VIDEO: LIBERAL JOAN WALSH EXHIBITS MORE APOPLEXY

While appearing on CNN with Howard Kurtz as the moderator, Salon magazine's Joan Walsh - far left liberal alert - found herself alienated, again by those she likely thought would be siding with her. Last week, it was Mika Brzenzinski of MSNBC's Morning Joe, who actually mocked Walsh openly and overtly, to which Walsh responded with an apoplectic face of shock that Mika would do such a thing.

As Walsh was still reeling from Mika's body blow, she is hit again, this time by global editor-at-large for REUTERS, of all places, Chrystia Freeland who announces she's siding with Rush Limbaugh over Bill Clinton with respect to the latter's contention that Limbaugh's rhetoric may incite another Timothy McVeigh style attack. Shortly thereafter, Walsh's jaw drops.



For the precursor to Walsh being alienated in debate by those she suspected would be on her side, click here.

This video of Walsh on MSNBC is good viewing multiple times...



h/t to NewsBusters

VIDEO: JUAN WILLIAMS DOES IT AGAIN - REVEALS TRUE SELF

The phenomenon that is Juan Williams just continues to un-mask itself. The arguments this guy has been putting up lately are so literally absurd, objective viewers are left with only one conclusion - conflict of interest. The conflict is the fact that Juan Williams is paid with taxpayer dollars, as an employee of NPR.

At issue in his debate with Bill Kristol on Fox News Sunday is the revealing of emails belonging to a Goldman Sachs CEO. Kristol makes the point that Michigan Senator Carl Levin (D) has no right to make such an email public. Williams then compares Levin to a boss who has every right to access an employee's email.

Justifiably, Kristol goes on offense, reminding Williams that a Senator is not the boss of any businessman. Instead of conceding the point, Williams deflects by making some lame argument about stockholders and investors. Williams is increasingly revealing himself as a Big Government hack who is defending the entity he thinks is his boss (Big Government) without realizing who really is - the U.S. tax payer.

This is another amazing un-masking of Juan WIlliams.

via MediaITE

WHERE, OH WHERE IS TONY REZKO?

The fact that convicted felon and longtime Barack Obama friend Tony Rezko has yet to be sentenced after two years is curious enough. Adding to that mystery - it's a mystery because apparently no one can answer it - is that no one knows where Rezko is. According to an article in the Washington Examiner, he's not even listed in the Bureau of Prisons' inmate locator.

Via Barbara Hollingsworth at the Examiner:

Why is Antoin “Tony” Rezko under lock and key at an undisclosed location, like some sort of CIA-renditioned al Qaeda operative? And why hasn’t he been sentenced yet?

As the June 3 corruption trial of former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich for allegedly trying to sell Obama’s former Illinois Senate seat approaches, the whereabouts of the former Blago and Obama fundraiser is literally a state secret.

The Chicago Sun-Times reported that Rezko was moved from Chicago’s downtown Metropolitan Correctional Center on December 16th, even though it’s right across the street from the federal courthouse where Blago will be tried.

Adding to the intrigue surrounding all of these head-scratching realities about Rezko is what was revealed about him this past week in Rod Blagojevich's motion for the subpoena of Barack Obama. The document, highly redacted, has been de-coded thanks to a software glitch and a significant portion of what was redacted included some potentially very strong claims about Rezko that could implicate team Obama. Here are the relevant excerpts from Blago's motion (formerly redacted portions in bold):

21. Tony Rezko is one of the government’s main witnesses.8 Mr. Rezko’s credibility is extremely relevant in this trial. In many instances, Mr. Rezko is the government’s crucial witness to prove up their allegations.9 Mr. Rezko wrote a letter to a federal judge stating “the prosecutors have been overzealous in pursuing a crime that never happened. They are pressuring me to tell them the “wrong” things that I supposedly know about Governor Blagojevich and Senator Obama. I have never been a party to any wrongdoing that involved the Governor or the Senator. I will never fabricate lies about anyone else for selfish purposes.” (Exhibit A)

22. However, the defense has a good faith belief that Mr. Rezko, President Obama’s former friend, fund-raiser, and neighbor told the FBI and the United States Attorneys a different story about President Obama. In a recent in camera proceeding, the government tendered a three paragraph letter indicating that Rezko “has stated in interviews with the government that he engaged in election law violations by personally contributing a large sum of cash to the campaign of a public official who is not Rod Blagojevich. … Further, the public official denies being aware of cash contributions to his campaign by Rezko or others and denies having conversations with Rezko related to cash contributions. … Rezko has also stated in interviews with the government that he believed he transmitted a quid pro quo offer from a lobbyist to the public official, whereby the lobbyist would hold a fundraiser for the official in exchange for favorable official action, but that the public official rejected the offer. The public official denies any such conversation. In addition, Rezko has stated to the government that he and the public official had certain conversations about gaming legislation and administration, which the public official denies having had.”10

23. President Obama is the only one who can testify as to the veracity of Mr. Rezko’s allegations above.

10 The defense has a good faith belief that this public official is Barack Obama.

The implication is clear. Rezko's claims - according to Blago's motion - are that he illegally gave cash to Obama, in some cases as a quid pro quo and that the two had multiple conversations about such transactions. Obama's land deal with Rezko would seem to bolster that claim. Obama is apparently on record as saying no such conversations with Rezko have taken place.

So why is Rezko's location such a secret and why hasn't he been sentenced?

Previous posts about the redacted motion for subpoena here and here.