• 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

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

“Gross Mismanagement”: Report Says DOJ Lost Track of Possible Terrorists

May 16, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

witness_protectionThe Justice Department temporarily lost track of two known or suspected terrorists who were in the witness protection program — and allowed others on the no-fly list to board commercial flights — according to a watchdog report which fueled criticism of the administration.

“This is gross mismanagement — pure and simple,” Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said in a statement.

The allegations were made in an inspector general report released Thursday. The report found agencies in the department did not properly share the new identities of some in witness protection — the lapse meant those new names were not updated in the no-fly list.

“Therefore, it was possible for known or suspected terrorists to fly on commercial airplanes in or over the United States and evade one of the government’s primary means of identifying and tracking terrorists’ movements and actions,” the report said.

The report said “some” in the program were able to do just that.

The inspector general’s office also said the U.S. Marshals Service, as of last July, was “unable to locate” two former participants who were known or suspected terrorists, and that they were thought to be outside the U.S. The report said the department “did not definitively know” how many known or suspected terrorists had been admitted into the program either.

Though the Justice Department says these problems have in large part been corrected, Republicans seized on the report as another example of administration mismanagement. The DOJ is already under fire for seizing journalist phone records, while the IRS faces criticism for a practice of singling out conservative groups.

Goodlatte said the latest report detailed behavior that jeopardized American lives.

“Today’s IG report shows that the Justice Department continues to repeat the same mistakes that were made prior to 9/11,” he said, adding that his committee would hold a hearing on the matter.

The Justice Department began making changes in response to the report last year.  The department says it is now sharing information on the new identities of those in the program with other agencies.

The department also said in a letter to Inspector General Michael Horowitz that it has since “identified, located and minimized the threat of all former known or suspected terrorists” in the program.

That includes the two individuals the department temporarily lost track of. Justice Department officials said Thursday that those individuals left the program and the country years ago and had made no effort to return to the U.S. “They’re not fugitives,” one official said.

Officials said there is “no threat to public safety,” stressing that those in the program had been thoroughly vetted from the outset and that most were admitted before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Both the department and IG stressed that the witness protection program has helped in major investigations including that into the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. The department said the number of known or suspected terrorists in the program amounts to a fraction of a percent.

But Republicans were not satisfied with the assurances.

“This is just another example of the Justice Department’s ineptness at the basic handling of an important program,” Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said in a statement. “These people may be in a witness protection program, but they were still known or suspected terrorists. It’s only logical that the federal government know where they are.”

Published May 16, 2013 / FoxNews.com

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

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

Benghazi Review Board to Testify Before Congress

May 15, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

clinton_hillaryWASHINGTON –  The leaders of the panel that independently reviewed last year’s deadly attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, said Tuesday they were prepared to testify publicly before Congress to counter what they consider unfounded criticism of their work.

In a letter to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, veteran diplomat Thomas Pickering said he and former Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen would answer any questions lawmakers have. Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., chairman of the panel, is pressing for the two men to agree to an interview with staff investigators prior to a public hearing.

The work of the Accountability Review Board is the latest focus of a broader Republican inquest into their claims that the Obama administration misled Congress and the American people after the Sept. 11, 2012, attack that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.

The blistering report released in December by Pickering, Mullen and three other reviewers found that “systematic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels” of the State Department meant security was “inadequate for Benghazi and grossly inadequate to deal with the attack that took place.”

Pickering, however, noted how recently “some have called into question the integrity of the board and its work.”

“We believe that such criticisms are unfounded and, if left unaddressed, undermine the essential work that the board has done,” he wrote. “It is therefore important that we be afforded the opportunity to appear at a public hearing before the committee and answer directly questions regarding the board’s procedures, findings and recommendations.”

Republicans believe the report was flawed, and they want to know why top officials like Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton weren’t interviewed. The panel absolved Clinton of any wrongdoing, faulting lower level State Department officials. Four were given paid suspensions.

