Here, you are urged and encouraged to run your mouths about something important.

Saturday, June 30, 2012

Fast and Furious Showdown over? Not so Fast, Oversight Committee Furious

Apologies in advance for this long post but there are some extremely important developments taking place relative to Fast and Furious AFTER the contempt vote, despite House Leadership seemingly being a little too comfortable with closing the book on the scandal at this point. Keep in mind that the details in Fast and Furious are pointing to a mass murder scheme and some extremely powerful people are involved.

Conventional wisdom says that Fast and Furious ran its course when the House voted to find Eric Holder in contempt of Congress on both criminal and civil grounds. After all, Holder's subordinates are responsible for prosecuting him but as Deputy Attorney General James Cole - a man who's possibly more intimately involved with Fast and Furious than is his boss - wrote in a letter to John Boehner (h/t Fox News):
Across administrations of both political parties, the longstanding position of the Department of Justice has been and remains that we will not prosecuted an Executive Branch official under the contempt of Congress statute for withholding subpoenaed documents pursuant to a presidential assertion of executive privilege.
Boehner's potential desire to let this all end right there notwithstanding, Oversight Committee member, Rep. Trey Gowdy, explains that there are only three kinds of Executive Privilege and one doesn't even apply to Congress. The other two implicate either Obama or his immediate advisers directly in the Fast and Furious coverup, at minimum:



So, the President has implicated himself in the coverup of a mass murder plot by asserting Executive Privilege; Holder has committed perjury and is likely directing the coverup; and Holder's immediate subordinates are saying they won't prosecute Holder - who was essentially convicted of two serious crimes - because Obama asserted Executive Privilege. Boehner and Company could either throw up their hands and say, 'that's it, we've gone as far as we can go' or they can play hardball. Playing hardball doesn't seem to be in Boehner's DNA (see Washington Times link below) but there are members of the Oversight Committee, including Chairman Darrell Issa who appear to be swinging for the fences.

There have already been several developments that have taken place since the contempt vote that should cause continued interest in Fast and Furious. First among them is talk that Eric Holder can legally be arrested for being found in contempt of Congress.

Committee member, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) appeared on Fox News with Megyn Kelly and while responding to the aforementioned letter sent by James Cole, admitted that having the Sergeant at Arms arrest Eric Holder is an option that the House is not taking off the table, saying, "We're serious about this."

Via MediaIte:



The Washington Times addressed the legality of arresting Holder as well:
Despite voting to hold Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. in contempt of Congress, there’s little House Republicans can do in the short term to compel him to turn over documents — unless it wanted to revisit a long-dormant power and arrest him.

The thought is shocking, and conjures up a Hollywood-ready standoff scene between House police and the FBI agents who protect the attorney general. It’s a dramatic and unlikely possibility not least because Congress doesn’t even have a jail any longer. But in theory it could happen.

Republicans say it’s not even under consideration, with House Speaker John A. Boehner’s spokesman flatly ruling it out.

But the process, known as inherent contempt, is well-established by precedent, has been confirmed by multiple Supreme Court rulings, and is available to any Congress willing to force such a confrontation.
The second development involves Chairman Issa placing a letter he wrote to Ranking member Elijah Cummings (D-MD) on May 24th, into the Congressional Record. That letter involved details of the wiretap applications that came into Issa's possession courtesy of a whistleblower (mole?) inside the Justice Department. Those wiretap applications were under seal and implicated high ranking DOJ officials in the authorizing of gun-walking. When Issa received them, it was a major flashpoint in this investigation. I received a link to a story from Issa's Communications Department via mass email yesterday that reports on this move by Issa.

Via Roll Call:
In the midst of a fiery floor debate over contempt proceedings for Attorney General Eric Holder, House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) quietly dropped a bombshell letter into the Congressional Record.

The May 24 letter to Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), ranking member on the panel, quotes from and describes in detail a secret wiretap application that has become a point of debate in the GOP’s “Fast and Furious” gun-walking probe.

The wiretap applications are under court seal, and releasing such information to the public would ordinarily be illegal. But Issa appears to be protected by the Speech or Debate Clause in the Constitution, which offers immunity for Congressional speech, especially on a chamber’s floor.

According to the letter, the wiretap applications contained a startling amount of detail about the operation, which would have tipped off anyone who read them closely about what tactics were being used.
Sipsey Street has actually transcribed the entire May 24th letter from Issa to Cummings that is now in the Congressional record and it is not only incredibly - and I mean INCREDIBLY - damaging to Holder and the Justice Department but it makes Elijah Cummings look like an absolutely despicable human being for not pursuing the investigation fully. Not only was Cummings one of the Congressional Black Caucus members who walked out during the vote to find Holder in contempt but on June 15, 2011 he looked the Brian Terry family in the eyes and said this:



It's important to point out that by putting his letter to Cummings in the Congressional Record, Issa not only took it public but he delivered an uppercut to the legacy of Cummings in so doing. These wiretap applications go into excruciating detail about how the Justice Department worked with the ATF to allow these guns to walk. If Cummings continues siding with Holder, historians will know exactly how wicked he was.

Additionally, remember, Issa has six wiretap applications in his possession, not just the one he referenced in his letter to Cummings. What's to say that Issa hasn't made it clear to Cummings that details about the other wiretap applications won't be placed into the public record in the future? Are they more damning than the one referenced in the May 24th letter? If so, Cummings knows it.

Future revelations courtesy of any whistleblower should not be discounted either. If that person on persons was able to get his / her hands on sealed wiretap applications, what else might be presented to Issa? The longer this goes on, the more damaging it will be to Cummings, who could just find himself the victim of a reverse-Alinsky tactic:
Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.
And, of course, Cummings is leading the charge to blame Bush for Operation Wide Receiver.

The third significant development is news that ATF whistleblowers John Dodson and Peter Forcelli have been placed directly under a supervisor - Scot Thomasson - who allegedly expressed a fervent desire for retaliation against those agents.

Check out this excerpt from a May 29th letter from Issa and Grassley to - you guessed it - The DOJ's Inspector General:
We just learned that ATF senior management placed two of the main wistleblowers who have testified before Congress about Fast and Furious under the supervision of someone who vowed to retaliate against them.

...According to a direct eyewitness account, shortly after the allegations (of gun-walking) became public, he (Thomasson) stated: "We need to get whatever dirt we can on these guys [the whistleblowers] and take them down."...Thomasson was also allegedly heard to have said: "All these whistleblowers have axes to grind. ATF needs to f--k these guys." When asked if the whistleblower allegations were true, Thomasson purportedly said he didn't know and didn't care.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. There are indications that House Speaker John Boehner doesn't want to confront this issue head-on. Scheduling the contempt vote on the same day that SCOTUS ruled on Obamacare is one such example. If Boehner and Company want this to go away because they think it's a political loser for the presidential election, aren't they saying that the ends justify the means, with the means being no justice for the Terry family and continued whistleblower retaliation and the ends being electing Mitt Romney president?

Besides, if Boehner is not doing all he can to get justice, it implicates him in the coverup. There's simply too much evidence of wrongdoing at the highest levels of our government for him to have plausible deniability at this point.

Conservatives are supposed to stand for doing what's right; isn't it the left that believes ends justify means?



Friday, June 29, 2012

Videos: Eric Holder found in Contempt of Congress

As promised, all but one member of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) walked out during the vote to find Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress. In total, there were more than 100 Democrats who turned their backs on the Brian Terry family and didn't vote. There were some noteworthy moments as both sides debated.

