• 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

Hundreds of Thousands Protest Egypt’s Morsi

June 30, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

Egypt_Morsi_ProtestCAIRO –  Hundreds of thousands thronged the streets of Cairo and cities around the country Sunday and marched on the presidential palace, filling a broad avenue for blocks, in an attempt to force out the Islamist president with the most massive protests Egypt has seen in 2 1/2 years of turmoil.

In a sign of the explosive volatility of the country’s divisions, a hard core of young opponents broke away from the rallies and attacked the main headquarters of President Mohammed Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood, pelting it with stones and firebombs until a raging fire erupted in the walled villa. During clashes, Brotherhood supporters opened fire on the attackers, and activists said three protesters were killed.

Fears were widespread that the two sides could be heading to a violent collision in coming days. Morsi made clear through a spokesman that he would not step down and his Islamist supporters vowed not to allow protesters to remove one of their own, brought to office in a legitimate vote. Thousands of Islamists massed not far from the presidential palace in support of Morsi, some of them prepared for a fight with makeshift armor and sticks.

At least five anti-Morsi protesters were killed Sunday in clashes and shootings in southern Egypt.

The protesters aimed to show by sheer numbers that the country has irrevocably turned against Morsi, a year to the day after he was inaugurated as Egypt’s first freely elected president. But throughout the day and even up to midnight at the main rallying sites, fears of rampant violence did not materialize.

Instead the mood was largely festive as protesters at giant anti-Morsi rallies in Cairo’s central Tahrir Square and outside the Ittihadiya palace spilled into side streets and across boulevards, waving flags, blowing whistles and chanting.

Fireworks went off overhead. Men and women, some with small children on their shoulders, beat drums, danced and sang, “By hook or by crook, we will bring Morsi down.” Residents in nearby homes showered water on marchers below — some carrying tents in preparation to camp outside the palace — to cool them in the summer heat, and blew whistles and waved flags in support.

“Mubarak took only 18 days although he had behind him the security, intelligence and a large sector of Egyptians,” said Amr Tawfeeq, an oil company employee marching toward Ittihadiya with a Christian friend. Morsi “won’t take long. We want him out and we are ready to pay the price.”

The massive outpouring against Morsi raises the question of what is next. Protesters have vowed to stay on the streets until he steps down, and organizers called for widespread labor strikes starting Monday. The president, in turn, appears to be hoping protests wane.

For weeks, Morsi’s supporters have depicted the planned protest as a plot by Mubarak loyalists. But their claims were undermined by the extent of Sunday’s rallies. In Cairo and a string of cities in the Nile Delta and on the Mediterranean coast, the protests topped even the biggest protests of the 2011’s 18-day uprising, including the day Mubarak quit, Feb. 11, when giant crowds marched on Ittihadiya.

It is unclear now whether the opposition, which for months has demanded Morsi form a national unity government, would now accept any concessions short of his removal. The anticipated deadlock raises the question of whether the army, already deployed on the outskirts of cities, will intervene. Protesters believe the military would throw its weight behind them, tipping the balance against Morsi. The country’s police, meanwhile, were hardly to be seen Sunday.

“If the Brothers think that we will give up and leave, they are mistaken,” said lawyer Hossam Muhareb as he sat with a friend on a sidewalk near the presidential palace. “They will give up and leave after seeing our numbers.”

Violence could send the situation spinning into explosive directions.

The fire at the Brotherhood headquarters, located on a plateau overlooking Cairo, sent smoke pouring in the air, even as youths clashed with Brotherhood supporters at the site. Three on the anti-Morsi side were shot to death, and 60 were wounded, an activist who monitored casualties at the hospital, Nazli Hussein, said.

Southern Egypt saw deadly attacks on anti-Morsi protests, and five people were killed. Two protesters were shot to death during clashes outside offices of the Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party, one in Beni Suef, the other in Fayoum.

In the city of Assiut, a stronghold of Islamists, gunmen on a motorcycle opened fire on a protest in which tens of thousands were participating,, killing one person, wounding four others and sending the crowd running.

The enraged protesters then marched on the nearby Freedom and Justice offices, where gunmen inside opened fire, killing two more, security officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to talk to the press.  Clashes erupted, with protesters and security forces fighting side by side against Morsi’s supporters.

At least 400 people were injured nationwide, the Health Ministry said.

Morsi, who has three years left in his term, said street protests cannot be used to overturn the results of a free election.

“There is no room for any talk against this constitutional legitimacy,” he told Britain’s The Guardian newspaper in an interview published Sunday, rejecting early elections.

If an elected president is forced out, “there will (be) people or opponents opposing the new president too, and a week or a month later, they will ask him to step down,” he said.

Morsi was not at Ittihadiya as Sunday’s rally took place — he had moved to another nearby palace.

As the crowds massed, Morsi’s spokesman Ihab Fahmi repeated the president’s longstanding offer of dialogue with the opposition to resolve the nation’s political crisis, calling it “the only framework through which we can reach understandings.”

The opposition has repeatedly turned down his offers for dialogue, arguing that they were for show.

The demonstrations are the culmination of polarization and instability that have been building since Morsi’s June 30, 2012, inauguration. The past year has seen multiple political crises, bouts of bloody clashes and a steadily worsening economy, with power outages, fuel shortages, rising prices and persistent lawlessness and crime.

In one camp are the president and his Islamist allies, including the Muslim Brotherhood and more hard-line groups. Morsi supporters accuse Mubarak loyalists of being behind the protests, aiming to overturn last year’s election results, just as they argue that remnants of the old regime have sabotaged Morsi’s attempts to deal with the nation’s woes and bring reforms.

Hard-liners among them have also given the confrontation a sharply religious tone, denouncing Morsi’s opponents as “enemies of God” and infidels.

On the other side is an array of secular and liberal Egyptians, moderate Muslims, Christians — and what the opposition says is a broad sector of the general public that has turned against the Islamists. They say the Islamists have negated their election mandate by trying to monopolize power, infusing government with their supporters, forcing through a constitution they largely wrote and giving religious extremists a free hand, all while failing to manage the country.

“The country is only going backward. He’s embarrassing us and making people hate Islam,” said Donia Rashad, a 24-year-old unemployed woman who wears the conservative Islamic headscarf. “We need someone who can feel the people and is agreeable to the majority.”

As they marched toward the presidential palace, some chanted, “You lied to us in the name of religion.” The crowds, including women, children and elderly people, hoisted long banners in the colors of the Egyptian flag and raised red cards — a sign of expulsion in soccer.

In Tahrir, chants of “erhal!”, or “leave!” thundered around the square. The crowd, which appeared to number some 300,000, waved Egyptian flags and posters of Morsi with a red X over his face. They whistled and waved when military helicopters swooped close overhead, reflecting their belief that the army favors them over Morsi.

Defense Minister Gen. Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi warned a week ago that the military would intervene to prevent the nation from entering a “dark tunnel.” Army troops backed by armored vehicles were deployed Sunday in some of Cairo’s suburbs, with soldiers at traffic lights and major intersections. In the evening, they deployed near the international airport, state TV said.

Similarly sized crowds turned out in the Mediterranean city of Alexandria and the Nile Delta cities of Mansoura, Tanta and Damanhour, with sizeable rallies in cities nationwide.

“Today is the Brotherhood’s last day in power,” Suliman Mohammed, a manager of a seafood company, said in Tahrir.

The protests emerge from a petition campaign by a youth activist group known as Tamarod, Arabic for “Rebel.” For several months, the group has been collecting signatures on a call for Morsi to step down.

On Saturday, the group announced it had more than 22 million signatures — proof, it claims, that a broad sector of the public no longer wants Morsi in office.

It was not possible to verify the claim. If true, it would be nearly twice the some 13 million people who voted for Morsi in last year’s presidential run-off election, which he won with around 52 percent of the vote. Tamarod organizers said they discarded about 100,000 signed forms because they were duplicates.

Morsi’s supporters have questioned the authenticity of the signatures, but have produced no evidence of fraud.

Near Ittihadiya palace, thousands of Islamists gathered in a show of support for Morsi outside the Rabia al-Adawiya mosque. Some Morsi backers wore homemade body armor and construction helmets and carried shields and clubs — precautions, they said, against possible violence.

At the pro-Morsi rally at the Rabia al-Adawiya mosque, the crowd chanted, “God is great,” and some held up copies of Islam’s holy book, the Quran.

“The people hold the legitimacy and we support Dr. Mohamed Morsi,” said Ahmed Ramadan, one of the rally participants. “We would like to tell him not to be affected by the opponents’ protests and not to give up his rights. We are here to support and protect him.”

Published June 30, 2013 / Associated Press

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

Euro Allies Fume Over NSA Claim

June 30, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

Allegations of NSA bugging stir tension with European allies

obama_nsaEmerging allegations that America’s National Security Agency bugged and hacked European Union offices stoked tension Sunday between U.S. and European officials, with German prosecutors announcing they are probing the claims.

The allegations were carried in a report by the German magazine Der Spiegel. They are the latest claims to surface regarding NSA surveillance activity, as on-the-lam leaker Edward Snowden feeds a series of sensitive documents to the media. Der Spiegel did not specifically say how it obtained the information.