On Monday, Issa asked Pickering and Mullen to meet privately with committee staff investigators to answer questions about their review. Democrats countered that if lawmakers wanted to talk to them, Issa should hold a full open hearing.

Pickering said the board “conducted a thorough review and produced a report that included detailed findings and frank and often highly critical assessments.” It issued 29 recommendations for improving security at diplomatic facilities worldwide, and Pickering insisted that the board “fulfilled its role in identifying the lessons that must be learned and acted upon from Benghazi.”

“We stand behind the board’s report and look forward to discussing it in a public hearing,” he wrote.

Frederick Hill, a spokesman for the committee, said late Tuesday that the panel was following up with Pickering and the State Department to determine whether he would appear voluntarily for an interview with committee staff investigators. Hill noted that Issa and Pickering appeared on a Sunday talk show together two days ago, and said the former diplomat had told the committee chairman that he would voluntarily submit to an interview.

“The committee is giving him a full opportunity to voluntarily follow through on his commitment,” Hill said.

Issa, in his letter on Monday to Pickering and Mullen, had said that following the private interview, the committee would work with the report’s authors on a date for a public hearing.

Published May 14, 2013 / Associated Press

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

AG Holder Faces Tough House Questioning, After Defending AP Records Probe

May 15, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

eric-holderAttorney General Eric Holder will likely face aggressive questioning at a hearing by the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee Wednesday amid the outcry over the Justice Department’s gathering of phone records at The Associated Press and other scandals within the Obama administration.

The panel’s chairman, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., said committee members are planning on asking Holder “pointed” questions about the decision to obtain two months’ worth of telephone records of as many as 20 of the wire service’s reporters and editors.

“Congress and the American people expect answers and accountability,” Goodlatte said.

Holder’s prepared testimony, obtained by Fox News, does not address any of the recent controversies. It is focused on the department’s mission as well as the recent Boston terror attack.

Goodlatte, though, says the committee will also ask Holder about the targeting of conservative groups by the Internal Revenue Service, which is now the focus of an investigation by the Justice Department.

As for the AP controversy, Holder said Tuesday that his deputy “ultimately authorized the subpoena” to secretly obtain the records, and that he had recused himself early on in the related investigation into leaks of sensitive information that “put the American people at risk.”

Word that Deputy Attorney General James Cole is directing the FBI probe came as the White House expressed confidence in Holder and the department following revelations that it had seized the phone records in an effort to find out who leaked confidential information to it. Republicans pointed to the incident in renewing calls for Holder’s resignation.

Holder said Tuesday that the leak in question, which the AP has suggested involved a foiled terror attack originating in Yemen, was “very, very serious,” but declined to elaborate. He said it was among the most serious he’d seen in his career and that it “required very aggressive action.”

“It put the American people at risk,” he told reporters during a press conference Tuesday.

AP President Gary Pruitt called out the Justice Department in a statement posted Tuesday night on the media organization’s website.

“Rather than talk to us in advance, they seized these phone records in secret, saying that notifying us would compromise their investigation,” Pruitt said.

He added, “They say this secrecy is important for national security. It is always difficult to respond to that, particularly since they still haven’t told us specifically what they are investigating.”

During his press conference this morning, Holder said the investigation followed “all of the appropriate Department of Justice regulations.”

“As the Attorney General testified in June 2012, he was interviewed by the FBI in connection with the investigation into the unauthorized disclosure of classified information,” a DOJ official told Fox News earlier.

“To avoid any potential appearance of a conflict of interest, the Attorney General recused himself from this matter,” said the official, who spoke on background. “Since that time, this investigation has been conducted by the FBI under the direction of the U.S. Attorney and the supervision of the Deputy Attorney General, who has served as the Acting Attorney General overseeing this investigation.  The decision to seek media toll records in this investigation was made by the Deputy Attorney General consistent with Department regulations and policies.”

The year-long Justice Department probe included the seizure of two months’ worth of what the AP said included cellular, office and home telephone records of individual reporters and an editor; AP general office numbers in Washington, New York and Hartford, Conn.; and the main number for AP reporters covering Congress.