First, via Buzzfeed, Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) has been the Terry family's congressman for years. Though this video doesn't include Darrell Issa's full response to Dingell's attempt to assert that he represents the Terry family, you get the point; he doesn't. After Dingell made the claim, Issa ran down a list of obvious examples that demonstrate Dingell has done nothing to represent the family.



The Daily Caller reported on the Terry family's response to Dingell claiming to represent them while supporting Holder in this case:
Terry’s family was particularly disgusted with Dingell’s use of their name in his partisan defense of Holder. “Congressman Dingell represents the district in Michigan where Brian Terry was born and where his family still resides, but his views don’t represent those of the Terry family,” the family said, pointing out that Dingell “invoked” their name in his defense of Holder. “Nor does he speak for the Terry family. And he has never spoken to the Terry family.”

The family said they haven’t heard from Dingell since “[h]is office sent us a condolence letter when Brian was buried 18 months ago.”
On the opposite end of the spectrum is Rep. Trey Gowdy, whom Chairman Issa gave the last word before the criminal contempt vote. If there is anyone in this investigation who has risen to the occasion, it's Gowdy. In this rant, you may see him shed some tears but they're teas of anger. If ever there was a vote in Congress between good and evil, it happened yesterday.

It's easy to see what side Gowdy is on:



As the contempt vote was taking place, the subject of that vote - Eric Holder - was in Disneyworld, speaking to the leftwing Hispanic group, LULAC. The irony is that the documents Holder is withholding may implicate him in the murder of hundreds of dead Hispanics.

Here is Holder's arrogant reaction to being held in contempt of Congress:



Like Obamacare, the Supreme Court is likely to ultimately decide if Holder is to release the documents in question. Excuse me for being pessimistic but it very likely could be that the only way the documents are ever released is if they are leaked.

h/t GWP

Thursday, June 28, 2012

Smoking Guns: Why Rush Limbaugh was Right about Hillary and Huma

Walid Shoebat and Ben Barrack (Cross-posted at Shoebat)

Was Rush Limbaugh right when he discussed Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin, criticizing the Secretary of State for her Deputy Chief of Staff's familial ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and the close relationship between Huma's mother and Egypt's new first lady? Think Progress refers to Limbaugh's claims as 'baseless'.

First, here is Rush's commentary on the subject on June 26th (via Think Progress):



The first sign that Rush's claim is not baseless is that Think Progress says it is.

Now that we've got that out of the way, Saleha and her now-deceased husband, Syed Z. Abedin, co-founded the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA), established in both Great Britain and Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. It is a group that once had close ties with a Saudi group known as the Muslim World League (MWL) through that group's General Secretary, Omar Abdullah Naseef. In Contemporary Discussions on Religious Minorities in Iran, Jorgen S. Nielsen, Professor of Islamic Studies at the University of Copenhagen, writes of the relationship between the Abedins and Naseef on p. 366:
“Trained in social science and being of Indian origin, Professor Abedin (Syed Z.) was the founder of the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, an institution that had the quiet but active support of the then General Secretary of the Muslim World League, Dr. Umar Abdallah Nasif.”
Interestingly, IMMA was founded at the urging of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). Incidentally, the Obama administration's envoy to the OIC is Rashad Hussain, a man who found himself at the center of controversy when it was learned he spoke at a Muslim Students Association (MSA) event in 2004 and expressed support for convicted terrorist Sami al-Arian. MSA is also a Muslim Brotherhood group. Hussain was caught in a lie about the incident and was not fired.

Obama himself heaped praise on Hussain, saying he “has played a key role in developing the partnerships I called for in Cairo.”

Perhaps more foreboding are the connections Saleha Abedin has with the U.S. State Department. In addition to being a Vice Dean at Dar El-Hekma College in Saudi Arabia, Saleha was also one of the institution's founders, along with Yaseen Abdullah Kadi – a designated terrorist by the U.S. – and members of the bin Laden family.

In 2010, Huma arranged for the Secretary of State to visit Dar El-Hekma where Clinton spoke alongside both Saleha and another Sisterhood member named, Suheir Qureshi, who like so many of her colleagues, holds a Ph.D. The photo on the left is Hillary and Saleha at that Dar El-Hekma meeting; the photo on the right is of Huma and Hillary.


Though the IMMA Editorial Board currently lists both Huma's mother and her brother as editors, it does not list her. However, it once did. Thanks to a screenshot from the Anti-Mullah blog, we have proof that she was once a member.

IMMA website today:



IMMA website in 2008:



Speaking of covering internet tracks...

Although the MWL's (Muslim World League) financial arm in the United States – Rabita Trust – was shut down for its terror ties, it still exists under the name Rabita al-Alam al-Islami; Saleha Abedin was once listed as a member of this organization, which makes her part of the MWL.

The Anti Defamation League says the following about the MWL:
“While the MWL has on several occasions condemned terrorism in general terms, it has a long history of providing financial support to terrorist groups or having organizational links to them, including to Hamas, Abu Sayyaf group, Moro Islamic Liberation Front, Jemaat al Islamiyya, and Al Qaeda.”
Rabita Trust was started by former General Secretary of the MWL and notorious al-Qaeda godfather, Abdullah Omar Naseef. Naseef plays an integral role in both al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.

This reality makes Saleha Abedin and Abdullah Omar Naseef colleagues. Both are intimately involved with the MWL and, by extension, connected to al-Qaeda.

That's not Saleha's only al-Qaeda connection...

Her name currently appears on the main Al-Azhar University website (last name on the list) as a member of the High Council for Islamic Matters. Remember, the founder of al-Qaeda – Abdullah Azzam – is a graduate of Al-Azhar. Abedin is also a close colleague of Camellia Helmy, another Sisterhood leader. Helmy is the wife of Muslim Brotherhood leader Siraj Al-Din Allboudi. Allboudi was imprisoned for his role in establishing the modern day Sisterhood or International Women's Organization (IWO).

As a prestigious member of Al-Azhar University who participated in the 12th session of the Islamic Conference for the Islamic Uprising, Saleha has essentially endorsed the mission of the conference, which included representing the International Islamic Committee for Woman and Child (IICWC). The IICWS stood for the decriminalization of rape within marriage. This would mean that Saleha would support the rape of her daughter (Huma) by her son-in-law, Anthony Weiner, who also happens to be Jewish. How's that for a contradiction? While Saleha is, no doubt, a proponent of Muruna, which allows Muslims to absolve themselves of all prohibitions to further the cause of Islam (to include marrying a Jew), she also must necessarily support the marital rape of her daughter at the hands of Weiner.

One has to wonder what Saleha thinks about the treatment received by the likes of Lara Logan at Tahrir Square last year.

Here is a screen shot from a website that once listed Saleha as a member of Rabita Trust and touted her work with the IICWC. A screen shot is the best we could do because this information is no longer posted. Relevant Arabic has been translated:



According to Al-Midina, the history of the Abedin name has a very real connection to Hitler, with only two degrees of separation through Haj Amin al-Husseini - the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem during WWII - and and Hassan al-Banna - the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood. The former was a colleague of Muhammad Sabri Abedin and the latter's secretary was Abdul Hakim Abedin. Both are confirmed relatives of Sisterhood member, Saleha.

It doesn't end there as Saleha's son, Hassan Abedin, also serves as a fellow (his name was removed after our work last year) on the board of the Oxford Center for Islamic Studies (OCIS) with Naseef, who is the chairman of the Board of Trustees there. Also serving as a trustee there was the aforementioned, Hitler-loving Muslim Brotherhood leader Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi.