European Parliament President Martin Schulz, in response, demanded a clarification from the NSA about the alleged program.

“I am deeply worried and shocked about the allegations of U.S. authorities spying on EU offices,” Schulz said in a statement, according to The Wall Street Journal. “If the allegations prove to be true, it would be an extremely serious matter which will have a severe impact on EU-U.S. relations.”

German federal prosecutors also said they are looking into the reports. The Federal Prosecutors’ Office said in a statement Sunday that it was probing the claims so as to “achieve a reliable factual basis” before considering whether a formal investigation was warranted.

It also said private citizens were likely to file criminal complaints on the matter.

A representative with the NSA referred questions on the matter to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which has not yet commented on the report.

But Michael Hayden, the former director of both the NSA and CIA, said Sunday that European officials should look in the mirror before criticizing the U.S.

“Any European who wants to go out and rend their garments with regard to international espionage should look first and find out what their own governments are doing,” he said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

Hayden noted he’s been out of the agency for years and said he didn’t know the accuracy of the Der Spiegel report, nor could he confirm or deny it if he did.

But he said “the United States does conduct espionage,” and that the Fourth Amendment right to privacy “is not an international treaty.”

Der Spiegel reported that the NSA appears to have installed bugs in an EU building in Washington, D.C., as well as infiltrated their computer network. According to the report, this let U.S. officials monitor discussions and emails.

U.S. officials have warned that the string of NSA leaks are damaging to national security.

Snowden is believed to still be at the Moscow airport. Russian officials so far have refused to expel him to the U.S., claiming he is in a transit zone and not technically in their hands.

Meanwhile, Vice President Biden on Friday called Ecuador’s president to urge the country to reject a request by Snowden for asylum in that country.

Published June 30, 2013 / FoxNews.com / The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Filed Under: All Stories, Elections, Ethics, Foreign, Religion, Sci-Tech

Charges Dismissed Against Student Who Refused to Remove NRA Shirt

June 28, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

NRAThe West Virginia eighth-grader arrested after refusing a teacher’s demand he remove a National Rifle Association T-shirt he wore to school won’t face criminal charges after all.

Jared Marcum, 14, was charged with obstruction following the April 18 incident after police who were called to Logan Middle School school said he refused to stop talking. The case generated national headlines, as Marcum’s family and attorney, Ben White, claimed the demand that he remove the NRA shirt violated his right to freedom of speech. On Thursday, Logan County Circuit Judge Eric O’Briant signed an order dismissing the charge.

“It should have come sooner but it’s done and we don’t have to have that concern anymore about him having a criminal record.”- Allen Lardieri, Jared Marcum’s father

Marcum’s mother, Tanya Lardieri, told WOWK that she was overcome with emotion after signing a dismissal order relating to the charge. The boy’s father, Allen Lardieri, said the couple is just glad Eric’s legal troubles are behind him.

“It should have come sooner but it’s done and we don’t have to have that concern anymore about him having a criminal record,” Allen Lardieri told WOWK. “I’m just glad that it’s over. His mother is glad it’s over.”

After he was charged, Marcum faced up to a year in jail and a $500 fine. Although the charge related to the boy’s behavior after the incident began, White said the school’s unreasonable demand that he take off the shirt caused the situation to get out of control.

“We at this point believe that Jared acted as mature as a 14-year-old child can act with the pressure that was put on him,” White told The Associated Press.

The school’s dress code gives wide enforcement discretion to educators.

“If in the judgment of the administration, a student is dressed inappropriately, the student will be required to change clothes or cover up inappropriate clothing before returning to classes,” the code reads.

After Marcum was arrested, students throughout Logan County wore similar NRA shirts in a show of solidarity. And on Monday, the boy was summoned back to court as prosecutors sought to have a gag order imposed on him and his family. They claimed Jared and his father talking to the press about the case was not in the boy’s interest, a rationale his own attorney rejected.

“We were here because the prosecution filed a motion for a gag order,” White said on Monday. “My opinion is because, seemingly, they want to take it out of the court of public opinion.”

But on Thursday, after reviewing statements from the arresting officer and the school’s principal, White said he and a prosecutor agreed that creating a criminal record for Marcum wasn’t a good idea.

“I didn’t think it would go this far because, honestly, I don’t see a problem with [the shirt],” Jared Marcum told WOWK in April. “There shouldn’t be a problem with this.”

Published June 28, 2013 / FoxNews.com / The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Filed Under: All Stories, Elections, Ethics, Religion

IRS Official Waived Fifth

June 28, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

House panel finds IRS official waived Fifth Amendment right, can be forced to testify in targeting probe

Lerner_IRS_FifthA House Republican-led committee approved a resolution Friday declaring that high-ranking IRS official Lois Lerner waived her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination by delivering a statement before the committee in May.

Lerner used to oversee the IRS division that targeted groups for additional scrutiny when they applied for tax-exempt status. At a May 22 hearing, she invoked her right not to answer lawmakers’ questions after declaring in an opening statement that she had done nothing wrong.

Members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee voted along party lines Friday morning, with 22 Republicans saying she waived the Fifth and 17 Democrats arguing she did not. Lerner remains under subpoena, and the committee believes it could bring the long-time IRS official back and compel her to testify.

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., chairman of the committee, said at the opening of Friday’s meeting that “I believe Lois Lerner waived her Fifth Amendment privileges.”

“She did so when she delivered an opening statement,” Issa said.

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., reiterated Issa’s argument, delivering a fiery speech about Lerner’s attempt to protect herself under the Fifth.

Gowdy said Lerner made nine separate assertions, with the advice of counsel, and then authenticated a document.

“That’s not how the Fifth Amendment works,” Gowdy said. “You’re not allowed to just say your side of the story … She could have sat there and said nothing.”

Democrats, meanwhile, like Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va., challenged Gowdy’s argument, calling attempts to block Lerner’s invoking of the Fifth Amendment “an egregious abuse of power that tramples the Constitution and serves no valid legislative purpose.”

Connolly said that “the majority has brought us to a point where we risk allowing this committee to be transformed into a Star Chamber proceeding that establishes future Legislative Branch precedent where any chairman — whether a Democrat or a Republican — is free to compel an American invoking their constitutional right against self-incrimination to physically appear before the Committee for no other reason than to be pilloried, delayed, embarrassed, and burdened into unknowingly, unintentionally, and ironically, forfeiting the very sacred constitutional right that is intended to protect every American against forced self-incrimination by the government.”

“You may make a small-term political gain,” Connolly warned Republicans, but “at a long-term political cost.”

The committee is scheduled to vote Friday on whether Lerner waived her Fifth Amendment right not to answer questions by making an opening statement.

Legal scholars have differed in their views on the committee’s case against Lerner, who the IRS has placed on administrative leave.

Lerner’s lawyer, William Taylor, said he disagreed with the committee’s claim.

“There was nothing voluntary about her statement,” he said in a statement. “She had informed (the) committee that she would invoke and requested to be excused and (the) committee ordered her to appear and invoke her rights in public.

“It went so far as to serve a subpoena on her to assure that she would be compelled to attend, unlike other witnesses who appeared voluntarily.  In any event, protesting your innocence and invoking the right not to answer questions, which is what she did, is not a waiver.”

Published June 28, 2013 / FoxNews.com / Fox News’ Chad Pergram, Cristina Corbin and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

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

Another Senior IRS Official Pleads the Fifth Before Congress

June 27, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

irs_pleads_5thFor the second time in as many months, a senior IRS manager on Wednesday invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination, fueling perceptions of an agency in  crisis.

Greg Roseman, a Deputy IRS Director, spearheaded the awarding of the IRS’s  largest contract in history to a company owned by a close friend of his, an action that is prohibited under government contracting regulations.

The company is Strong Castle, Inc., owned by Braulio Castillo. Castillo won several contracts totaling almost $500 million for IRS IT services in part on the basis of his friendship  with Roseman and by qualifying for two minority programs that allow disadvantaged applicants a better chance of winning lucrative government contracts.

Castillo qualified for one minority set-aside program by setting up his business in a disadvantaged area of northeast Washington D.C. The Small Business Administration program requires applicants to hire from within the economically disadvantaged community, but a House Oversight Committee report found that Castillo manipulated that requirement by hiring students from Catholic University. The school’s campus lies within the designated boundary, but its students are, on balance, far from disadvantaged.

He won entrance into another minority set-aside program run by the Veterans Administration that gives disabled vets certain advantages in federal contracting. His disability? An ankle twisted during football at the US Military Academy Prep School 27 years ago.

That prompted  a sarcastic reaction at Wednesday’s House Oversight Committee hearing from a double amputee, Congresswoman Tammy Duckworth, an Iraq war vet. “I’m so glad that you would be willing to play football in prep school again to protect this great country. Shame on you, Mr. Castillo, shame on you,” she said.

As evidence of their close friendship, the committee published text messages between  Roseman and Castillo. The two men apparently found kinship in using homophobic slurs. One exchange reads, “Paging Dr. Faggot.”  The response reads, “Queerbait. How come u haven’t called back? Ain’t got all day. Lol.”

