.”

The crisis is surfacing at a politically awkward time for the Obama administration, which is trying to persuade states to embrace a major expansion of Medicaid under the health care law. One of the main arguments proponents of the expansion are making is that Washington is a reliable financial partner.

The root of the problem is that the federal health care law capped spending on the program at $5 billion, and the money is running out because the beneficiaries turned out to be costlier to care for than expected. Advanced heart disease and cancer are common diagnoses for the group.

Obama did not ask for any additional funding for the program in his latest budget, and a Republican bid to keep the program going by tapping other funds in the health care law failed to win support in the House last week.

Brian Cook, a spokesman for the HHS agency overseeing the health care law, took issue with idea that thousands of people could lose coverage, though he did not elaborate.

“These actions are part of our careful management of the program to ensure that there is a seamless transition … for enrollees, and that funding is spent appropriately,” he said in a written statement.

The administration has given the state-based plans until next Wednesday to respond to proposed contract terms for the program’s remaining seven months.

Delivered last Friday, the new contract stipulated that states will be reimbursed “up to a ceiling.

“The `ceiling’ part is the issue for us,” Keough said in an interview. “They are shifting the risk from the federal government, for a program that has experienced huge cost overruns on a per-member basis, to states. And that’s a tall order.”

State officials say one likely consequence of the money crunch will be a cost shift to people in the program, resulting in sudden increases in premiums and copayments. Many might just drop out, said Keough.

If a state and HHS can’t come to an agreement, the federal government will take over that state’s program for the rest of this year. Amie Goldman, director of the Wisconsin program, said that would be an unneeded and possibly risky disruption for patients who’ll have to change insurance next year anyway, when the pre-existing conditions plan formally ends.

Goldman said in her state, for example, the University of Wisconsin hospital isn’t part of the federal government’s provider network. “My colleagues in other states have similar concerns about holes in the network,” she said. “I think it puts people at medical risk.”

At his news conference this week, Obama acknowledged the rollout of his health care law wouldn’t be perfect. There will be “glitches and bumps” he said, and his team is committed to working through them. However, it’s unclear how the pre-existing conditions plan could get more money without the cooperation of Republicans in Congress.

The program got off to a slow start, partly because insurance isn’t cheap. It offers policies at market rates, and that can mean premiums of $500 a month for someone in their 50s. The first inkling of financial problems came in February, when HHS announced a freeze on new applications.

The plan was intended only as a stopgap until the law’s main push to cover the uninsured starts next year. Subsidized private insurance will be available through new state-based markets, as well as an expanded version of Medicaid for low-income people. At the same time, virtually all Americans will be required to carry a policy, or pay a fine.

States are free to accept or reject the Medicaid expansion, and the new problems with the stopgap insurance plan could well have a bearing on their decisions.

 

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Religion

Benghazi Review Board Coverd Up Facts

May 2, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

benghazi_ProbeThe State Department’s Office of Inspector General is investigating the special internal panel that probed the Benghazi terror attack for the State Department, Fox News has confirmed.The IG’s office is said by well-placed sources to be seeking to determine whether the Accountability Review Board, or ARB — led by former U.N. Ambassador Thomas Pickering and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen — failed to interview key witnesses who had asked to provide their accounts of the Benghazi attacks to the panel.The IG’s office notified the department of the “special review” on March 28, according to Doug Welty, the congressional and public affairs officer of the IG’s office.

This disclosure marks a significant turn in the ongoing Benghazi case, as it calls into question the reliability of the blue-ribbon panel that then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton convened to review the entire matter. Until the report was concluded, she and all other senior Obama administration officials regularly refused to answer questions about what happened in Benghazi.

But State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell disputed the characterization of the review, saying it is “simply false” to assert the panel is being investigated.

“Rather, it is conducting a review of the ARB process itself going back two decades, looking at how Boards are convened, their standards, and the implementation of ARB recommendations,” he said.

Since the ARB report was issued in December — finding that “systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels” well below Clinton were to blame for the “inadequate” security at Benghazi — Clinton and other top officials have routinely referred questioners to the conclusions of the board report. Now the methodology and final product of the ARB are themselves coming under the scrutiny of the department’s own top auditor.

On Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said: “The Accountability Review Board which investigated this matter — and I think in no one’s estimation sugarcoated what happened there or pulled any punches when it came to holding accountable individuals that they felt had not successfully executed their responsibilities — heard from everyone and invited everyone. So there was a clear indication there that everyone who had something to say was welcome to provide information to the Accountability Review Board.”

On Monday, State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell said of the ARB’s work: “We think that we’ve done an independent investigation, that it’s been transparent, thorough, credible, and detailed, and … we’ve shared those findings with the U.S. Congress.”

In an interview for the Fox News program “Geraldo” taped Thursday afternoon and set to air this weekend, Joe diGenova, a former U.S. attorney, told host Geraldo Rivera that he is legally representing a career State Department officer whom the board failed to interview. DiGenova called the ARB a “cover-up.”

DiGenova and his wife Victoria Toensing, a former Justice Department official who represents another State Department whistle-blower in the Benghazi case, said their respective clients will testify next Wednesday at a hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee being chaired by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif.

Asked to comment for this article, a senior State Department official told Fox News the IG probe is not a “formal investigation” but rather a review process, and one, moreover, that will examine previous ARBs in addition to the one established after Benghazi.

The official noted that the department had published a notice early on instructing employees on how they could furnish information to the ARB for Benghazi, and that the panel ultimately interviewed more than 100 witnesses.

The original law that established accountability review boards mandates that they act completely independently, the official said, adding that the department in this case neither sought nor enjoyed any influence over the panel’s work.

By James Rosen / Published May 02, 2013 / FoxNews.com

Watch Video:

 

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Ethics, Foreign, Religion

Benghazi: Cries for Backup Ignored by Administration

May 2, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

libya_attackOn the night of the Benghazi terror attack, special operations put out multiple calls for all available military and other assets to be moved into position to help — but the State Department and White House never gave the military permission to cross into Libya, sources told Fox News.

The disconnect was one example of what sources described as a communication breakdown that left those on the ground without outside help.

“When you are on the ground, you depend on each other — we’re gonna get through this situation. But when you look up and then nothing outside of the stratosphere is coming to help you or rescue you, that’s a bad feeling,” one source said.

Multiple sources spoke to Fox News about what they described as a lack of action in Benghazi on Sept. 11 last year, when four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, were killed.

“They had no plan. They had no contingency plan for if this happens, and that’s the problem this is going to face in the future,” one source said. “They’re dealing with more hostile regions, hostile countries. This attack’s going to happen again.”

Under normal circumstances, authorities in Benghazi would have fallen under the chief of mission, one source said — the person in charge of security in the country who in this case was Stevens. But once Stevens was cornered and members of his security detail pushed his distress button, that authority would have been transferred to his deputy. However, that deputy was out of the country.

benghazi-1That meant the authority then reverted directly to the U.S. State Department, and oversight of the response to the attack that night fell to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Undersecretary of State Patrick Kennedy, who were calling the shots.

Sources said that shortly after the attack began around 9:40 p.m., special forces put out the calls for assets to be moved into position.

“What that does is that enacts … every asset, every element to respond and it becomes a global priority,” one source said. “I would tell you that was given and the only reason it was given is because of special operations pack.”

However, the source said, “Assets did not move.”

The failure of the State Department or White House to give the military permission to go into Libya, according to the source, only accentuates the significant breakdown in communication among the State Department, military, CIA and White House.

“I can see the initial confusion in the beginning. I mean, you have a situation that’s developing. The problem with the State Department is they don’t have procedures in place. And if they do, they haven’t practiced or exercised them. And now they are making up for all the mistakes they have made, with excuse. And there is no excuse,” the source said, describing a “huge breakdown between State and military.”

Last October, then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta defended the response, saying the military was reluctant to put forces at risk.

“You don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on, without having some real-time information about what’s taking place,” Panetta said. “And as a result of not having that kind of information, the commander who was on the ground in that area, General Ham, General Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.”