Let us consider Saleha's relationship with IMMA Vice Chairman, Abu Bakr Bakader. (Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs). Our government needs to look into the two who are colleagues because Bakader is seen with Saleh Al-Ghamdia relative of three 9/11 hijackers, to include Saleh Al-Ghamdi, Ahmed al-Ghamdi, and Hamza Saleh Al-Ghamdi.

At this point it's safe to say that our State Department has been infiltrated by enemies of this nation and those responsible for letting them in – either actively or passively – may be guilty of treason.

Rush Limbaugh, as usual, is right and Think Progress, as usual, is left (and wrong).

Now, if Think Progress would like to challenge us further about the new first lady of Egypt being a close associate of Huma Abedin's mother, we recommend that they stop trying to catch our missiles with butterfly nets.

Walid Shoebat is the author of For God or For Tyranny
Ben Barrack is a talk show host and author of the upcoming book, Unsung Davids

Obama Lied... Again; Individual Mandate ruled a Tax; Chief Justice 'Judas' betrays Constitution

Barack Obama lied... again, this time about the Individual Mandate not being a tax. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts, who sided with the four professed liberals on the court, has gone to absurdly extreme lengths to make sure the law was upheld. The Individual Mandate was ruled unconstitutional as a penalty or mandate but Roberts decided to rule it constitutional as a tax, something Obama insisted it was not.

Here is Obama with George Stephanopolous on September 20, 2009 telling America that the Individual Mandate was NOT a tax.



That all changed when the legal argument from the Obama administration in front of the Supreme Court was that the mandate should be upheld because it is a tax. Translation: Obama lied... again.



As for Justice John 'Judas' Roberts...

The issue of severability was at the heart of the decision of U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson last year. Quite simply, the severability clause allows a law to stand if parts of it are thrown out. Obamacare did NOT have a severability clause. Vinson found the Individual Mandate unconstitutional and consequently ruled that the entire law had to be thrown out.

Roberts twisted himself into a pretzel to arrive at his decision today. Instead of ruling the Individual Mandate unconstitutional, which would require the law to be thrown out because it has no severability clause, Roberts ruled the Mandate unconstitutional under the commerce clause but found it constitutional as a tax, which the Obama administration argued it was not.

Chief Justice Roberts has just betrayed his nation.

**UPDATE** As Weasel Zippers points out, the White House website still has a post on the site, authored by Jason Furman, Assistant to the President for Economic Policy and Principal Deputy Director of the National Economic Council. Note the screen shot, taken today. The White House position is that the Individual Mandate is NOT a tax, though Obama still gets what he wants despite Roberts' disagreeing with him on what the Mandate is:


Think Progress goes after Limbaugh over his comments on Hillary and Huma Abedin

On June 26th, Rush Limbaugh spent a couple of minutes reporting on the story we broke on June 24th, that further exposes the familial ties of Huma Abedin - Hillary Clinton's closest advisor - to the Muslim Brotherhood. Specifically, the point of interest for Rush is the news that Huma's mother and Egypt's new first lady are close colleagues as leaders of the Muslim Sisterhood. The Soros-backed Think Progress attempted to debunk Limbaugh's claims and linked to an article we wrote last year, labeling it one of those conservative "conspiracy theories".

Keep checking Shoebat.com because we have an explosive follow-up piece to this story coming that you will not want to miss.

Here is the relevant audio clip of Limbaugh from June 26th, via Think Progress:



Socialist-Dominated Congressional Black Caucus plan to Race-Bait at Contempt Vote

The Congressional Black Caucus, led by a registered socialist, Emanuel Cleaver, is planning to stage a walkout during the House vote to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt.

Via The Hill:
The move comes less than 24 hours before the House plans to vote for the first time in history to hold a sitting attorney general in contempt of Congress for not complying with a congressional subpoena. Holder is the first black attorney general in U.S. history.

The walkout is reminiscent of a similar move made by Republicans in 2008 during a Democratic-led vote on whether to hold two senior staffers in President George W. Bush’s administration in contempt of Congress.

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) — then the minority leader — led the walkout with Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) following closely behind him. Issa, the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, is the sponsor of the contempt resolution against Holder.
The reference to the walkout in 2008 was not based on race and it did not involve the murder of one Border Patrol Agent (Brian Terry) as well as hundreds of dead Mexican nationals on the OTHER side of the border. It involved holding Harriet Miers and Josh Bolton in contempt for withholding documents relative to the firing of eight U.S. Attorneys by the Bush administration. If you want to make the argument that the documents should have been turned over, fine (I'd probably agree with you). If you want to make the argument that the Republicans shouldn't have walked out, fine. If you want to dismiss the fact that Bill Clinton fired 93 out of 94 total U.S. Attorneys all at once and without consequence, fine.

The contempt citation for Eric Holder is rooted in a demand for documents related to a confirmed lie to Congress on February 4, 2011 when a letter signed by Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich said that the ATF does not allow gun-walking. Ten months later, the DOJ withdrew the letter, an admission that it was false.

As for the Congressional Black Caucus, shouldn't it matter that 67% of its current members were registered with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) caucus in 2009? If you don't include the six freshmen that were elected in 2010, that number jumps to 78%. One of those freshmen is Lt. Col. Allen West (R-FL), who joined the caucus likely for reconnaissance purposes more than anything else, suggested there are 78-81 members of Congress who are registered with Communist Party USA. Being embedded with 29 registered socialists in the CBC might serve to lend his charge some credibility.

Socialists and Communists lie. It's part of the rule book (Obama lied about not being registered with a socialist party). The Congressional Black Caucus is dominated by confirmed, registered socialists. 67% of the current 43 members were registered with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) caucus in 2009. Obama's ideological mentor, Saul Alinsky believed that ends not only justify the means but failure to use any means necessary is a sin (that would be a sin against Lucifer, apparently). Check out this excerpt from his book, Rules for Radicals:
"The end is what you want, the means is how you get it. Whenever we think about social change, the question of means and ends arises. The man of action views the issue of means and ends in pragmatic and strategic terms. He has no other problem; he thinks only of his actual resources and the possibilities of various choices of action. He asks of ends only whether they are achievable and worth the cost; of means, only whether they will work. ... The real arena is corrupt and bloody." p.24
Consider the real agenda behind Fast and Furious - putting guns into the hands of bad guys, who would use them to kill innocent people, which would help create the political climate for more gun control in the United States. Sounds bloody, huh?

Following Alinsky's instructions to the letter would permit the sacrifice of innocent people if your desire for gun control is strong enough and if dead bodies furthered that agenda (kinda like abortion furthers Planned Parenthood's agenda). We also know that in 2009, the Democrats - to include Obama and Hillary Clinton - pushed a false statistic that 90% of all guns used to commit crimes in Mexico come from the United States. This has been debunked.

Back to lying communists and socialists. Of the 43 Congressional Black Caucus members who will be walking out of today's contempt vote, at least 67% of them are registered socialists. Discover the Networks has the following to say about how Socialism and Communism is related:
Marxist doctrine holds that just as society evolved from feudalism to capitalism, it will inexorably progress still further to socialism and eventually communism. Communists consider socialism to be an intermediary step between capitalism (out of which socialism is said to grow) and communism. That is, communism (whose motto is “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”) is deemed a further development, or “higher stage,” of socialism (whose motto is “From each according to his ability, to each according to his deeds”). Communism, in other words, is viewed as the more “perfect” of two systems that both advocate public ownership of the means of production, centralized economic planning, and the widespread redistribution of wealth.
The best possible thing one could say about socialists is that they are using a gateway drug that turns them into communists. Not holding a lawless administration accountable for a program that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of people might just put any of those socialists who aren't already stealth communists, over the top.