Roseman is still employed by the IRS. That fact prompted a testy exchange between Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., and Beth Tucker, the IRS’s Deputy Commissioner for Operations Support.

“Can you issue a statement by five o’clock today as to how someone who used this language in their official capacity as a government employee is still employed and drawing a paycheck?” Gowdy asked. “We are having discussions with our general counsel,” Tucker responded.

On Friday, there will be more IRS focus on the Hill. The committee will vote whether it believes Lois Lerner waived her Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination when she invoked that right, then abruptly proclaimed her innocence. It was a maneuver that some on the panel say amounted to waiving the right.

By Doug McKelway / Published June 26, 2013 / FoxNews.com

Watch Video

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

Obama Welcomes Islamic Scholar With Terrorist Ties Into White House

June 26, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

Bin_BayyahA Muslim scholar whose group supports Hamas, who has urged the U.N. to criminalize blasphemy and who is the deputy of an Egyptian cleric banned from the U.S. over his radical statements was able to secure a visit at the White House earlier this month.

A report from The Investigative Project on Terrorism uncovered a statement on the website of Sheikh Abdullah Bin Bayyah claiming he met June 13 with Obama administration officials in Washington.

Bin Bayyah is vice president of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, a group founded by Egyptian cleric Yusuf Qaradawi — a Muslim Brotherhood leader who has called for the death of Jews and Americans and himself is banned from visiting the U.S.

While Bin Bayyah secured a visit, he and his group also have a history of questionable positions, IPT reports.

A 2009 fatwa from the group barred “all forms of normalization” with Israel. Bin Bayyah also got behind a campaign to pressure the U.N. to pass a resolution criminalizing blasphemy. IPT also found Bin Bayyah was vice president at the organization when they issued a 2004 fatwa saying that resisting U.S. troops in Iraq is a “duty” for Muslims — effectively allowing the killing of Americans.

On his website, as first reported by IPT, Bin Bayyah said the Obama administration requested the meeting.

He quoted National Security Council official Gayle Smith as saying: “We asked for this meeting to learn from you and we need to be looking for new mechanisms to communicate with you and the Association of Muslim Scholars.”

The post reportedly claimed he had met with Smith; Rashad Hussain, U.S. envoy to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation; and the national security adviser, among others.

According to the IPT report, the reference to meeting with the national security adviser was later deleted.

IPT reported that Bin Bayyah was lobbying the White House to do more to help the Syrian opposition.

Published June 26, 2013 / FoxNews.com

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

Supreme Court Sides with Gay Marriage

June 26, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

gay_domaIn a big day for gay-rights advocates, the Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down a federal provision denying benefits to legally married gay couples and issued a separate ruling that paves the way for same-sex marriages to resume in California.

Cheers erupted on the steps of the high court, as the rulings were handed down. The latter decision did not speak to the constitutionality of gay marriage bans in California, or in the country as a whole. The court avoided a broad ruling, and rather, determined that the defenders of California’s Proposition 8 ban on gay marriage did not have the standing to appeal lower court rulings against the ban.

As a result, California is likely to allow same-sex marriages to resume in a matter of weeks.

The more sweeping decision came in relation to the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which the court said was unconstitutional and effectively gutted by ruling against a provision that denied benefits to legally married gay couples.

The 5-4 ruling — a major victory for gay-rights advocates — means those same-sex couples would be eligible for federal benefits.

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion.

“DOMA divests married same-sex couples of the duties and responsibilities that are an essential part of married life and that they in most cases would be honored to accept were DOMA not in force,” he wrote.

Kennedy wrote that the law “places same-sex couples in an unstable position of being in a second-tier marriage.”

The ruling prompted tension among the divided court. Multiple dissenting opinions were filed. Justice Antonin Scalia, reading from his dissent, said the components of the majority’s ruling are “wrong.”

“The error in both springs from the same diseased root: an exalted notion of the role of this Court in American democratic society,” he said.

Social conservatives were similarly disappointed.

“They are rejecting the truth. It’s a sad day,” said Frank Page, president of the Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee. “Christians have to live in the world in which we live. We will adapt and adjust to the realities of the law change. At the same time we will continue to preach, declare, and live the truth that our God does not get involved in swing votes and cultural change when there is a biblical principle at stake.”

But David Boies, attorney for the plaintiffs in the Prop 8 case, hailed both rulings as a step toward “true equality.” He said that while the California case was not ruled on the merits, the DOMA ruling demonstrates that when the issue of gay marriage returns to the high court, “marriage equality will be the law throughout this land.”

The provision in question defined marriage as between a man and woman and in doing so prevented married gay couples from receiving a range of tax, health and retirement benefits that are generally available to married people.

Same-sex marriage has been adopted by 12 states and the District of Columbia. Another 18,000 couples were married in California during a brief period when same-sex unions were legal there.

“Under DOMA, same-sex married couples have their lives burdened, by reason of government decree, in visible and public ways,” Kennedy said.

“DOMA’s principal effect is to identify a subset of state-sanctioned marriages and make them unequal,” he said.

He was joined by the court’s four liberal justices.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented.

Scalia said the court should not have decided the case.

Published June 26, 2013 / FoxNews.com / The Associated Press contributed to this report.

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

Supreme Court Strikes Down Key Part of Voting Rights Act

June 25, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

Supreme-CourtIn a major ruling, the Supreme Court on Tuesday voided a provision of the Voting Rights Act that determines which state and local governments have to seek federal permission to change their voting laws.

The 1960s-era provision largely singled out states and districts in the South — those with a history of discrimination — for special screening by the federal government over changes to their laws. But the court ruled 5-4 that the formula determining which states are affected is unconstitutional, and said Congress could try to draft a new provision.

The justices said that the law Congress most recently renewed in 2006 relies on 40-year-old data that does not reflect racial progress and changes in U.S. society.

“In 2006, the Act was reauthorized for an additional 25 years, but the coverage formula was not changed. Coverage still turned on whether a jurisdiction had a voting test in the 1960s or1970s, and had low voter registration or turnout at that time,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote.

He clarified that the provision requiring advance approval of voting law changes — known as Section 5 — was not being struck down. Rather, the court found that the provision pertaining to the formula, known as Section 4, was unconstitutional. The decision, though, challenges the overall practice of federal screening unless and until Congress addresses the formula.

The decision means that a host of state and local laws that have not received Justice Department approval or have not yet been submitted will be able to take effect. Prominent among those are voter identification laws in Alabama and Mississippi.

Going forward, the outcome alters the calculus of passing election-related legislation in the affected states and local jurisdictions. The threat of an objection from Washington has hung over election-related proposals for nearly a half century. At least until Congress acts, that deterrent now is gone.

Roberts argued that these states and the conditions in them have “changed dramatically” over the years.

“The tests and devices that blocked ballot access have been forbidden nationwide for over 40 years. Yet the Act has not eased (Section 5’s) restrictions or narrowed the scope of (Section 4’s) coverage formula along the way. Instead those extraordinary and unprecedented features have been reauthorized as if nothing has changed, and they have grown even stronger,” he wrote.

The decision comes five months after President Obama, the nation’s first black chief executive, started his second term in the White House, re-elected by a diverse coalition of voters.

The high court is in the midst of a broad re-examination of the ongoing necessity of laws and programs aimed at giving racial minorities access to major areas of American life from which they once were systematically excluded. The justices issued a modest ruling Monday that preserved affirmative action in higher education and will take on cases dealing with anti-discrimination sections of a federal housing law and another affirmative action case from Michigan next term.

The court warned of problems with the voting rights law in a similar case heard in 2009. The justices averted a major constitutional ruling at that time, but Congress did nothing to address the issues the court raised. The law’s opponents, sensing its vulnerability, filed several new lawsuits.

The latest decision came in a challenge to the advance approval, or preclearance, requirement, which was brought by Shelby County, Ala., a Birmingham suburb.

The lawsuit acknowledged that the measure’s strong medicine was appropriate and necessary to counteract decades of state-sponsored discrimination in voting, despite the Fifteenth Amendment’s guarantee of the vote for black Americans.

But it asked whether there was any end in sight for a provision that intrudes on states’ rights to conduct elections, an issue the court’s conservative justices also explored at the argument in February. It was considered an emergency response when first enacted in 1965.

The county noted that the 25-year extension approved in 2006 would keep some places under Washington’s oversight until 2031 and seemed not to account for changes that include the elimination of racial disparity in voter registration and turnout or the existence of allegations of race-based discrimination in voting in areas of the country that are not subject to the provision.

The Obama administration and civil rights groups said there is a continuing need for it and pointed to the Justice Department’s efforts to block voter ID laws in South Carolina and Texas last year, as well as a redistricting plan in Texas that a federal court found discriminated against the state’s large and growing Hispanic population.

Advance approval was put into the law to give federal officials a potent tool to defeat persistent efforts to keep blacks from voting.

The provision was a huge success because it shifted the legal burden and required governments that were covered to demonstrate that their proposed changes would not discriminate. Congress periodically has renewed it over the years. The most recent extension was overwhelmingly approved by a Republican-led Congress and signed by President George W. Bush.