Republicans, meanwhile, are calling on Holder to resign following news of the probe.
“Freedom of the press is an essential right in a free society,” RNC Chairman Reince Priebus said in a statement.

“The First Amendment doesn’t request the federal government to respect it; it demands it,” Priebus said. “Attorney General Eric Holder, in permitting the Justice Department to issue secret subpoenas to spy on Associated Press reporters, has trampled on the First Amendment and failed in his sworn duty to uphold the Constitution.”

The Obama administration has been aggressive in going after leaks of classified information, prosecuting six officials – more than under all previous administrations combined.

In an initial letter to Holder, Pruitt, accused the Justice Department of seeking information beyond what could be justified.

“There can be no possible justification for such an overbroad collection of the telephone communications of The Associated Press and its reporters,” Pruitt wrote to Holder. “These records potentially reveal communications with confidential sources across all of the newsgathering activities undertaken by the AP during a two-month period, provide a road map to AP’s newsgathering operations, and disclose information about AP’s activities and operations that the government has no conceivable right to know.”

The White House said Tuesday that it had no knowledge of the investigation and referred all inquiries to the Justice Department.

“The president is a strong defender of the First Amendment,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said during a press conference. “He also of course recognizes the need for the Justice Department to investigate alleged criminal activity without undue influence.”

“I cannot, and he [President Obama] cannot, comment specifically on an ongoing criminal investigation,” Carney said.

Fox News’ Mike Levine  and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

Filed Under: All Stories, Elections, Ethics

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

‘VERY TROUBLED’: Lawmakers Rip Justice Dept. Over AP Records Grab

May 14, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

eric-holderLawmakers from both parties sharply questioned the Justice Department over its reported effort to secretly obtain two months of phone records from Associated Press journalists, with House Speaker John Boehner’s office saying “they better have a damned good explanation.”

The AP disclosed the department’s actions Monday afternoon, revealing that the news service had recently learned the department obtained records listing outgoing calls for the work and personal phone numbers of AP reporters and various AP offices. In all, the government seized the records for more than 20 separate telephone lines assigned to AP and its journalists in April and May of 2012.

Concern about what the AP’s top executive called an “unprecedented intrusion” quickly spanned party lines.

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

“The burden is always on the government when they go after private information — especially information regarding the press or its confidential sources. I want to know more about this case, but on the face of it, I am concerned that the government may not have met that burden,” Leahy said in a statement.

The AP also reported that the Justice Department got records for the main AP number in the House of Representatives press gallery. One congressional source told Fox News this allegation in particular “is not sitting too well” with congressional leadership.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., said he plans to ask Attorney General Eric Holder “pointed questions” on the issue at a hearing Wednesday.

Boehner spokesman Michael Steel also had pointed words for the administration.

“The First Amendment is first for a reason. If the Obama administration is going after reporters’ phone records, they better have a damned good explanation,” he said.

The allegations come on the heels of a pair of major controversies for the Obama administration. Fresh testimony and newly released documents last week raised questions about whether top administration officials deliberately distorted the details of the Benghazi attack as they first began providing details to the public last September. Then the IRS acknowledged Friday that it singled out conservative groups like the Tea Party for additional scrutiny as it screened applications for tax-exempt status.

House Republican Whip Kevin McCarthy described the AP claims as another blemish for the administration.

“I am deeply concerned by numerous reports of misconduct by the administration, from (whistle-blower) testimony regarding Benghazi to the Internal Revenue Service targeting groups based on political ideology and now the Department of Justice monitoring journalists with the Associated Press,” he said.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney referred questions on the issue to the Justice Department, claiming the White House was not involved.

“Other than press reports, we have no knowledge of any attempt by the Justice Department to seek phone records of the AP. We are not involved in decisions made in connection with criminal investigations, as those matters are handled independently by the Justice Department. Any questions about an ongoing criminal investigation should be directed to the Department of Justice,” he said.