Placing the cherry on top of a heaping pile of irony is the position of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) when it comes to Fast and Furious. Like the CBC, the CHC is dominated by Democrats; Chairman Charles A. Gonzalez is one himself.

On the day that the House Oversight Committee voted to hold Eric Holder in contempt of Congress - also the same day that Obama asserted Executive Privilege - the Congressional Hispanic Caucus condemned Chairman Darrell Issa for voting in favor of contempt.

Here is a quote from Gonzalez, via NBC Latino:
“Congress must exercise its authority responsibly and in the interest of the American people, not to score partisan political points,” said Charles Gonzalez, Hispanic Caucus Chairman, in a statement. “The Justice Department and Attorney General Holder have provided the Committee leadership with unprecedented access to the documents it requested; yet Rep. Issa refuses to be reasonable. When partisan advantage is the primary motivation, it’s really the American people who suffer,” he added.
Calling 7600 documents out of a population of 140,000 "unprecedented" is a lie; it is a bald-faced one at that. The bigger question is: Why is a caucus that is supposed to represent Hispanics, not standing with those who want to get to the bottom of a government-led operation that led to the deaths of hundreds of Hispanics?

Socialists and Communists lie. Perhaps that explains both the February 4, 2011 letter as well as the behavior of the racially based Caucuses to demands that the truth comes out.

For some reason, this 1963 short film narrated by former FBI Agent Herbert A. Philbrick comes to mind.

Part 1:



Part 2:



Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Trey Gowdy: Accepting White House deal on Fast and Furious Documents like buying 'used car over the phone'

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) is making quite the name for himself as a member of the House Oversight Committee investigating Operation Fast and Furious. In this exchange with Greta, Gowdy discusses the alleged deal the Obama administration is offering Issa's committee; Gowdy thinks it's a joke and minces no words in telling you. The deal apparently involves the White House coughing up some documents and the Committee taking contempt permanently off the table.

Gowdy, a congressional freshman all but mocks the administration for the offer, saying it's like 'buying a used car over the phone'. If establishment Republicans ever decide to learn what conservatives mean when they say they don't want compromise with the Democrats, first-term Gowdy gives them the perfect example in this exchange.

When you have a dead Border Patrol agent and hundreds of dead Mexican nationals, reaching a compromise that doesn't involve accountability for those involved is not compromise; it's surrender.

As an added bonus, Gowdy chimes in on the strong letter sent by Chairman Darrell Issa to Barack Obama a day earlier. Watch as the Republican freshman puts Obama in a box, saying that there are only three kinds of Executive Privilege. Two implicate the President directly as being involved in the coverup and the third doesn't even apply to Congress.

In essence, Gowdy is saying that Obama is either part of Fast and Furious or he's misusing Executive Privilege.

Via Fox News:



Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Important Video: Dearborn Police stand down as Muslim Mob Assaults Christians

The surrender of Dearborn, MI to Islam is all but complete. This may be one of the most important videos in a long, long time. Background: A group of Christians showed up at the annual 2012 Arab Festival, holding signs and wearing t-shirts to communicate their message.

There are many things to take note of as you watch. First, the mob assaults the Christians with debris (rocks, bottles, crates, etc.). Second, the police do nothing to stop it. The video opens with one officer telling one of the Christians that use of a bullhorn is prohibited by a city ordinance. Then, after 30 minutes of massive assault, one officer tells a Christian he's putting his own safety in danger because the cops have so much territory to cover. Note the response of the Christian male; he tells the officer that violence will be wherever their signs are. Having no response, the cop turns and walks away.

There are only two explanations for the behavior of these police officers. Either they are sympathetic to the Muslim cause or they are suffering from displacement.

Via The United West:



Matthew 5:10:
Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, For theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
That's the good news.

Cross-posted at Shoebat

Speaker Boehner, working to make Fast and Furious go away would be Felonious

If House leaders (John Boehner, Eric Cantor, and Kevin McCarthy) still want Fast and Furious to 'go away' at this point, it'd no longer be an issue of political cowardice or courage, or even calculation; it'd be about them being accomplices in the coverup of a murderous federal program.

No accusations here but when it comes to politicians - especially ones of the establishment / RINO persuasion - history is on the side of the skeptics. Besides, there's nothing wrong with a bit of preemptive accountability when it comes to holding said politicians accountable. Trusting them almost always gets you burned. So why do it now?

Consider a post by Mike Vanderboegh over at Sipsey Street about sources telling him that John Boehner, Mitt Romney, and the RNC (by extension) could be looking for ways to prevent the truth about Fast and Furious from coming out:
Said one source, "Romney wants this to go away, so the RNC wants it to go away, and they're putting more pressure on Boehner who never wanted to get this far down the road in the first place but he's been pushed along by Issa and the stand-up guys on his committee." He added, "The NRA making this a 'scored' vote means that if it comes to a vote, it will happen with as many as two or three dozen Democrats as well. The leadership now thinks that the only way for this to 'go away' like Romney wants is to short-circuit the vote."
Again, I'm not making the charge but if that last sentence is true and House leadership is doing anything to sabotage the vote, they would already be accomplices in the coverup. Not only that but it would mean the presumptive Republican nominee for president - as well as the RNC - would be party to the biggest political scandal in perhaps the history of the country, before even winning the general election.

Another interesting aspect to this comes courtesy of the Washington Post (h/t Sipsey Street). They imply that a possible reason for House leadership scheduling the contempt hearing on Thursday is to coincide with the expected Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare on the same day.
Republican leaders plan to bring the issue to the floor on Thursday, meaning lawmakers likely will vote on contempt charges on the same day that the U.S. Supreme Court is slated to announce its ruling on the constitutionality of the 2010 health-care reform law.

The timing likely deprives advocates for contempt charges of the big headlines they might have received if the vote were held another day this week.
To his credit, when Boehner speaks publicly about Fast and Furious, his words are in support of getting to the bottom of the scandal. To his discredit, these concerns just keep rearing their heads. Maybe if he spoke a little more like Congressional freshman, Rep. Trey Gowdy and less like a politically guarded politician, that would stop.



As for Romney, he had a golden opportunity - when Obama announced amnesty for illegal aliens nearly two weeks ago - to point to Fast and Furious being a program that is responsible for hundreds of dead Mexicans. The implication would have been clear: If Obama cares so much about the welfare of Mexican nationals, why hasn't anyone been held accountable for a program that led to the deaths of hundreds of Mexican nationals.

Romney didn't do it and that is another example of why skeptics are, well, skeptical.

E-mail or call Speaker Boehner's office by clicking HERE.

E-mail or call the Romney campaign by clicking HERE.

E-mail or call the RNC by clicking HERE.

**UPDATE** POLITICO has written that Issa has sent a letter to Barack Obama demanding answers about why he asserted Executive Privilege. Toward the end of the article, we have more anecdotal indicators that may lend more credence to the claim that House Leadership wants this to go away:
Unlike Issa’s last letter to the administration, this note didn’t contain the signatures of House GOP leadership.

The contempt motion is sure to pass, but House Republican leadership is not whipping their members. Speaking aboard Air Force One en route to New Hampshire, White House press secretary Jay Carney declined to say whether the administration was trying to keep Democrats in line.
Compare that behavior with that of Congressional Democrats in 2009 - 2010 when it came to ramming Obamacare through.

Quite the contrast, eh?