The State Department Accountability Review Board, which investigated the attack and what led up to it, also claimed that “Washington-Tripoli-Benghazi communication, cooperation, and coordination on the night of the attacks were effective.”

But one source told Fox News there was “not good communication” between State and Defense “on any level.”

By Adam Housley / Published May 02, 2013 / FoxNews.com

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Ethics, Foreign, Religion

Bomber Texted ‘LOL’ When Friends Saw Pics on TV

May 2, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

Dzhokahar_FriendsWhen the alleged Boston Marathon bomber was told by one of his friends that he resembled one of the suspects in the widely released surveillance video, he sent a chilling response: “Lol, you better not text me,” an affidavit unsealed Wednesday said.

The brief interaction between bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and his friend Dias Kadyrbayev occurred three days after the April 15 bombing, the affidavit said. Kadyrbayev was among three others charged Wednesday for allegedly conspiring to get rid of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s incriminating backpack filled with gutted fireworks.

He also texted Kadyrbayev to say, “Come to my room and take whatever you want,” according to the affidavit.

“Kadyrbayev knew when he saw the empty fireworks that Tsarnaev was involved in the marathon bombing,” the affidavit reads. “Kadyrbayev decided to remove the backpack from the room in order to help his friend Tsarnaev avoid trouble.”

The exchange came just a few hours before the Tsarnaev brothers would carjack a Chinese immigrant, murder an MIT police officer and engage in a wild shootout with police through the streets of Cambridge and Watertown, police say. Tamerlan Tsarnaev died April 19, after a shootout hours after authorities showed the brothers on surveillance video and named them as suspects.

Documents based on interviews with the young men reveal Dzhokhar Tsarnaev allegedly dropped sinister hints before the attack, telling his friends a month before that he had learned how to make a bomb. However, it wasn’t until the FBI released a surveillance photo of the suspects that the friends realized Tsarnaev may have been involved.

The FBI claims this prompted Dias Kadyrbayev and Azamat Tazhayakova both 19-year-old natives of Kazakhstan and friends of Tsarnaev at UMass-Dartmouth, to go to Tsarnaev’s dorm and take a laptop, the backpack and some Vaseline that may have been used in making the deadly pressure cooker bombs that killed three and injured more than 200 at the race. Police believe the bombs were packed with shrapnel and gunpowder removed from fireworks.

Robel Phillipos, of Cambridge, Mass., also 19, was charged with willfully making materially false statements to federal law enforcement officials during a terrorism investigation.

The affidavit filed in support of a complaint said Kadyrbayev was the one who carried out the disposal of the backpack after the three saw the fireworks that had been hollowed out and emptied of gunpowder.

Although the three new suspects initially appear to have stonewalled authorities, Phillipos came clean in a fourth interview, conducted April 26. He confessed that the three took the backpack out of their friend’s dorm room, according to the affidavit. Phillipos allegedly told investigators that the two others “started to freak out” after seeing Tsarnaev identified on television.

Robert Stahl, an attorney representing Kadyrbayev, said his client denies the allegations and added that Kadyrbayev assisted authorities in their investigation.

“He is just as shocked and horrified by the violence that took place in Boston as the rest of the community is,” Stahl said. “He did not have anything to do with it.”

Prior to the latest development, authorities had named only the brothers as suspects in the bombing at the finish line of the world-famous race.

Kadyrbayev and Tazhayakov face maximum sentences of five years in prison and fines of $250,000. Phillipos, a U.S. citizen, faces a maximum sentence of eight years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

Kadyrbayev’s attorney, Robert Stahl, says his client will be transported to the federal courthouse later Wednesday to appear on new criminal charges. On Friday, Yerlan Kubashev with the Consulate General for Kazakhstan in New York confirmed in a statement to Fox News that the consulate is helping the young men with legal representation. Both Kadyrbayev and Tazhayakov will plea not guilty, according to their attorneys.

Kubashev said the two men are “shocked at the bombings,” and “they express sorrow to the bombing victims and their families.”