Rules published by the Justice Department require that subpoenas of records of news organizations must be personally approved by the attorney general, but it was not known if that happened in this case. The letter notifying AP that its phone records had been obtained through subpoenas was sent Friday by Ronald Machen, the U.S. attorney in Washington.

William Miller, a spokesman for Machen, said Monday that in general the U.S. attorney follows “all applicable laws, federal regulations and Department of Justice policies when issuing subpoenas for phone records of media organizations.” But he would not address questions about the specifics of the AP records. “We do not comment on ongoing criminal investigations,” Miller said in an email.

According to the AP, it was not clear if the records obtained also included incoming calls or the duration of the calls.

The exact number of journalists who used the phone lines during that period is unknown, but more than 100 journalists work in the offices where phone records were targeted, on a wide array of stories about government and other matters.

In a letter of protest sent to Attorney General Eric Holder on Monday, AP President and Chief Executive Officer Gary Pruitt said the government sought and obtained information far beyond anything that could be justified by any specific investigation. He demanded the return of the phone records and destruction of all copies.

“There can be no possible justification for such an over-broad collection of the telephone communications of The Associated Press and its reporters. These records potentially reveal communications with confidential sources across all of the news gathering activities undertaken by the AP during a two-month period, provide a road map to AP’s news gathering operations and disclose information about AP’s activities and operations that the government has no conceivable right to know,” Pruitt said.

The government would not say why it sought the records. Officials have previously said in public testimony that the U.S. attorney in Washington is conducting a criminal investigation into who may have provided information contained in a May 7, 2012, AP story about a foiled terror plot. The story disclosed details of a CIA operation in Yemen that stopped an Al Qaeda plot in the spring of 2012 to detonate a bomb on an airplane bound for the United States.

In testimony in February, CIA Director John Brennan noted that the FBI had questioned him about whether he was AP’s source, which he denied. He called the release of the information to the media about the terror plot an “unauthorized and dangerous disclosure of classified information.”

Prosecutors have sought phone records from reporters before, but the seizure of records from such a wide array of AP offices, including general AP switchboards numbers and an office-wide shared fax line, is unusual.

In the letter notifying the AP, which was received Friday, the Justice Department offered no explanation for the seizure, according to Pruitt’s letter and attorneys for the AP. The records were presumably obtained from phone companies earlier this year although the government letter did not explain that. None of the information provided by the government to the AP suggested the actual phone conversations were monitored.

Among those whose phone numbers were obtained were five reporters and an editor who were involved in the May 7, 2012, story.

The Obama administration has aggressively investigated disclosures of classified information to the media and has brought six cases against people suspected of providing classified information, more than under all previous presidents combined.

The American Civil Liberties Union said the use of subpoenas for a broad swath of records has a chilling effect both on journalists and whistle-blowers who want to reveal government wrongdoing. “The attorney general must explain the Justice Department’s actions to the public so that we can make sure this kind of press intimidation does not happen again,” said Laura Murphy, the director of ACLU’s Washington legislative office.

Fox News’ Chad Pergram and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

Filed Under: All Stories, Elections, Ethics

Doctor Found Guilty of Murdering Infants in Late-term Abortion

May 13, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

Kermit GosnellA Philadelphia doctor was found guilty Monday of murdering three babies born alive in an abortion clinic, Fox News confirms. He was acquitted in the fourth baby’s death, and found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the overdose death of an adult patient.

Dr. Kermit Gosnell, 72, was convicted of first-degree murder and could face execution in the deaths of three babies who authorities say were delivered alive and then killed with scissors at his grimy clinic, in a case that became a flashpoint in the nation’s debate over abortion.

Gosnell was cleared in the death of a fourth baby, who prosecutors say let out a soft whimper before he snipped its neck.

Gosnell was also found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the drug-overdose death of a patient who had undergone an abortion.

Gosnell appeared hopeful before the verdict and calm afterward; jurors and lawyers on both sides were more emotional.

The jury will return Tuesday to hear evidence on whether Gosnell should get the death penalty.