Monday, June 25, 2012

Fast and Furious smoking gun may be one Email

It looks like an email from then Acting Director at the ATF - Kenneth Melson - to high ranking Department of Justice officials in March of 2011 may just blow the lid off the Fast and Furious investigation once and for all. That also may be why Obama went as far as asserting Executive Privilege to prevent it from being released.

Via Matthew Boyle at the Daily Caller:
Ken Melson, now the former acting director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, purportedly sent that email to several DOJ leaders in March 2011. According to Grassley, Melson wrote that he had reviewed the wiretap applications — the same documents Cummings and Holder claim do not show senior DOJ officials knew of or approved gunwalking tactics in Fast and Furious.

“ATF Acting Director Kenneth Melson described reading those same wiretap affidavits in March of last year,” Grassley told Holder during the Senate hearing. “He said he was alarmed that the information in the affidavits contradicted the public denial to Congress.”

It appears Republican congressional investigators first learned of the Melson email’s existence on July 4, 2011, when Melson chose to give a lengthy deposition on Fast and Furious without DOJ and ATF lawyers present. Grassley told Holder during the Senate hearing that congressional investigators first requested that the DOJ provide Congress with that email during July 2011, shortly after Melson made his then-secret trip across town to Capitol Hill.
Possible scenario: The February 4, 2011 letter from the Justice Department to Grassley said any claims that the ATF was engaged in gun-walking were "false". In March of 2011, Melson sees the now infamous wiretap applications. Upon doing so, it becomes apparent to him that DOJ Officials (Lanny Breuer / Jason Weinstein we now know at minimum) were well aware of gun-walking; Melson then sends an email expressing this concern - as well as concern over the fallacious letter sent to Grassley - to high ranking DOJ officials.

As the days and weeks go by, Melson sees that the Justice Department is not going to correct the record relative to the lie in the February 4th letter. He gets nervous and decides to meet with Oversight Committee investigators on July 4th of last year instead of on the date of his scheduled testimony on July 13th. He also brings his own counsel instead of DOJ or ATF counsel during that meeting.

Here is a report from July 6th of last year, via Hot Air:
...it says something that Melson chose to meet secretly with Issa and Grassley and to be represented by his own personal counsel rather than DOJ and ATF counsel, who, obviously, would have had departmental interests (and the protection of higher officials, perhaps?) more in mind than what was best for Melson.
On July 5, 2011 Charles Grassley sent a letter to Eric Holder about the testimony given by Melson one day earlier. In light of this new focus on Melson's e-mail to DOJ officials, this excerpt seems to take on added significance:
"By his (Melson's) account, he was sick to his stomach when he obtained those documents and learned the full story. Mr. Melson said that he told the office of the Deputy Attorney General (ODAG) at the end of March that the Department needed to reexamine how it was responding to requests for information from Congress.
The Deputy Attorney General is Holder's right hand man. In this case, that's James Cole. Did Melson notify Cole in March of last year that DOJ needed to correct the February 4th letter? If so, DOJ ignored it month after month until it retracted the letter in December of 2011. That also calls into question every bit of testimony given to the House Oversight Committee as well as House and Senate Judiciary Committees by all DOJ and DHS officials between February 4, 2011.

Let's revisit this clip from a May 3, 2011 House Judiciary Committee hearing, not for what it's become most known for - Holder saying that the first he had heard about Fast and Furious was a "few weeks" earlier - but for his response to a question from Issa about whether James Cole authorized the program. Holder says he doesn't think Cole authorized the program because it started before Cole had assumed the position of DAG. This is correct as Cole was sworn in on December 29, 2010, fifteen days after Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was murdered. When asked if Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer authorized the program, Holder was evasive.

Pay attention starting at the 1:00 mark:



What makes this testimony interesting is that if Melson's letter is released (currently being withheld under Executive Privilege asserted by Obama last week), it could show that Cole knew the February 4th letter was false at the time Holder was painting Cole as someone having virtually nothing to do with the operation.

Earlier today, Mike Vanderboegh, at the reliable Sipsey Street Irregulars website, claims to have heard from sources who claim that:
Boehner is set to deal away the contempt vote in the full House for less than the minimum discovery that Darrell Issa has set.
Regular visitors to this blog know I'm not a Boehner fan but in light of these revelations that one lone email from Kenneth Melson could blow a hole in the Fast and Furious stonewall, the Committee might not need everything it's subpoenaed.

The best part, as Boyle points out at DC? Holder told Grassley at the Senate Judiciary Committee on June 12 (earlier this month) that the Melson email did not qualify for Executive Privilege.

If you're in the mood (and have time) for some very real comparisons from 40 years ago...



Video: Hillary shows lack of respect for Oath of Office

I realize this video is a few days old now but I can't get past the fact that while swearing in Mike Hammer as the new Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs, Hillary cackled while donning outlandish mardi gras glasses as she read the oath of office to Hammer so he could repeat it.

Humor is fine but it was classless for Clinton not to remove the glasses before swearing Hammer in with the formal oath. It's as if she doesn't take that oath seriously. Then again, Huma Abedin is her closest aide. Hate to say it but perhaps it's not possible for Hillary to take that part about 'domestic' enemies too seriously when someone like Abedin is her Deputy Chief of Staff.



Video: Darrell Issa vs. Elijah Cummings on Fast and Furious

Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa and Ranking member Elijah Cummings, who is registered with Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), appeared together on Fox News Sunday. Issa is rightfully focused on getting the documents involved in the Justice Department's demonstrably false February 4, 2011 letter that it didn't retract for ten months. Cummings comes across as foolish while making straw man arguments.

For example, Cummings claims this is a witch hunt against Holder and proceeds to whine about Issa not calling former Acting ATF Director Kenneth Melson publicly before the Committee, despite the fact that Melson testified in private session for two days before congressional investigators last July. Issa explains that Holder is the guy withholding the documents and that Melson - as well as a slew of others involved - would be called before the committee publicly once Holder releases the documents that would help the Committee prepare to ask these individuals the necessary questions.

Another takeaway here is that Issa seems convinced not only that the House will find Holder in contempt of Congress but that the vote will have bi-partisan support (possibly up to 31 Democrats).

Via Fox News Insider:



Sunday, June 24, 2012

Fort Hood Jihadist Attorneys: Military preventing Muslims from being on Jury

If you find yourself wondering why the trial of Nidal Malik Hasan still hasn't so much as completed jury selection after nearly three years since he murdered 14 people, perhaps the latest bit of insane news will help to explain it. Apparently, the defense team thinks the Military is discriminating against potential Muslim jurors.

Via Temple Daily Telegram:
The jury panel selection process for the court-martial of Army psychiatrist Maj. Nidal M. Hasan has been described by the defense team as a “highly unusual process” that it wants to know more about.

When pre-trial hearings in the case resume on Friday, look for Judge Col. Gregory Gross to address several points raised by Hasan’s attorneys last week that suggest the military might have screened out Islamic officers in advance.

Army prosecutors in the case say the allegation is simply not true but the defense team wants proof.

They are asking the judge to release paperwork associated with the panel selection so they can better understand the process. In addition, the defense wants to interview Lt. Gen. Donald Campbell, Fort Hood's commanding  general and Staff Judge Advocate Col. Stuart Risch, Campbell's senior legal advisor, to determine if thee was command influence exerted from beyond the gates at Fort Hood.
I fail to see what's so difficult about this. Wives of police officers are not permitted to serve on juries in criminal cases because of an obvious and inherent bias. Muslims should not be allowed to serve on the jury in the Fort Hood Shooter case for the same reason. According to Islam, Hasan was justified.