The requirement currently applies to the states of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia. It also covers certain counties in California, Florida, New York, North Carolina and South Dakota, and some local jurisdictions in Michigan. Coverage has been triggered by past discrimination not only against blacks, but also against American Indians, Asian-Americans, Alaska Natives and Hispanics.

Towns in New Hampshire that had been covered by the law were freed from the advance approval requirement in March. Supporters of the provision pointed to the ability to bail out of the prior approval provision to argue that the law was flexible enough to accommodate change and that the court should leave the Voting Rights Act intact.

On Monday, the Justice Department announced an agreement that would allow Hanover County, Va., to bail out.

Published June 25, 2013 / FoxNews.com / The Associated Press contributed to this report.

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

Technology Makes Possible the Surveillance State

June 23, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

obama-big-brotherTechnology is making your every move — perhaps even those movements you make in the bathroom — ready for broadcast. The question is, are you ready for it?

Following the revelations about some of what the U.S. National Security Agency has been up to — secretly collecting millions of phone records and innumerable personal online searches and e-mails — government officials have been scrambling to reassure the public that the amount of information it is collecting is negligible, even trivial, and doesn’t impinge on personal freedom. However, the technology itself argues against the idea that what’s being collected about you is harmless.

Consider that phone numbers with time and location information can be easily combined with Web searches (for “anti-depressants,” say) and text message information to form a picture of where you are and what you’re doing. No one needs to listen to the content of a call if they know everything else about you, like the fact that you’ve messaged a therapist several times this week, belong to a gun club, and gave money to a Tea Party candidate.

Furthermore, the government’s Prism program looks positively mundane when you consider the other possible sources of information available through secret government surveillance. It is technically possible to monitor nearly every U.S. citizen — through automated scanning software programs — seven days a week, 24 hours a day.

Video cameras monitor you walking down the sidewalk. Toll tags and on-board connected car systems monitor you behind the wheel, even relaying rabbit starts, severe braking, and excessive speed. Security systems at work oversee cubicles, and employers monitor computer habits with hidden software that tracks keystrokes. At home, smart TVs with streaming services collect information about what you’re watching. Some sets and gaming consoles even include cameras that can tell who is in the room sitting on the couch.

big_brother_watchingWorse, our addiction to smartphones means we’re beaming our location, purchases, banking information, and personal relationships over networks that can be easily tapped — by government officials or by malware from hackers. Indeed, a computer program known as Flame that security experts say was created for espionage purposes has the demonstrated ability to secretly turn on a device’s microphone and record a conversation.

And then there’s Google Glass.

The much anticipated eyewear isn’t even available to the public yet, but when it is people won’t have to hold up a phone to take a picture, they’ll be able to record video in the blink of an eye. At a recent shareholder meeting, Google CEO Larry Page told attendees not to be terrified that people might use Glass in a public bathroom, just as we shouldn’t worry about people using smartphones in the bathroom.

I think there are some choice words folks would have for people who use Google Glass in the bathroom. (Try explaining to the friendly police officer that you were just reading FoxNews.com on the eyepiece, honest.)

The problem, of course, is the surreptitious nature of the technology and the secret monitoring it enables. It means that information — information you might think is innocuous — can be used against you without your knowledge. (Never mind embarrassing videos showing your lack of hygiene in the bathroom.) You may never know why you were rejected for a job or your kid didn’t get into a particular school.

Hypothetically speaking, you might be pulled over on the highway in the middle of the night by an officer who claims you were dallying in the passing lane. Unbeknownst to you, the real reason was that your plate was flagged by a license plate reader (LPR) camera, which was relying on an algorithm that detected that an individual who made phone calls to Eastern Europe and conducted Web searches for gun clubs is associated with that plate number.

The police officer lets you go on your way, but the next week, late at night, the same thing happens. And then the week after that, and, well, you get the picture.

So even if you never do anything wrong, never jaywalk or get a parking ticket, the information collected could be used against you, and you would be none the wiser. Catching terrorists is a laudable aim of such technological surveillance, and you might trust the Obama administration that such surveillance will never be misused. But what about the next administration?

Should people associated with the Tea Party get extra scrutiny from the IRS? Should people who are against gun control be monitored by state police? Should anti-war activists have their search history scrutinized by the NSA?

There are technological ways to limit the intrusion of such technology and prevent it from diminishing our privacy and freedoms, but it requires extra work. Programmers can limit the scope and fine tune communications monitoring software, and government officials could submit to more oversight by courts that are not secret.

But in a society where most of us are scrutinized on camera already — with the bathroom soon to come — it may be too late to put the digital genie back in the bottle.

By John R. Quain / FoxNews.com

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

Egyptian Pres. Morsi Appoints Member of Al Qaeda that Massacred European Tourists in Luxor

June 22, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

AdelLast year Egyptian President Morsi freed one of the monsters behind the Luxor Massacre. Now he has appointed another member of The Islamic Group, Adel Mohammed al-Khayat as the Governor of Luxor.

Egypt’s tourism minister resigned a day after President Mohamed Morsi appointed the new governor to Luxor province.

Hesham Zazou said on Wednesday he “couldn’t continue in the role of tourism minister” after the appointment of Adel al-Khayat.

Following are witness accounts of the day that Adel Mohammed al-Khayat and his Islamic terrorist comrades murdered 58 tourists.

“As they ran past a Japanese tourist, she said, one of the men fired into the woman’s face from a range of about 15 inches.” The gunmen “took all the young women, the girls, and disappeared with them. I don’t know where they went with the women, but they hurt them. We could hear screams of pain,” Dousse said.

Among the horrors, the marauders cut off the ears and noses of several of their victims. A note praising Islam was found inside one disemboweled body.

The foreign dead included 31 Swiss, 10 Japanese, five Germans, four Britons, one child (a Bulgarian), a Colombian and a French citizen. The Japanese victims were four newlywed couples and an elderly couple on their second honeymoon.

Witnesses told how the terrorists methodically executed the European tourists. Some were forced to kneel before being shot, while others were stabbed to death.

Little Shaunnah, her mum and gran, all from Ripponden, West Yorks, died alongside fellow Brits George Wigham, 69, and wife Ivy, 71, of Swanley, Kent, and Londoner Sylvia Wilder, 26.

Shaunnah_Turner

Shaunnah Turner, 5 Years Old, Murdered by Muslim terrorists at Luxor

Shaunnah Turner’ father, ’ Richard, spoke of his murdered daughter  after the horror: “In a crowd she would shine. She was really beautiful. She had an impish charm that could win anybody over.”

A member of the movement whose gunmen killed 58 foreigners at a temple in Luxor in 1997 was sworn in by Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi on Monday as governor of the vital tourist region.

Adel Mohammed al-Khayat, who now represents the Building and Development Party, the political wing of the al-Gamaa al-Islamiya movement.

‘No to the terrorist governor!’ read a placard at a demonstration by dozens of tourism workers who protested outside the governor’s office in Luxor.

Khayat, then in his mid-40s, was a leader of al-Gamaa al-Islamiya in another province when, on Nov. 17, 1997, six young men from the group shot their way into the Temple of Hatshepsut in Luxor’s Valley of the Queens.

The attack was part of a broader campaign by the group, at that time linked to al Qaeda, to cripple tourism revenues for the government of then-president Hosni Mubarak. Of the 62 people killed in the next hour, 58 were foreign tourists, more than half of them Swiss and the rest Japanese, British, German and Colombian.

The gunmen, reported to have trained at al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan, committed suicide.

PUBLIUS

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

White House, IRS Hid Media Requests in Red Tape

June 20, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

obama_irsEven as the freshly minted Obama administration was pledging a “new era of open government” in 2009, officials were quietly adding new rules that had the potential to slow down public requests for documents.

Those rules, detailed in memos reviewed by FoxNews.com, could even trip up present-day efforts to dig into the IRS’ practice of targeting conservative groups. The rules detailed in the memos largely emanated from the Treasury Department and, specifically, the IRS.

“It would seem to repudiate this notion that this is going to be the most transparent government in history,” said Dan Epstein, executive director of Cause of Action, the group that first obtained the memos.

“It would seem to repudiate this notion that this is going to be the most transparent government in history.” – Dan Epstein, director of Cause of Action

The memos follow reports about the administration’s use of private email accounts, and coincide with ongoing debate about government transparency — particularly with recent disclosures about widespread surveillance programs.

Epstein said the document request procedures are “troubling” since the media are “really concerned about the limits of government power.”

According to the documents, the Treasury Department in 2009 set up an additional review for requests involving “sensitive information,” which covered a broad range of items. The White House sometimes got involved, slowing down the process. The IRS also acknowledged having another review process for requests from “major media,” but not for requests from private individuals.

Members of the media often try to obtain documents not readily available by citing a law known as the Freedom of Information Act. The Treasury Department, though, in late 2009 erected speed bumps for some so-called FOIA requests.

The rules were detailed in a November 2010 memo and report sent from the Treasury inspector general to Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa.

The documents showed the Treasury Department set up an additional “formal level of review” for requests for “sensitive information.” This category would cover everything from emails to memos to calendars to travel logs for top department officials, legal advisers, senior advisers and others.

Once a request was deemed “sensitive,” it would then go before a “review committee,” made up of officials from several Treasury offices.