Jack McMahon, Gosnell’s attorney, described the doctor as “disappointed” and “upset” over the verdict but said the defense team respected the jury’s ruling.

“They obviously took their job seriously,” McMahon said of the jury. “The verdict should be respected based on their effort.”

Former clinic employees testified that Gosnell routinely performed illegal late-term abortions past Pennsylvania’s 24-week limit, that he delivered babies who were still moving, whimpering or breathing, and that he and his assistants “snipped” the newborns’ spines, as he referred to it.

“Are you human?” prosecutor Ed Cameron snarled during closing arguments as Gosnell sat calmly at the defense table. “To med these women up and stick knives in the backs of babies?”

The grisly details came out more than two years ago during an investigation of prescription drug trafficking at Gosnell’s clinic in an impoverished section of West Philadelphia.

Authorities said the clinic was a foul-smelling “house of horrors” with bags and bottles of stored fetuses, including jars of severed feet, along with bloodstained furniture, dirty medical instruments, and cats roaming the premises.

Pennsylvania authorities had failed to conduct routine inspections of all of its abortion clinics for 15 years by the time Gosnell’s facility was raided and closed down. In the scandal’s aftermath, two top state health department officials were fired, and Pennsylvania imposed tougher rules for clinics.

Four former clinic employees have pleaded guilty to murder and four more to other charges. They include Gosnell’s wife, Pearl, a cosmetologist who helped perform abortions.

Both sides of the abortion divide seized on the case. Abortion foes said it exposed the true nature of abortion in all its disturbing detail. Abortion rights activists warned that Gosnell’s rogue practice foreshadows what poor and desperate young women could face if abortion is driven underground with more restrictive laws.

Midway through the six-week trial, anti-abortion activists accused the mainstream media of ignoring the case because it reflected badly on the abortion rights cause. Major news organizations denied the allegation, though a number promptly sent reporters to cover the trial.

After prosecutors rested their case, Common Pleas Judge Jeffrey Minehart threw out for lack of evidence three of seven murder counts involving aborted fetuses. That left the jury to weigh charges involving fetuses identified as Baby A, Baby C, Baby D and Baby E.

Prosecution experts said one was nearly 30 weeks along when it was aborted, and it was so big that Gosnell allegedly joked it could “walk to the bus.” A second fetus was said to be alive for some 20 minutes before a clinic worker snipped its neck. A third was born in a toilet and was moving before another clinic employee grabbed it and severed its spinal cord, according to testimony. Baby E let out a soft whimper before Gosnell cut its neck, the jury was told; Gosnell was acquitted in that baby’s death.

Gosnell’s attorney, Jack McMahon, argued that none of the fetuses was born alive and that any movements were posthumous twitching or spasms.

He also contended that the 2009 death of 41-year-old Karnamaya Mongar of Woodbridge, Va., a Bhutanese immigrant who had been given repeated doses of Demerol and other powerful drugs to sedate her and induce labor, was caused by unforeseen complications.

Gosnell did not testify, and his lawyer called no witnesses in his defense. But McMahon argued that the doctor provided desperate young woman with “a solution to their problems,” and he branded prosecutors “elitist” and “racist” for pursuing his client, who is black and whose patients were mostly poor minorities.

“We know why he was targeted,” McMahon said.

Prosecutors described Gosnell’s employees as nearly as desperate as the patients. Some had little or no medical training, and at least one was a teenager still in high school. One woman needed the work to support her children after her husband’s murder.

Stephen Massof, an unlicensed medical school graduate who could not find a residency, told jurors that Gosnell taught him how to snip babies’ spines, something he then did at least 100 times at the clinic.

“I felt like a fireman in hell,” Massof testified. “I couldn’t put out all the fires.”

Gosnell still faces federal drug charges. Authorities said that he ranked third in the state for OxyContin prescriptions and that he left blank prescription pads at his office and let staff members make them out to cash-paying patients.