Instead of taking the position that they're NOT screening out potential Muslim jurors, perhaps the Military / prosecutors should say they did while citing the Qur'an and the Hadith as justification.

How is Huma Abedin connected to Egypt's new President-Elect?

Walid Shoebat and Ben Barrack

It was encouraging to see five sitting US Congressmen – led by Rep. Michele Bachmann – send a letter to the Office of the Inspector General at the State Department recently; it made reference to the familial relationships Huma Abedin – Hillary Clinton's Deputy Chief of Staff and closest advisor – has to the Muslim Brotherhood. Abedin has much fewer than six degrees of separation (1 or 2 depending on your interpretation) from Egypt's newly elected Muslim Brotherhood president – Mohammed Mursi.

One year ago, when Walid discovered the names of 63 leaders who make up the Muslim Sisterhood – which is essentially nothing more than the female version of the Brotherhood – we learned that Huma's mother, Saleha, was one of those leaders. Little attention has been paid to the other 62 leaders, however. One of them is Najla Ali Mahmoud, the wife of Mursi. Both are members of the Guidance Bureau, which proves fallacious, the claim that Najla is just an innocent and na├»ve spouse.

This would make Huma's mother a close, personal colleague of the wife of a virulently anti-Semitic racist who has officially been declared the first president-elect of post-Mubarak Egypt. Mursi also sat behind a Muslim cleric at a presidential campaign rally before the first round of elections, nodding in approval as the cleric enthusiastically informed the crowd that under Mursi, Jerusalem would become the new capital of the next Caliphate.



Abedin has the ability to leak highly sensitive state secrets; she is closely associated with her Muslim Brotherhood family; she even joined Clinton at an event with Saleha at Dar El-Hekma College in Saudi Arabia and another leader who appeared on the list of 63 as an associate of Saleha Abedin—Suheir Qureshi. Huma's brother—Hassan Abedin—has also collaborated with an al-Qaeda godfather Omar Naseef and Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, two of the most influential terror supporters in the world.

All signs point to Huma using a technique championed by Qaradawi himself. It's called Muruna and it allows Muslims to go to extreme lengths to deceive and convince non-Muslims they pose no threat. One such act permitted by Muruna would be for a Muslim woman to marry a non-Muslim man if it furthered the cause of Islam.

Consider, Huma Abedin is also the wife of former US Congressman Anthony Weiner (D-NY), who happens to be Jewish. Why hasn't Huma denounced her mother or the views espoused by the Sisterhood? In fact, as the twitter sex scandal involving Weiner was playing out last year, the New York Post reported that the former Congressman allegedly claimed that there were three women he needed to reconcile with – Huma, Hillary, and Saleha. Perhaps the biggest red flag of all is why Huma – a practicing Muslim – wasn't disowned by her family for marrying a Jew in the first place.

When it was learned that Saleha was a member of this extremely nefarious group, Walid was able to uncover mountains of evidence from news sources – in Arabic – that implicated Huma's mother as being part of a plot reminiscent of Hitler's Nazi Germany. Today, much of these connections have vanished. Short of identifying Saleha as the Dean of Dar el Hekma, her tracks have been all but covered.

If she and Huma aren't stealth collaborators, why is this so?

Walid Shoebat is the author For God or For Tyranny
Ben Barrack is a talk show host and author of the upcoming book, Unsung Davids

Saturday, June 23, 2012

Video: Bill Whittle on Fast and Furious; Obama and Holder 'Evil'

In this installment of Afterburner, Bill Whittle explains why he thinks Barack Obama and Eric Holder are 'evil' and it has to do with Fast and Furious.

Democrats wanna talk Wide Receiver? Let's talk Wide Receiver!

As Fast and Furious burst onto the national stage this week with the Oversight Committee decision to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress, the Democratic left unsurprisingly decided to defend Holder primarily in two ways. Nancy Pelosi's insane argument notwithstanding, one line of defense is that Holder is being targeted because he is black. The other is that Operation Wide Receiver was a gun-walking program started under the Bush Administration, which they claim is evidence that this is all partisan.

Consider...

Holder made this claim during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on June 12, 2012:
If you want to talk about Fast and Furious, I’m the Attorney General that put an end to the misguided tactics that were used in Fast and Furious. An Attorney General who I suppose you would hold in higher regard was briefed on these kinds of tactics in an operation called Wide Receiver and did nothing to stop them – nothing. Three hundred guns, at least, walked in that instance.
The blame Bush strategy is nothing new but instead of Republicans arguing Wide Receiver was drastically different from Fast and Furious in scope, perhaps they should engage the Democrats in the Wide Receiver debate by referring to someone who was at the heart of both operations. If they do, the Democrats are likely to give up the argument.

There is at least one man who was intimately involved with both Wide Receiver and Fast and Furious; his name is William Newell, former ATF Special Agent in Charge (SAC) in Phoenix. In a phone conversation from December, 2010 between Newell and a gun store owner named Mike Detty, the subject of Operation Wide Receiver was discussed. Here is that relevant portion, via Sipsey Street:
Detty: "You know, I was just curious with, uh, with Wide Receiver, you know, three years ago, I think, the U.S. Attorney here told me they were planning on arresting something like forty people and its my understanding, I think it was, November 10th or November 9th, they made six arrests here in Tucson.

Newell: Right.

Detty: But I haven't seen. . . I check the website daily and I haven't seen a press release regarding that. Is there a reason that you're waiting on that or hoping to make more arrests?

Newell: Yeah, there'll be . . . uh, we're waiting. There's some other stuff going on, uh, that's part of that, and so it'll be a wait, it'll be a bit here. Probably another month or so.
If we are to take Holder at his word on June 12th, then Newell necessarily perjured himself in previous testimony.

CNN reported on the following exchange between Committee Chairman Darrell Issa and William Newell at a July 26, 2011 Oversight Committee hearing:
Newell's insistence that guns were not allowed to cross the border drew an angry rebuke from Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House committee investigating the program, who called Newell a "paid non-answerer" at Tuesday's hearing.

"Are they (the other agents) lying, or are you lying?" Issa asked Newell.

"We did not let guns walk," Newell responded.

"You're entitled to your opinion, not to your facts," Issa said.
Either Newell lied then or Holder lied last week. Perhaps concurrent with the upcoming House Resolution that will determine if Holder will be in contempt, the Oversight Committee could revisit its meetings with Newell. At this point, no one is going to protect him; he could go under the bus at any time. His testimony is in direct contradiction with Holder's. Which one do you think will be made to take the fall? As this Fast and Furious = Wide Receiver narrative continues to be pushed by the left, Newell is increasingly exposed. It would seem that the best thing for him to do would be to start singing to Issa's Committee (if he isn't already).

As proof that Democrats don't want to go down the road of equating Wide Receiver with Fast and Furious, take a look at this clip from a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing from November 8, 2011. This exchange between Senator Cornyn and Holder turns to the subject of Wide Receiver at about the 2:30 mark. Shortly thereafter, Cornyn draws a line of distinction between the two operations so well that any inclination Holder had to compare the two was extinguished. In fact, at the 3:30 mark, Holder says:
"Senator, I have not tried to equate Wide Receiver with Fast and Furious."
Watch the entire exchange if you can.



During that same hearing, Senator Chuck Schumer played the Wide Receiver card too, saying in part:
"It's a pretty good bet that top officials at the Bush Justice Department - perhaps the Attorney General himself - learned of this operation in its early stages... at the very least, they let it continue. For all we know, they've endorsed it. And so, I think it's important that we look at both sides and my suggestion Mr. Chairman is, if the House won't do that, we should."
Shortly after making those comments, Schumer found agreement with none other than John Cornyn, who echoed Schumer's sentiment about getting to the bottom of Wide Receiver as well.