Further, the document said a special report would be prepared for IRS requests from “major media.” This covers requests from traditional news media as well as bloggers, and according to the report covered information that “was likely to attract news media or congressional interest, involved large dollar amounts, or involved unique or novel issues.”

This report would then be sent to a higher-up in the division who decided whether the material should be disclosed.

The report repeatedly said that, in most cases, political appointees were not involved in these decisions, and that the agencies have no procedures to allow that.

But Epstein said these rules could cause problems as Congress and the media dig deeper into the origin of the IRS practice of singling out conservative groups for additional scrutiny.

He pointed to another memo, dated April 15, 2009, from then-White House Counsel Greg Craig that urged “executive agencies” to consult with his office “on all document requests that may involve documents with White House equities.” Craig said this pertains to everything from FOIA requests to congressional requests to subpoenas.

This practice apparently dates back to 1993. The Treasury IG memo cited this, and described the White House involvement as “minimal and limited.” However, the report also said the White House involvement “was responsible in several cases for adding a significant processing delay,” which in Treasury’s case slowed them down.

“It actually is heavily ironic in the realm of transparency,” Epstein said.

He pointed to edicts and memos early on in the first term of the administration stressing transparency. Obama issued a January 2009 directive calling for an “unprecedented level of openness.”

Attorney General Eric Holder in March 2009 directed all Executive Branch departments to use a “presumption of openness” when dealing with FOIA requests.

To that end, the administration has instituted several other transparency initiatives. It has followed through on requiring Cabinet secretaries to hold Internet town hall discussions, set up a comprehensive website to track stimulus spending, and set up a national declassification center.

By Judson Berger / Published June 20, 2013 / FoxNews.com

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

Find From Era of King David May Confirm Old Testament Text

June 20, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

Tropper-pillarA carved pillar discovered near Bethlehem may be linked to the Biblical King of Kings, David himself, or perhaps validate the scope of wise Solomon’s majestic kingdom.

If they ever get around to digging it up, that is.

Israeli tour guide Binyamin Tropper, who thought he was the first to discover the major historical artifact, was astonished to find out that authorities had known about the pillar for decades — and had been keeping it a secret all that time.

‘The Israeli Antiquities Authority told him, that’s great, now shut up.’ – Binyamin Tropper

“When I realized the significance of the pillar, I told my boss who spoke with the Israeli Antiquities Authority (IAA),” Tropper, who works at the educational field school at Kibbutz Kfar Etzion, told FoxNews.com. “The IAA then told him, ‘that’s great, now shut up.'”

Tropper may have stumbled across further proof of the real-life world behind the Biblical stories related in the Old Testament. The 2,800-year-old stone pillar could help locate those legends on a map, archaeologists say, and connect the modern country of Israel with the historical roots of Judaism.

But due to the complexities of Arab-Israeli relations, the find is being ignored, experts say, hushed up to avoid a major political battle over centuries of debate concerning who has the more legitimate claim to the Holy Land.

“As the site is located in the West Bank, not within the official borders of Israel, it is more problematic to excavate there than inside Israel,” Yosef Garfinkel, a professor of archeology at Hebrew University who inspected the site, explained to FoxNews.com.

In a carefully worded statement to FoxNews.com, the IAA acknowledged the discovery of the pillar but would not discuss the matter further, expressing concern over the unavoidable relationship between archeology and the Middle East conflict.

“The complex reality in Israel sometimes brings the scholarly discipline of archaeology in contact with political issues regarding the subject of historical roots and rights,” the IAA told FoxNews.com in an email. “When a significant archaeological discovery requires additional research, the IAA sees that this is carried out. Such is the case in this issue: the IAA is operating in effort to carry out a full excavation of the site, which will enable thorough study of the findings and their disclosure in both popular and scholarly publications.”

Tropper defied the IAA’s request to stay mum on his discovery, however; he believes it’s worth the political headache a proper excavation would provoke.

Tropper explained that in the last 20-30 years, an internal debate in Israel has ensued over the size and importance of King David’s kingdom as described in the Bible. This pillar’s design, he says, is consistent with the time period of the First Temple and would help provide concrete evidence of the Judean king’s existence in Israel.

“This pillar weighs (approximately) five tons, so you can’t move it,” Tropper said. “Because it is so big, we know it must belong to this location.”

King Solomon is credited with building the First Temple as detailed in the Old Testament. A place of worship for biblical Jews, it was said to be destroyed by the Babylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar II in 587 BCE.

Garfinkel told the Times of Israel that the pillar marks the entrance to a water tunnel of the First Temple period. The similar Siloam Tunnel in Jerusalem is near the modern-day Arab neighborhood of Silwan and is thought to be a project of the biblical king Hezekiah, used as a way to channel water into the city before the Assyrian siege in the 8th century, according to the Book of Kings.

While Tropper is reluctant to reveal the exact location of the pillar in order to prevent attracting antiquity thieves, he admits the find is all the more controversial as it currently rests on privately owned land belonging to a Palestinian.

“I think the (Arabs in the nearby town) know of the find, but they do not know how important it is,” Tropper told FoxNews.com. He said opening up the site for excavation would benefit the nearby Arab-owned orchard tremendously.

“There is a spring there that if we excavate will open up and the Arabs would have the water back and it will bring them money,” explained Tropper.

Tropper hopes that with time, the IAA will realize the importance of the pillar and order an excavation.

“We understand that it is problematic and a little complicated,” Tropper said. “This is an important place and it is our story so we need to dig.”

By Sasha Bogursky, Jeremy A. Kaplan / Published June 20, 2013 / FoxNews

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

Columbia U. Cons: Ivy League Social Work Program Run by Felons

June 19, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

BoudinIn the hallowed halls of Columbia University, a nest of ex-cons — who have served time for murder, attempted murder, robbery and assault — hold court on their unique brand of social justice for admiring students enrolled in the school’s social work program, a FoxNews.com investigation has found.

The ex-cons work for or with the Criminal Justice Initiative (CJI), co-founded in 2009 by former Weather Underground operative and Columbia adjunct professor Kathy Boudin, who pleaded guilty to felony murder for her role in an infamous 1981 armed robbery that left two police officers and a security guard dead. And while that case was well-publicized, the group is hardly upfront about the “practical experience” of Boudin and others associated with the CJI.

A description on the program’s website says it is “situated inside” Columbia, and a part of the school’s “Social Intervention Group,” a research center within the Columbia University School of Social Work. It lists among its goals helping to forge a solution for “a central social crisis of our time, mass incarceration.” The program holds events and conducts research as part of “an interdisciplinary project built around a model of community collaboration” that “seeks to increase the number of skilled practitioners, policy-makers and researchers who can advance the fields of re-entry and incarceration across all disciplines.”

“It’s terrible that she has murderers working with her at a school.” – John Hanchar, brother-in-law of slain Nyack Police Officer Edward O’ Grady

But students and parents who shell out more than $43,000 in annual tuition and fees might be hard-pressed to uncover the fact that former inmates are running the CJI. Outside of a vague reference to Boudin and Cheryl Wilkins being “part of a community of people who have returned from prison,” there is no information about their criminal pasts. Boudin’s school directory bio, for example, makes no mention of her time in prison. Several other CJI faculty, program members and associates have similarly disturbing backgrounds.

Wilkins, co-director of the CJI, is listed in the Columbia School of Social Work adjunct faculty directory as a “research scientist” and “Associate Director for the Criminal Justice Initiative. She was convicted for her role in a 1996 gunpoint hijacking of a Federal Express truck in Harlem, in which she served as the getaway driver. Wilkins served a 12-year sentence for robbery and assault at Bayview Correctional Facility in Manhattan.

But Wilkins’ school biography page makes no mention of her time in jail. Wilkins is also listed as staff associate at Columbia Law School’s Center for Institutional and Social Change, though that bio also neglects any mention of her prison time. According to the bio, Wilkins works with teens who have incarcerated parents and is an adjunct lecturer at Columbia, where she often discusses topics concerning the “need of families and communities affected by mass incarceration.”

Denise Blackwell, a “research assistant” under the Social Intervention Group, the parent/umbrella group of the Criminal Justice Initiative, was paroled in 2003 after serving 10 years in prison on an attempted second-degree murder conviction for her role in a Brooklyn holdup in which three drug dealers were killed. According to reports of her 1991 arrest, Blackwell knew the three men and “orchestrated” the robbery.

“By prearrangement, she let the boys in to stick up the place,” a New York Police Department lieutenant was quoted as saying at the time. Blackwell’s son, Mack Moton, who was 15 at the time, was tried as an adult and convicted of second-degree murder. He was sentenced to 32 years to life, and is being held in Sing Sing Correctional Facility, in Ossining, N.Y.

Mika’il DeVeaux was one of the keynote speakers for the CJI’s “Removing the Bars” Conference in 2012. But his bio in the conference program failed to mention the 24-year stint he served in Westchester County for second-degree murder and his subsequent parole in 2003, or that he’s co-director of a non-profit with Boudin called Citizens Against Recidivism. Instead, the bio simply says DeVeaux “has more than three decades of experience working with men incarcerated in New York State maximum security prisons and many who have been released following periods of confinement.”