He performed thousands of abortions over a 30-year career. Authorities said the medical practice alone netted him about $1.8 million a year, much of it in cash. Authorities found $250,000 hidden in a bedroom when they searched his house. Gosnell also owned a beach home and several rental properties.

“He created an assembly line with no regard for these women whatsoever,” Cameron said. “And he made money doing that.”

Planned Parenthood applauded the verdict on Monday, saying in a statement that “The jury has punished Kermit Gosnell for his appalling crimes.”

“This verdict will ensure that no woman is victimized by Kermit Gosnell ever again,” said Planned Parenthood spokesman Eric Ferrero. “This case has made clear that we must have and enforce laws that protect access to safe and legal abortion, and we must reject misguided laws that would limit women’s options and force them to seek treatment from criminals like Kermit Gosnell.”

And the National Right to Life committee said that while Gosnell had been converted, babies still suffer just as much in late term abortions nationwide.

“Kermit Gosnell was convicted of murder for severing the necks of just-born babies, but those babies would have died just as painfully if he had killed them inside the womb, as most late-term abortionists do,” National Right to Life President Carol Tobias said.  “The result is the same for the baby whether it meets its end in a shabby clinic like Gosnell’s or a brand new Planned Parenthood facility — a painful death.”

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

Filed Under: All Stories, Elections, Ethics, Religion

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

Colo. Dems Feel Gun Law Blowback

May 11, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

Hickenlooper_gunsColorado Democratic lawmakers who recently helped pass some of the toughest gun-control laws in the country now face the political backlash of recall efforts.

Two groups are targeting state Rep. Mike McLachlan and state Sens. Angela Giron, Evie Hudak and John Morse.

The Democrat-controlled legislature passed bills that ban magazines holding more than 15 rounds and require background checks for all gun transfers. They were signed into law in March by Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper.

Morse, the Senate president, pushed a more far-reaching proposal that called for holding owners, sellers and makers of assault-type weapons liable for havoc inflicted by their guns.

He pulled the bill upon realizing he didn’t have enough votes. But his efforts have still drawn the ire of the groups.

The petition drives are being organized by the organizations Pueblo Freedom and Rights Group. They will need signatures from 25 percent of the vote in each lawmaker’s district to trigger a special election.

The signature deadline is May 21. Colorado’s Secretary of State office confirmed with FoxNew.com that it has approved the forms for the petition drives.

The legislature also passed a bill before adjourning Friday that prohibits domestic-violence offenders from owning guns.And Hickenlooper is also expected to sign that legislation.

Morse is getting help from a group called “A Whole Lot of People for John Morse,” which is collecting money and petition signatures to fight the recall effort. The group has so far raised $23,050, according to The Daily Caller.

Connecticut, Maryland and New York also have passed tighter gun-control measures following the Dec. 2012 mass shooting at a Connecticut school in which 20 first-graders and six adults were killed. However, there are no indications of organized recall efforts in those Democratic-leaning states.

Hudak angered gun-rights advocates and others, beyond her support for tighter firearms control, because of a comment to a rape victim testifying against a bill that would have banned concealed weapons on college campuses.

She suggested the attacker might have used the gun on the woman had she been carrying a concealed weapon, saying “statistics are not on your side even if you had a gun.”

The bill was pulled and Hudak apologized.

Published May 08, 2013 / FoxNews.com

Filed Under: All Stories, Elections, Ethics

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

INTEL ALTERED: Emails Challenge Official Story on Benghazi Memos

May 10, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

benghazi_attackNew details about the Obama administration’s initial story-line on the Benghazi attack are raising additional questions about top-level efforts to downplay terrorism, with one report showing a State Department official pushed to delete a section that could have been used to “beat up” her department.The fresh reports have surfaced two days after three whistle-blowers testified on Capitol Hill about the Benghazi attack. One of them sharply challenged the administration’s decision to describe the attack out of the gate as a protest gone wrong.ABC News reported Friday that, despite administration claims that the flawed description reflected the best intelligence at the time, the talking points that led to the statement were revised 12 times.