Memo to the Democrats. If you wish to point to Wide Receiver in defense of Fast and Furious, you might want to re-think your strategy; Holder did.

Of course, that leaves you with nothing but the race card.

Eric Holder Contempt Resolution Released

After the House Oversight Committee found Eric Holder in contempt of Congress this past week, it now goes to the full House for a vote next week. That resolution was released late last night. Unlike Obamacare, it's very short.

Via the Resolution:
"Resolved, That Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of the United States, shall be found to be in contempt of Congress for failure to comply with a congressional subpoena.

"Resolved, That pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 192 and 194, the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall certify the report of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, detailing the refusal of Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, to produce documents to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform as directed by subpoena, to the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, to the end that Mr. Holder be proceeded against in the manner and form provided by law.

"Resolved, That the Speaker of the House shall otherwise take all appropriate action to enforce the subpoena."
If you think the mainstream media was forced to cover Fast and Furious last week, when Obama asserted Executive Privilege, just wait and see what happens if the full House finds Holder in contempt of Congress.

h/t The Hill

Friday, June 22, 2012

Democrats in 1999: It's just Sex; Democrats in 2012: It's just Dead People

In 1999, not one House Democrat voted to impeach Bill Clinton; not one Senate Democrat voted to convict him. None of them, however, could deny that Clinton committed the felony of lying under oath to a grand jury. They had to create a new argument. What did they do? They shifted the argument away from perjury and over to what the lie was about - sex.

The narrative took hold among Democratic voters and a liberal media. Suddenly, holding a president accountable for lying under oath was something to be derided if the lie was about what could be portrayed as minor. Lawlessness was acceptable if you were a Democrat and if the substance of your crime could be diminished. Democrats couldn't deny Clinton committed a felony so they decided to impugn the motives of those who prosecuted it. The problem with the liberal logic applied to Clinton's situation is that there are not degrees of perjury. When you're under oath, it doesn't matter if you lie about sex or murder; the lie itself is the offense and it is a felony.

Speaking of murder, the Democrats find themselves in another battle over Democratic leaders - in this case, Attorney General Eric Holder and his underlings - committing perjury about an operation in which hundreds of Mexican nationals and one Border Patrol agent (Brian Terry) were murdered. Holder perjured himself on May 3, 2011 when he told the House Judiciary Committee that he had only learned about Fast and Furious a 'few weeks' earlier; his Department lied in a February 4, 2011 letter to Congress and had to retract it; and just this week, Holder had to retract a statement he made to the Senate Judiciary last week.

These lies demand accountability.

If Bill Clinton was let off the hook for perjury because of the substance (sex) at the heart of the charge, why isn't Eric Holder being held accountable for perjury by the Democrats when the substance of his perjury involves murder? Are we to excuse Holder because his lies are just about an operation that led to hundreds of dead people?

Such a notion should send chills down your spine because it would make such Democrats nothing short of wicked.

It would seem that the technique used by the Democrats with Clinton would be dangerous territory today but that's only if the Republicans are willing to fight tooth and nail without worrying about political considerations. Lying about a murderous program cannot be as easily diminished as can lying about sex, can it? Nonetheless, Democrats appear to be lining up in much the same way that they did with Clinton. In the House Oversight Committee, the vote to hold Eric Holder in contempt of Congress passed but, like with Clinton's impeachment, not one Democrat voted for it, despite having in their possession the demonstrably false February 4th letter signed by then Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich.

The contempt hearing only tangentially involved perjury; it was about the Justice Department handing over documents related to that demonstrably false letter. What led to its crafting and what led to its retraction? Democrats don't want you to know what's in them. The reason is simple. They have a good idea about what they reveal - a coverup and blood on the hands of high ranking Obama administration officials.

Those documents are also quite likely to reveal multiple instances of perjury from Holder, as well as other officials who have testified in front of Congressional Committees about Fast and Furious.

The inability of the Democrats to hold the Attorney General accountable for lying to Congress about a murderous operation indicates that the reasons given for not voting to impeach and convict Clinton are rendered invalid, using liberal logic. If lying under oath is ok as long as what you lie about is trivial, aren't they necessarily saying that what Holder is lying about is trivial by not holding him in contempt?

That would make lying about murder... trivial.

Thursday, June 21, 2012

David Duke Endorses Black Democrat

Ok, so how does a former KKK Grand Wizard endorse a black candidate, who is also a Democrat, for Congress? Perhaps this is the strongest indicator yet that ideology trumps race.

Via Daily Caller:
The Democratic Party is facing an awkward problem Thursday because white supremacist David Duke has endorsed the leading candidate in the Democratic Party’s primary race for a New York House seat.

Duke says he’s endorsing Charles Barron, the leading candidate for the 10th district primary on June 26, because of their shared emnity toward “zionists.”

Barron is an African-American city politician who has been slammed as an anti-white racist and as a Jew-hater. However, he’s already got the endorsement of the retiring Democratic congressman, Rep. Edolphus Towns.
Edolphus Towns is also black.

Video: George Zimmerman reenacts shooting

On the day after the Trayvon Martin shooting, police took George Zimmerman to the scene to reenact what happened. That video is now posted.

Via ABC:

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

Here is ABC's Chris Cuomo giving analysis of what the tape of Zimmerman's reenactment means for both the defense and the prosecution.

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

Video: NBC's Brian Williams covers Fast and Furious Contempt Hearing

Though NBC's Brian Williams covered the Fast and Furious contempt hearing held yesterday, he seemed more interested in chalking up the contentious arguments to 'caustic' partisanship than to legitimate concerns that Eric Holder may be at the center of a scandal that makes Watergate look like jaywalking.

The biggest takeaway from this is that Williams seems more interested in focusing on partisan fisticuffs than on getting to the truth about what's behind it.

Surprise, right?




h/t Hot Air

Obama position on Honduras in 2009 and on Egypt 2012 quite similar

Barack Obama wants the virulently anti-Semitic and very dangerous Muslim Brotherhood in charge of Egypt. In 2009, he wanted Manuel Zelaya, a Hugo Chavez stooge, to be reinstated as president of Honduras after Zelaya was constitutionally removed from office and replaced by a man named Roberto Micheletti. At one point, it was reported that Israel and the Mubarak- led Egypt were two of only four countries that supported Micheletti.

Today, Mubarak is gone, and two entities are fighting for power in Egypt - holdover forces from the Mubarak regime and the Muslim Brotherhood; Obama is openly siding with the Brotherhood.

Via Los Angeles Times:
U.S. officials said Monday that they were "deeply concerned" by an Egyptian military decree giving its ruling generals sweeping powers to pass laws and decide whether to go to war, issued just as Egyptians finished casting their votes for its new president.

“We have, and will continue, to urge the [Supreme Council of the Armed Forces] to relinquish power to civilian-elected authorities and to respect the universal rights of the Egyptian people and the rule of law,” Pentagon Press Secretary George Little told reporters.
And of course, let's not forget the quotes from the woman who refused to acknowledge that Jerusalem is the Capital of Israel, State Department spokesman, Victoria Nuland:
"This is a critical moment in Egypt, and the world is watching closely," State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland was quoted as saying by the Associated Press on Monday. "We are particularly concerned by decisions that appear to prolong the military's hold on power."
Chavez is anti-Semitic; so was Manuel Zelaya. It was reported that Zelaya's Chief Propagandist endorsed Hitler and the Holocaust. At one point, while holed up in the Brazilian embassy, Zelaya had delusions of persecution about Jews poisoning him with radiation beams. That's the guy the Obama administration supported in 2009.