Repeated requests for comment from Boudin placed through Columbia were not returned, but the school responded with a statement.

“There are approximately 1.6 million people in the nation’s prisons and jails and 7 million American children with a parent who is either incarcerated, on parole, or on probation,” read the statement. “The Criminal Justice Initiative focuses on how the social work profession can best address the educational and human needs of individuals, children, families and communities affected by incarceration.”

Requests for comment were also sent to officials at CJI, including Wilkins and Blackwell.

Critics can’t understand why convicted criminals with violent pasts should hold such prestigious positions at the vaunted school.

“I am perplexed by Columbia administrators’ plot to commission notorious villains as mentors to the rising generation of Americans,” Josiah Ryan, editor-in-chief for education advocacy blog Campus Reform, told FoxNews.com. “Columbia administrators should send a letter to parents informing them that many of the professors who will teach their children are unable to pass a basic criminal background check.”

Boudin was a member of radical leftist group the Weather Underground, which was responsible for numerous bombings in the 1960s and 1970s, including ones at the Pentagon, Capitol Building and New York’s police headquarters. The group was co-founded by William Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn, who themselves went on to long careers in academia in Chicago. The couple was appointed the legal guardians of Boudin’s son while she was in prison and has been linked to the early days of President Obama’s political career.

Ayers and his wife were even in attendance for CJI’s “Removing the Bars” conference in 2012.

“Hungout with Angela Davis, Bill and Bernadine Ayers, Kathy Boudin & others! Wow #removingbars #removingthebars We had a great kickoff event,” tweeted Ronin Davis, then head of the Criminal Justice Caucus, a CJI student-leadership group.

The group holds frequent on-campus events, where a common theme is a curious vision of prison reform that seems not to include punishment. Some of the panel discussions at these events include: “How do we DE-carcerate?” and “Society’s Perceptions of the Formerly Incarcerated.”

Last year, CJI held a workshop titled, “No One Wants to Work With Me: Working with Difficult Populations,” where one of the key points discussed was the “misconceptions and judgments of people labeled registered sex offenders.”

The program’s ties to the Weather Underground are deep. In addition to Boudin’s involvement and the visit from Ayers and Dohrn, other former high-level members of the Weather Underground were invited to speak at CJI events. They included Russell Neufeld, who went on to become an anti-death penalty attorney, and Laura Whitehorn, who spoke at an October 2011 called the “Troy Davis Teach-in.”

In 1981, a 38-year-old Boudin, along with several other members of the Weather Underground and the Black Liberation Army, attempted to rob a Brink’s armored truck in Nanuet, N.Y. The two police officers and the security guard were killed in a shootout during the attempted heist, and, although Boudin did not fire any weapons, her role as getaway driver earned her a sentence of 20 years to life. She was paroled in August 2003.

Boudin’s work in prison education dates back to her stint at the Bedford Hills Correctional Facility in New York. She took part in a 2001 research study on the subject that also included as participants former Black Panther and one-time FBI most-wanted fugitive Angela Davis and Donna Hylton, who served 25 years in prison for her part in the 1985 torture and murder of a Long Island real-estate broker whose decomposing body was found stuffed in a foot locker. That study, and her previous experience with the Weather Underground, appears to have laid the groundwork for her reinvention as an academic specializing in working for — and with — violent criminals.

John Hanchar, brother-in-law of Nyack Police Officer Edward O’ Grady, who was killed in the Brink’s robbery, told FoxNews.com it is distressing to see Boudin and other violent criminals treated like academic superstars.

“That’s the worst thing I could have heard,” Hanchar said. “My sister had three children and she raised them into good people and what [Boudin] did was take their father from them.

“It’s terrible that she has murderers working with her at a school,” he continued. “I could see if they had someone speak who committed robbery and served their time, but murderers? It’s not right.”

By Perry Chiaramonte  /  June 19, 2013 / FoxNews.com

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

Democrat Senator ‘abandons big government plantation’ to join GOP

June 18, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

Elbert_GulloryLouisiana State Senator Elbert Gullory — formerly a lifelong Democrat — made a surprising and enthusiastic announcement. The African-American Senator is walking away from the Democrats to join the GOP. After making the announcement, Sen. Gullory released this video explaining his unique decision.

“I’m Elbert Lee Guillory, the senator for the 24th district right here in beautiful Louisiana.  Recently I made what many are referring to as a bold decision to switch my party affiliation to the Republican Party.  I wanted to take a moment to explain why I chose to become a Republican and also to explain why I don’t think it was a bold decision at all.  It is the right decision.  Not only for me, but for all my brothers and sisters in the black community.  You see, in recent history, the Democrat Party created the illusion that their agenda and their policies are what’s best for black people.

Somehow it’s been forgotten the Republican Party, founded in 1854 as an abolitionist movement with one simple creed that slavery is a violation of the rights of man.  Fred ache Douglass called Republicans the party of freedom add progress. And the first Republican President was Lincoln, the uh a Thor of the emancipation proclamation.  It was Republicans who offered the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments giving former slaves citizenship, voting rights and drew process of law.  The Democrats, on the other hand, with the party of Jim Crow, it was Democrats who defended the rights of slaves on us. It was the Republican president Dwight Eisenhower who champions the Civil Rights Act of 1957, but it was the Democrats in the Senate who filibustered the bill.

At the heart of liberalism is the idea that only a great and powerful big government can be the benefactor of social justice for all Americans.  But the left is only concerned with one thing:  Control, and they guess guise in control as charity. Programs such as welfare, these programs aren’t designed to lift black Americans out of poverty.  They were always intended as a mechanism for politicians to control the black community.  The idea that blacks or anyone, for that matter, need the government to get ahead in life is despicable.

And even or important, this idea is a failure.  Our communities are just as poor as they have always been.  Our schools continue to fail children, our prisons are filled with young black men, who should be at home, being fathers.  Our self-initiative and our several relicense have been sacrificed in exchange for allegiance to our overseers.  Who control us by making us dependent on them.  Sometime I wonder if the word freedom is tossed around so frequently in our society that it has become a cliche.  The idea of freedom is complex and it’s all-encompassing.  It’s the idea that the economy must remain free of government persuasion.  It’s the idea that the press must operate without government intrusion.  It’s the idea that e-mails and phone records of Americans should remain free from government search and seizure.  It’s the idea that parents must be the decision-makers in regards to their children’s education, not shop government bureaucrat.  But most importantly, it is the idea that the individual must be free to pursue his or her own happiness, free from government dependence and free from government control, because to be truly free is to be reliant on no one, other than the author of our destiny.

These are the ideas at the core of Republican party and it is why I am a Republican.  So my brothers and sisters of the American community, please join with me today in abandoning the government plantation and the party of disappointment.”

PUBLIUS

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

GOP Strikes Back at Voter ID Ruling

June 18, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

Repuvoter_idblican lawmakers are moving quickly to try and allow states to require proof of citizenship for a voter registration form after the Supreme Court rejected an Arizona law that did just that.

In a blow to Arizona’s efforts to toughen its voter ID standards, the high court on Monday ruled 7-2 that states could not unilaterally require would-be voters to prove citizenship in order to use a federal registration form. The court ruled that because the federal “Motor Voter” registration law — which created the form — doesn’t require that documentation, Arizona could not on its own demand it.

In response, Sens. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and David Vitter, R-La., announced an amendment to the Senate immigration overhaul that would explicitly allow states to impose those requirements.

In a statement, Cruz said the Supreme Court ruling leaves a “hole in federal law” that must be addressed.

“This encourages voter fraud and we must ensure that our elections are fair and accurately reflect the will of our citizens,” he said.

The amendment would adjust the federal law so that states would be able to require proof of citizenship in order to complete any federal voter registration form.

On the House, side, Rep. Matt Salmon, R-Ariz., also plans to introduce a separate bill on Tuesday to change the law in a similar fashion. His bill would grant states the authority to ask for additional documents to prove citizenship.

Meanwhile, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., is pushing an amendment of his own that would ensure immigrants given visas or legal status under the immigration overhaul cannot vote in federal elections until they become citizens. His amendment would also allow states to check citizenship before allowing them to register to vote.

The high court justices cited the existing federal law in their ruling against Arizona’s voter ID measure.

Federal law “precludes Arizona from requiring a federal form applicant to submit information beyond that required by the form itself,” Justice Antonia Scalia wrote for the court’s majority.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals earlier said that the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, which doesn’t require such documentation, trumps Arizona’s Proposition 200 passed in 2004.

Arizona appealed that decision to the Supreme Court, and the high court agreed.

“Today’s decision sends a strong message that states cannot block their citizens from registering to vote by superimposing burdensome paperwork requirements on top of federal law,” said Nina Perales, vice president of litigation for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and lead counsel for the voters who challenged Proposition 200.

“The Supreme Court has affirmed that all U.S. citizens have the right to register to vote using the national postcard, regardless of the state in which they live,” she said.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented from the court’s ruling.

The Constitution “authorizes states to determine the qualifications of voters in federal elections, which necessarily includes the related power to determine whether those qualifications are satisfied,” Thomas said in his dissent.