Initial versions, as has been previously reported, contained references to Al Qaeda that were later deleted. But the latest excerpts show how State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland pressed the CIA to scrub references to the agency’s prior security warnings.

According to ABC News, the original paragraph read:

“The Agency has produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa’ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya. These noted that, since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador’s convoy. We cannot rule out the individuals has previously surveilled the U.S. facilities, also contributing to the efficacy of the attacks.”

But Nuland wrote that the lines  “could be abused by members [of Congress] to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings, so why would we want to feed that either? Concerned …”

The paragraph in question was then reportedly deleted.

The Weekly Standard, which referenced that exchange briefly in a prior account, also reported new details Friday, describing how then-CIA Director David Petraeus voiced surprise when he learned the Saturday after the attack that officials had deleted all prior references to Al Qaeda and jihadists, leaving only the word “extremists.”

U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice would use the final version of the talking points to say on several Sunday shows that the attack was triggered by protests over an anti-Islam film.

While administration officials and congressional Democrats have described the protracted debate over the talking points as politically motivated and inconsequential, the testimony this week drew new attention to it.

Greg Hicks, former deputy chief of mission in Libya, said Rice’s comments actually hurt the FBI investigation by insulting the Libyan president — who gave a conflicting account at the time by saying the attack was premeditated.

Hicks said the anti-Islam film was actually a “nonevent” in Libya, and his “jaw dropped” when he heard Rice’s comments.

ABC News reported that the CIA’s first drafts did say the attack appeared to be “spontaneously inspired” by the protests at the embassy in Cairo. However, the early versions also said “we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa’ida participated in the attack.”

The State Department and White House have continued to defend their actions and intervention in light of the new details.

After it was first revealed that references to security concerns — in addition to references to Al Qaeda — were removed, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said: “What we said and what remains true to this day is that the intelligence community drafted and redrafted these points.”

He defended administration claims that the faulty statements were merely the product of incomplete intelligence in a rapidly changing environment. Despite the excerpts, he stood by claims that White House involvement was minimal.

“The fact that there are inputs is always the case in a process like this. But the only edits made by anyone here at the White House were stylistic and non-substantive. They corrected the description of the building or the facility in Benghazi from ‘consulate’ to ‘diplomatic facility’ and the like,” he said.

State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell also said Rice’s comments were based on the intelligence community’s “best assessment that there was not any evidence of months-long pre-planning or pre-meditation, which remains their assessment.”

Published May 10, 2013 / FoxNews.com

 

Filed Under: All Stories, Elections, 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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

Follow us

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

Privacy Policy

Terms of Service

Economy

The “Authoritarian” Narrative vs. Reality: Why Trump’s Positions Are Historically Mainstream

Election Autopsy: What Yesterday’s Results Revealed

Why Is the United States Still Allowing Iran to Threaten the Strait of Hormuz?

Elections

Stephen Colbert’s Final Curtain: When Late Night Became Political Therapy Instead of Comedy

Where Are the Handcuffs?

Skid Row Vote-Buying Case Exposes How Dems Cheat America’s Election System

Foreign

BREAKING: President Trump Orders Devastating Airstrikes on Iran’s Nuclear Weapons Facilities in Historic Preemptive Strike

Jamie Lee Curtis Wept Over Kanye’s Antisemitism—But Where Is Her Outrage Now?

Trump confirms ‘comprehensive’ trade deal with UK

Crime

When Political Rhetoric Becomes a Security Threat—Yet Another Assassination Attempt

Where Are the Handcuffs?

Skid Row Vote-Buying Case Exposes How Dems Cheat America’s Election System

Science Tech

Fed Appeals Court Judge Stayed Silent for Decades. Now Witnesses Beginning to Talk.

Trump’s ISIS Strike in Nigeria Sends a Message: America Can Still Hunt Terrorists Anywhere

Trump’s UFO Disclosure Has Changed the Conversation — But Not Yet Answered the Biggest Question

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