Meanwhile, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is frothing at the mouth to attack Israel. the Military, though not in love with Israel, is certainly more rational. It wants the Brotherhood on a leash. Clearly, Obama does not.

It was this same Los Angeles Times that refused to release a tape of Obama at a Party for another virulent anti-Semite - Rashid Khalidi - in 2008, before the election.

Khalidi worked for the media arm of Yasser Arafat's PLO and even dedicated his book to Arafat in 1982.

h/t FPM

Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Oversight Committee finds Holder in Contempt of Congress

Just received the following statement from Darrell Issa's office after his committee voted to find Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt on a party line vote:
“The Oversight Committee voted to hold Attorney General Holder in contempt for his continued refusal to produce relevant documents in the investigation of Operation Fast and Furious. This was not the outcome I had hoped for and today’s proceeding would not have occurred had Attorney General Eric Holder actually produced the subpoenaed documents he said he could provide.

“The President’s assertion of Executive Privilege this morning took us by surprise but did not alter the Committee’s conclusion that documents had been inappropriately withheld.  Executive Privilege only applies to materials that directly pertain to communications with the President and his senior advisors.  This assertion indicates that the White House’s role in Operation Fast and Furious and the response to whistleblower accusations has been greater than previously acknowledged.  Just yesterday, the Attorney General indicated a willingness to produce a small subset of documents on the condition that the Committee end its investigation before they were described or made available for review. Today, the President asserted Executive Privilege to ensure they are never produced.

“At the heart of the Congressional investigation into Operation Fast and Furious are disastrous consequences: a murdered Border Patrol Agent, his grieving family seeking answers, countless deaths in Mexico, and the souring effect on our relationship with Mexico.  Congress has not just a right, but an obligation to do all that it can to uncover exactly what happened and ensure that it never occurs again.  After the Justice Department’s earlier false denial of reckless conduct, the Committee has a duty to pursue all options to gather and evaluate key evidence.

“I still believe that a settlement, rendering the process of contempt unnecessary, is in the best interest of the Justice Department, Congress, and those most directly affected by Operation Fast and Furious.  I urge Attorney General Holder and President Obama to reconsider their decision to withhold documents that would allow Congress to complete its investigation.”
 Five words. Reaches to the White House.

Holder Busted Lying... Again

Last week, while testifying in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Eric Holder told Senator John Cornyn that his predecessor - Atty General Michael Mukasey - knew about gun walking and did nothing to stop it. That is a demonstrably false statement that Holder has now had to retract. He made the charge in response to Cornyn's call for his resignation.

Here is an excerpt from a memo from Senator Chuck Graslley that details the retraction. Via Washington Examiner:
The Justice Department has retracted a second statement made to the Senate Judiciary Committee. During a hearing last week, Attorney General Eric Holder claimed that his predecessor, then-Attorney General Michael Mukasey, had been briefed about gunwalking in Operation Wide Receiver. Now, the Department is retracting that statement and claiming Holder "inadvertently" made that claim to the Committee. The Department's letter failed to apologize to former Attorney General Mukasey for the false accusation. This is the second major retraction the Justice Department has made in the last seven months. In December 2011, the Department retracted its claim that the ATF had not allowed illegally purchased guns to be trafficked to Mexico.
Here is the exchange between Cornyn and Holder in which the Attorney General made the original charge that he has since retracted.

Video: Did Hillary throw Holder under the Bus?

At today's contempt hearing for Eric Holder, Rep. Connie Mack (R-FL) once again referenced the Arms Export Control Act. This law requires any entity that sends weapons out of the United States (in this case, the Department of Justice) to get a written waiver from the State Department. In short, if Holder was involved in Fast and Furious and no written waiver exists, he's broken that law. If the waiver does exist, then Hillary's State Department is on the hook.

Here is Mack making reference to an exchange he had with Hillary last year. Note that Mack said today that the State Department informed him that no waiver was issued. Relevant excerpt begins at the 2:00 mark:



Here is the exchange between Mack and Hillary Clinton back in October that Mack referenced today:



If Mack is saying that the State Department has informed him that no waiver was ever issued to the Justice Department, Holder has a new set of problems courtesy of Hillary Clinton.

Video: Chris Matthews plays the race card on Fast and Furious

Let's see, for 18 months, Fast and Furious has been newsworthy. Those of us who have followed it know beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it reaches to the highest levels of the Justice Department (at minimum). MSNBC - the propaganda arm of the White House - has practically ignored the story altogether. Now, as Attorney General Eric Holder is about to face contempt of Congress, Chris Matthews is all of a sudden an expert on the story and tells his viewers that it's a racially motivated witch hunt?

If we are to gauge Matthews' knowledge of Fast and Furious by how much he's covered it, he's a neophyte on the subject at best. Yet, he sees fit to imply that Holder's accusers, who have been investigating the scandal for 18 months, are racists by saying the investigation is 'ethnic' in its motivations.

The families of the hundreds of dead Mexicans who are victims of Fast and Furious should find that offensive. Were the motivations behind placing these guns in the hands of those Mexicans' killers 'ethnic' too Chris?

Via Daily Caller:



I don't believe Matthews is ignorant on Fast and Furious. He's just doing his job. The most well known part of this clip is Matthews saying it's his job to help Obama succeed but there's another part worth noting in the context of his charging that the motives of Issa and those who want justice in Fast and Furious are 'ethnic'. In this now infamous exchange from 2008, notice how Matthews says, 'it's the worst thing you can do in journalism is try to figure out motive'.

Tuesday, June 19, 2012

Issa on meeting with Holder: Looks like Contempt Hearing will Proceed

It doesn't appear that the meeting between Eric Holder and Darrell Issa went well today. Based on a statement from Issa's office, it looks like the contempt hearing is full steam ahead tomorrow.

Via Issa's Director of Communications:
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa made the following statement after his meeting with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder:

“I had hoped that after this evening’s meeting I would be able to tell you that the Department had delivered documents that would justify the postponement of tomorrow’s vote on contempt.  The Department told the Committee on Thursday that it had documents it could produce that would answer our questions. Today, the Attorney General informed us that the Department would not be producing those documents. The only offer they made involved us ending our investigation.

“While I still hope the Department will reconsider its decision so tomorrow’s vote can be postponed, after this meeting I cannot say that I am optimistic.  At this point, we simply do not have the documents we have repeatedly said we need to justify the postponement of a contempt vote in committee.”
The only offer was stop the investigation?

Holder's refusal to be forthcoming today says one thing. He has decided it is more advantageous for him to be found in contempt of Congress than to honor the subpoena.

The next question that needs to be answered is, why?

Can you say, "White House"?

Accuracy in Media
American Spectator
American Thinker
Big Government
Big Journalism
Breitbart
Doug Ross
Drudge
Flopping Aces
Fox Nation
Fox News
Free Republic
The Hill
Hope for America
Hot Air
Hot Air Pundit
Instapundit
Jawa Report
Jihad Watch
Mediaite
Michelle Malkin
Naked Emperor News
National Review
New Zeal Blog
NewsBusters
Newsmax
News Real
Pajamas Media
Politico
Powerline
Rasmussen
Red State
Right Wing News
Say Anything
Stop Islamization of America
Verum Serum
Wall Street Journal
Washington Times
Watts Up With That
Web Today
Weekly Standard
World Net Daily

Blog Archive