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, is in a prison hospital after being wounded in the shootout with police as he and his brother made their getaway attempt. He is charged with using a weapon of mass destruction to kill, a crime that carries a potential death sentence.

Authorities have searched the Rhode Island home of the parents of Katherine Russell, Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s widow.

Published May 02, 2013 / FoxNews.com / Fox News’ Pamela Browne and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Filed Under: All Stories, Economy, Elections, Entitlement, Ethics, Foreign, Religion

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Federalist Press Dispatch

Get breaking political news, investigations, and uncensored analysis delivered directly to your inbox.

Please wait...

Thank you for subscribing to the Federalist Press Dispatch.

Byrna Non-lethal Self Protection

Byrna Non-lethal Self Protection

Byrna offers non-lethal self protection at an affordable price. Watch the short video, or click to learn more!

Click to talk with us about writing your book >>

Do you want to write a book? James Thompson is a ghostwriter who writes the books of people just like you.

Brit Axton Mysteries Series

Brit Axton Mysteries Series

Brit Axton Mysteries is a series of young adult adventure novels that lead young Brit Axton and her friends on whirlwind adventures to uncover hidden secrets and long lost treasures.

Get free info to help your life

Get free info to help your life

Simple bite-sized guides for life, money, civics, and more . . . because some stuff school just didn’t cover.

Understanding Cryptocurrency: Essentials for Building Wealth in Digital Currency

Understanding Cryptocurrency: Essentials for Building Wealth in Digital Currency

Understanding Cryptocurrency serves as a definitive guide for novice investors looking to understand the world of cryptocurrency and harness its potential for financial growth and prosperity.

Real Estate Wealth Strategies During High Inflation

Real Estate Wealth Strategies During High Inflation

Real Estate Wealth Strategies During High Inflation is a comprehensive guide on navigating the real estate market, offering strategies and insights for successful investing, during high inflation and interest rates.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Service

Follow us

  • parler
  • welcome-widgets-menus
  • facebook
  • envato

Economy

Federal Agents Raid Ilhan Omar’s Washington Home in Criminal Immigration Investigation

The $224 Happiest Place on Earth: Has Disney Forgotten the American Family?

“O Be Wise”: A Timely Warning Against America’s Costly Gambling Explosion

Elections

Federal Agents Raid Ilhan Omar’s Washington Home in Criminal Immigration Investigation

Does Pres. Trump Plan to Announce That Extraterrestrials Are Visiting Earth Before the Midterm Elections?

From “Buy Greenland” to Permanent U.S. Bases: What Trump Got America in the Arctic Deal

Foreign

The Left’s Favorite Question Is “Who Benefits?” Their Forgotten Question Is “At Whose Expense?”

The Battle for Lindsey Graham’s Senate Seat Begins

The Bloody Record of Socialism: Why America Must Reject the Siren Song of the Radical Left

Crime

Federal Agents Raid Ilhan Omar’s Washington Home in Criminal Immigration Investigation

The Economic Numbers Americans Should See: Income Rises, Poverty & Crime Fall and Job Growth Rebounds

Is Islamic Terror Winning? 25 Years After 9/11: America Must Remember What Happened

Science Tech

From “Buy Greenland” to Permanent U.S. Bases: What Trump Got America in the Arctic Deal

Deeper Dive Into White House UFO Tranche 6. The Files That Deserve Another Look.

The Pentagon Just Dropped UFO Tranche 6 — And a 74-Year-Old Recording May Be the File to Hear First

Reader Responses

  • Linda Livaudais on Trump’s UFO Disclosure Has Changed the Conversation — But Not Yet Answered the Biggest Question
  • T059736 on Trump and Musk Announce Plans to Shut Down USAID
  • C.Josef.D on ‘Pay to Play’ at Clinton Foundation Under Investigation
  • John D Cole on Biden Says ‘You ain’t black’ If You Don’t Vote for Him
  • Ed on U.S. Attorney Huber Moving to Indict Clintons and Others

Copyright © 2026 by Federalist Press · All rights reserved · Website design by RoadRunner CRM · Content Wiriting by GhostWriter · Log in