The federal “motor voter” law, enacted in 1993 to expand voter registration, requires states to offer voter registration when a resident applies for a driver’s license or certain benefits. Another provision of that law — the one at issue before the court — requires states to allow would-be voters to fill out mail-in registration cards and swear they are citizens under penalty of perjury, but it doesn’t require them to show proof. Under Proposition 200, Arizona officials require an Arizona driver’s license issued after 1996, a U.S. birth certificate, a passport or other similar document, or the state will reject the federal registration application form.

While the court was clear in stating that states cannot add additional identification requirements to the federal forms on their own, it was also clear that the same actions can be taken by state governments if they get the approval of the federal government and the federal courts.

Arizona can ask the federal government to include the extra documents as a state-specific requirement, Scalia said, and take any decision made by the government on that request back to court.  Other states have already done so, Scalia said.

Published June 18, 2013 / FoxNews.com / The Associated Press contributed to this report.

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

Supreme Court: Arizona Law Requiring Citizenship Proof for Voters is Illegal

June 17, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

supreme_courtWASHINGTON –  The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states cannot require would-be voters to prove they are U.S. citizens before using a federal registration system designed to make signing up easier.

The justices voted 7-2 to throw out Arizona’s voter-approved requirement that prospective voters document their U.S. citizenship in order to use a registration form produced under the federal “Motor Voter” voter registration law.

Federal law “precludes Arizona from requiring a federal form applicant to submit information beyond that required by the form itself,” Justice Antonia Scalia wrote for the court’s majority.

The court was considering the legality of Arizona’s requirement that prospective voters document their U.S. citizenship in order to use a registration form produced under the federal “motor voter” registration law. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, which doesn’t require such documentation, trumps Arizona’s Proposition 200 passed in 2004.

Arizona appealed that decision to the Supreme Court.

The case focuses on Arizona, which has tangled frequently with the federal government over immigration issues involving the Mexican border. But it has broader implications because four other states — Alabama, Georgia, Kansas and Tennessee — have similar requirements, and 12 other states are contemplating such legislation.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented from the court’s ruling.

The Constitution “authorizes states to determine the qualifications of voters in federal elections, which necessarily includes the related power to determine whether those qualifications are satisfied,” Thomas said in his dissent.

Opponents of Arizona’s law see it as an attack on vulnerable voter groups such as minorities, immigrants and the elderly. They say they’ve counted more than 31,000 potentially legal voters in Arizona who easily could have registered before Proposition 200 but were blocked initially by the law in the 20 months after it passed in 2004. They say about 20 percent of those thwarted were Latino.

But Arizona officials say they should be able to pass laws to stop illegal immigrants and other noncitizens from getting on their voting rolls. The Arizona voting law was part of a package that also denied some government benefits to illegal immigrants and required Arizonans to show identification before voting.

The federal “motor voter” law, enacted in 1993 to expand voter registration, requires states to offer voter registration when a resident applies for a driver’s license or certain benefits. Another provision of that law — the one at issue before the court — requires states to allow would-be voters to fill out mail-in registration cards and swear they are citizens under penalty of perjury, but it doesn’t require them to show proof. Under Proposition 200, Arizona officials require an Arizona driver’s license issued after 1996, a U.S. birth certificate, a passport or other similar document, or the state will reject the federal registration application form.

Arizona can ask the federal government to include the extra documents as a state-specific requirement, Scalia said, and take any decision made by the government on that request back to court.

Published June 17, 2013 / Associated Press

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

IRS Supervisor in DC Scrutinized Tea Party Cases

June 16, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

irs_troubleWASHINGTON –  An Internal Revenue Service supervisor in Washington says she was personally involved in scrutinizing some of the earliest applications from tea party groups seeking tax-exempt status, including some requests that languished for more than a year without action.

Holly Paz, who until recently was a top deputy in the division that handles applications for tax-exempt status, told congressional investigators she reviewed 20 to 30 applications. Her assertion contradicts initial claims by the agency that a small group of agents working in an office in Cincinnati were solely responsible for mishandling the applications.

Paz, however, provided no evidence that senior IRS officials ordered agents to target conservative groups or that anyone in the Obama administration outside the IRS was involved.

Instead, Paz described an agency in which IRS supervisors in Washington worked closely with agents in the field but didn’t fully understand what those agents were doing. Paz said agents in Cincinnati openly talked about handling “tea party” cases, but she thought the term was merely shorthand for all applications from groups that were politically active — conservative and liberal.

Paz said dozens of tea party applications sat untouched for more than a year while field agents waited for guidance from Washington on how to handle them. At the time, she said, Washington officials thought the agents in Cincinnati were processing the cases.

Paz was among the first IRS employees to be interviewed as part of a joint investigation by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee.

Congressional investigators have interviewed at least six IRS employees as part of their inquiry. The Associated Press has reviewed transcripts from three interviews — with Paz and with two agents, Gary Muthert and Elizabeth Hofacre, from the Cincinnati office.

The IRS declined comment for this story.

A yearlong audit by the agency’s inspector general found that IRS agents had improperly targeted conservative political groups for additional and sometimes onerous scrutiny when those groups applied for tax-exempt status.

The audit found no evidence that Washington officials ordered or authorized the targeting. But the IRS watchdog blamed ineffective management by senior IRS officials for allowing it to continue for nearly two years during the 2010 and 2012 elections.

Since the revelations became public last month, much of the agency’s leadership has been replaced and the Justice Department has started a criminal investigation. Both Paz and her supervisor, Lois Lerner, who headed the division that handles applications for tax-exempt status, have been replaced.

Agency officials told congressional aides that Lerner was placed on administrative leave. They did not disclose the status Paz, other than to say she was replaced June 7.

Lerner is the IRS official who first disclosed the targeting at a legal conference May 10. That day, she told The AP: “It’s the line people that did it without talking to managers. They’re IRS workers, they’re revenue agents.”

On May 22 — the day after Paz was interviewed by investigators — Lerner refused to answer questions from lawmakers at a congressional hearing, citing her Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate herself.

Paz told congressional investigators that an IRS agent in Cincinnati flagged the first tea party case in February 2010. The agent forwarded the application to a manager because it appeared to be politically sensitive, Paz said. The manager informed Paz, who said she had the application assigned to a legal expert in Washington.

At the time, Paz headed a technical unit in Washington that provided guidance to agents who screened applications for tax-exempt status. The agents worked primarily in Cincinnati. One of their tasks was to determine the applicant groups’ level of political activity.

IRS regulations say tax-exempt social welfare organizations may engage in some political activity but their primary mission cannot be influencing the outcome of elections. It is up to the IRS to make that determination.

“It’s very fact-and-circumstance intensive. So it’s a difficult issue,” Paz told investigators.

“Oftentimes what we will do, and what we did here, is we’ll transfer it to (the technical unit), get someone who’s well-versed on that area of the law working the case so they can see what the issues are,” Paz said. “The goal with that is ultimately to develop some guidance or a tool that can be given to folks in (the Cincinnati office) to help them in working the cases themselves.”

By the fall of 2010, the legal expert in Washington, Carter Hull, was working on about 40 applications, Paz said. A little more than half had “tea party” in the name, she said.

IRS agents in Cincinnati were singling out groups for extra scrutiny if their applications included the words “tea party,” “patriots” or “9-12 project,” according to the inspector general’s report. Paz said she didn’t learn that agents were targeting groups based on those terms until June 2011, about the time Lerner first ordered agents to change the criteria.

Paz said an IRS supervisor in Cincinnati had commonly referred to the applications as “tea party” cases. But, Paz said, she thought that was simply shorthand for any application that included political activity.

“Since the first case that came up to Washington happened to have that name, it appeared to me that’s why they were calling it that as a shorthand,” Paz told congressional investigators.

Paz said she didn’t think the agents in Cincinnati were politically motivated.

“My impression, based on, you know, this instance and other instances in the office is that because they are so apolitical, they are not as sensitive as we would like them to be as to how things might appear,” Paz said.

“Many of these employees have been with the IRS for decades and were used to a world where how they talked about things internally was not something that would be public or that anyone would be interested in,” Paz added. “So I don’t think they thought much about how it would appear to others. They knew what they meant and that was sort of good enough for them.”

For several months in 2010, Hull worked closely with Hofacre, the agent in Cincinnati, to review the tea party cases, Paz said. In Hofacre’s interview, she complained that Hull micromanaged her work.

Hofacre left for a different IRS job in October 2010 and was replaced by an agent whose name was blacked out in the transcript. Paz said the new agent sat on the tea party applications for more than a year because he was waiting on guidance from Washington on how to proceed. Officials in Washington, however, thought the agents in Cincinnati were still processing the cases, she said.

As a result, many applications languished for more than a year, which, the inspector general said, hurt the groups’ ability to raise money.

“I knew they were waiting for guidance,” Paz said. “I did not know that they were not working the cases because what had been done previously was, they were working the cases in consultation with Washington. And I was under the impression that that was continuing.”

Hull was to be interviewed by congressional investigators on Friday. Efforts to reach Hull and Paz for comment were unsuccessful.

In all, agents singled out 298 applications for additional scrutiny because the groups appeared to be involved in political activity, the inspector general’s report said. But IRS agents in Cincinnati weren’t given adequate training on how to handle the cases until May 2012, the report said.

Before the training, only six applications had been approved. Afterward, an additional 102 applications were approved by December 2012, the report said.

Of those 102 applications, 29 involved tea party, patriots, or 9-12 organizations, the report said. Many applications are still awaiting action. None has been rejected, according to the IRS.

Published June 16, 2013 / Associated Press

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

‘Jihad’ Graffiti by Interstate 95 Sparks Outrage

June 16, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

JihadDrivers traveling along I-95 in Delray Beach, Fla., couldn’t miss it.

The word JIHAD spray-painted in bold black lettering, nearly 20-feet high, across a wall along the northbound lanes of the interstate.

The Arabic word means, among other definitions, “Holy War.”

And that’s almost what happened between two motorists whose verbal altercation over the graffiti was captured on video Saturday. Here’s how WPEC-TV described the scene:

CBS 12’s Karl Man was interviewing Damon Rosen about the jihad spray painted message, something that disgusted him, that’s when an unidentified man left his car and just like that it was on.

Things quickly escalated, the unknown man who did not oppose the jihad message shifted his shouting to a crowd of bystanders.

“You’re all brainwashed!”

The group of onlookers hurling profanity back at the man.

“You’re going to lose your job bit–!”

Rosen then jumping in with his own choice language…

“Take that shi– back to the Muslim land,” screamed Rosen. […]

The man who did not see the big deal about the jihad message made one last statement to those nearby before he sped off.

“Just for the record there are no fu–ing terrorists,” he screamed.Rosen came back to where we were before to finish the interview; he laid out why the spray paint sign irked him so much and why he stopped to get a closer look.

Here’s the compelling clip of the altercation from WPEC-TV:

Florida Highway Patrol troopers came out Saturday evening to investigate the graffiti, finding one can of spray paint nearby that may be linked to the crime, WPTV reported.

The graffiti is now gone from the wall.

Jun. 16, 2013 / Dave Urbanski

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

Is Obama Targeting LDS Canneries?

June 14, 2013 By Editor 147 Comments

Enoch_Adam_ad

LDS_Temple_TargetThe Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS or Mormon) has a network of food canning and distribution centers around the nation, where volunteer church members donate time to can food grown on the church’s farms and orchards or purchased from other sources. The purpose of this network of canneries is to provide food to those who have been caught in disasters or just caught short by an ever-declining national economy. Millions of pounds of food are prepared for distribution annually in the LDS canneries.

LDS_Cannery_1Recently, we have heard rumblings that the federal government has been paying very close attention to the church’s cannery network and that the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration have been imposing increasingly burdensome regulations and requirements on the LDS canneries. Despite the cutting-edge technologies and state-of-the-art equipment at these ‘clean-room’ quality facilities, federal agencies have been hitting the LDS church with improvised fines for “violations” they find during surprise inspections. Reports of an FBI “raid” at one facility where agents demanded a list of the names of the cannery’s patrons was especially troublesome.

LDS_Cannery_2Indeed, a muffled discussion within the LDS canning network has confirmed all of these abuses, but the LDS Church has refused to report the abuses openly, wishing to avoid a ‘Tea Party’ type of confrontation with the federal government–although the Church has almost certainly been targeted by the Administration in the same manner as other independent-thinking groups.

Accounts confirm that in fact, the LDS Church is shutting down all of its canning facilities east of the Mississippi River, and some in the west as well. These units will cease canning operations by the end of this month, and will only make prepackaged items available to patrons thereafter.

Reagan_Ogden_CanneryWhy is the federal government going after the LDS Church? There are a number of reasons that come to mind. Obama’s nemesis in the general election was a prominent member of the LDS Church. Members of the church tend to vote in a conservative block. The LDS Church teaches the worship of God and His Son Jesus Christ, independence, morality, education, and family and traditional values–all things that are abhorrent to the current administration, which has proven its willingness to abuse its authority to go after those with whom it disagrees (Romney supporters, patriotic groups, conservatives, Christians, etc.).

J.L. Thompson is an LDS/Christian writer, and holds a Juris Doctor degree. He is Editor-in-Chief of Scottsdale Multimedia, Inc., a leading ghostwriting firm.  Volume One of his new novel series “The Coming Flood” has just been released, titled Enoch in the City of Adam. Visit J.L. Thompson on Facebook

Readers may be interested in these stories as well:

The Tree of Liberty is Dying—Is Civil War Coming?

Mormons and Progressivism: United Order vs. Socialism

The “Mormon Effect”

Mormons and Progressivism: United Order vs. Socialism

The Spirit of Antichrist Permeates Our Nation

This Easter Morning, Remember

What ‘NOAH’ Movie Gets Wrong, and Right

Christians: Marked For Extinction?

Harry Reid: Worst Human On Earth

British Court Dismisses Case Against LDS Church President

 

Advertisers

 Let Scottsdale Multimedia write your book. The nation’s premier ghostwriters.>>

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

FBI Director Rattled Over IRS, Surveillance and Benghazi Scandals

June 13, 2013 By Editor Leave a Comment

Robert_MuellerThe country’s top investigator seemed to be in the dark Thursday when pressed to provide details of the IRS investigation into the tax agency’s targeting of Tea Party and conservative groups.Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, seemed to rattle FBI Director Robert Mueller for not knowing the specifics surrounding the IRS probe.“You’ve had a month now to investigate,” Jordan said. “This has been the biggest story in the country and you can’t even tell me who the lead investigator is. You can’t tell me the actions the inspector general took which are not typically how investigations are done. You can’t tell me if that’s appropriate or not. This is not speculation. This is what happened.”

Mueller repeatedly declined to answer Jordan’s questions, saying he couldn’t because the investigation was ongoing or that he’d have to get back to the lawmakers with answers.

When Jordan asked again,” Can you tell me who the lead investigator is?” Mueller responded, “Off the top of my head, no.”

The day didn’t go much better for the outgoing FBI chief. He was grilled for hours by lawmakers on a number of different topics, including the federal government’s surveillance programs, the Benghazi scandal and the Boston Marathon bombings.

Mueller defended the government’s collection of millions of U.S. phone records, emails and other information as vital to the nation’s national security.

Early in the hearing, Mueller tried to make the case for the National Security Agency surveillance programs and said that law enforcement “must stay a step ahead of criminals and terrorists” while still heeding the civil liberties of Americans.

Mueller, who is stepping down from his post in September, said that if the metadata collection program had been in place before the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, they would have identified one of the 9/11 hijackers in San Diego and most likely derailed the plot.

But Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. said he was “not persuaded that the argument makes it OK to collect information on every call,” adding, that by Mueller’s interpretation, it would be “anything and everything goes” situation.

Mueller also testified that the government’s controversial surveillance programs that recently surfaced complied “in full with U.S. law and with basic rights guaranteed under the Constitution.”
The Justice Department revealed last month that it had secretly gathered emails of Fox News correspondent James Rosen and phone records of The Associated Press in an effort to crack down on leakers of classified information.

The department later acknowledged that Attorney General Eric Holder was on board with a search warrant for Rosen’s personal emails, obtained after federal officials accused him in an affidavit of being a likely criminal “co-conspirator” under a wartime law known as the Espionage Act.

Authorities also obtained phone records for Fox News lines, including those for a number that matched the number of Rosen’s parents.

In the past week, a 29-year-old contractor leaked National Security Agency documents on the agency’s collection of millions of U.S. phone records and the NSA’s collection of emails and other information that people transmit online to and from foreign citizens.

That has touched off a national debate over whether the Obama administration, in its efforts to thwart terrorism, has overstepped by using intrusive surveillance methods.

Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., the committee’s chairman, said when it comes to national security leaks, it’s important to balance the need to protect secrecy with the need to let the news media do its job.

Goodlatte also said the committee planned to find out more about the status of what the congressman called the FBI’s “stalled investigation” into the attack in Benghazi, Libya that killed four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador.

As for the Boston Marathon bombings, committee members want to know whether there was a breakdown in information-sharing between federal agencies, preventing the FBI from thwarting the explosions that killed three people and injured more than 260.

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

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

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Federalist Press Dispatch

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

Please wait...

Thank you for subscribing to the Federalist Press Dispatch.

Byrna Non-lethal Self Protection

Byrna Non-lethal Self Protection

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

Click to talk with us about writing your book >>

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

Brit Axton Mysteries Series

Brit Axton Mysteries Series

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

Get free info to help your life

Get free info to help your life

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

Understanding Cryptocurrency: Essentials for Building Wealth in Digital Currency

Understanding Cryptocurrency: Essentials for Building Wealth in Digital Currency

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

Real Estate Wealth Strategies During High Inflation

Real Estate Wealth Strategies During High Inflation

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

Privacy Policy

Terms of Service

Follow us

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

Economy

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

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

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

Elections

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

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

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

Foreign

The Battle for Lindsey Graham’s Senate Seat Begins

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

Peace Through Strength: Trump Forces Iran into Submission

Crime

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

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

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

Science Tech

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

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

America Has Seen This Movie Before: Don’t Let Fear, or China, Stop the AI Revolution

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