REMEMBER WALPIN-GATE? IT'S BAAAAACK

Believe it or not, there was a time in this country when a story like this would be earth-shattering. Unfortunately, it's been languishing in relative obscurity since it broke last summer. That said, Byron York at the Washington Examiner is doing an excellent job of peeling the onion, one layer at a time.

This story does have many layers that I won't get into but if you'd like to read up, feel free to go here, here, and here.

The latest development involves Walpin, the mayor of Sacramento Kevin Johnson, Johnson's attorney, and Lawrence Brown who, at the time was the U.S. Attorney in Sacramento. In short, Walpin exposed Johnson as mis-using taxpayer dollars and wasn't backing down.

Johnson's attorney, Matthew Jacobs appears to have had some correspondence with Brown who confronted Walpin and helped the White House justify its decision to fire Inspector General Walpin, who discovered that former NBA star Kevin Johnson - a friend of Barack Obama - was mis-using government funds for his personal benefit.

New revelations, thanks to York, show that Brown very likely could have had a motive when it came to opposing Walpin. The former apparently had his eye on a job requiring a presidential appointment:

Republican investigators for the Senate Finance Committee and the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform have released a supplement to the 62-page report on the Walpin case they filed last November, and it shows that, at the same time he was blocking Walpin, Brown was seeking an appointment from the Obama White House as the permanent U.S. Attorney. In other words, when Brown let Obama ally Kevin Johnson off the hook, he was hoping to get a job from the Obama White House.

York's piece goes on to quote Brown's letter specifically but the deeper story at this point, appears to be the Obama administration's willingness or unwillingness to reward Brown for doing its bidding with respect to protecting Obama's friend, Kevin Johnson.

In matters like this, one seeks poetic incarnations of justice wherever they can be found. It would seem that even if this case dies here - not likely, considering how long it's been percolating - Walpin may just be able to take some solace in the fact that he made enough of a stink that Brown didn't get that position he so coveted.

Walpin was later cleared of all the charges against him. In the end, Brown did not get the U.S. Attorney job. He is now a judge on the Sacramento Superior Court.

If this story is as it appears, how comfortable should we feel knowing that someone like Brown is now a judge?

Be sure to Read it All

VIDEO: HOLDER'S DOJ SLAMMED WITH FACTS, RESPONDS WITH OBFUSCATION

Once again, facts are stubborn things and sometimes they can even penetrate a stonewall. What we know to be factual is that Eric Holder's Justice Department has at least nine employees who have defended Guantanamo detainees. We also know the names of two of those employees. One is Jennifer Daskal who, in addition to defending enemies of the United States, said things very sympathetic to 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. The other known DOJ employee is Neal Katyal, who once defended Osama bin Laden's driver. I wrote about both of them here.

That leaves seven DOJ employees who have defended terrorists as still unnamed. Remember, these seven individuals are paid with taxpayer dollars. Holder has been purposely preventing the release of those names since November. While the Black Panther case has been stonewalled for much longer, defenders of al Qaeda terrorists working inside the Department of Justice almost seems more surreal.

That leads to a video from the group called Keep America Safe, a group Liz Cheney is involved with. Gotta love that title: The Al Qaeda Seven.



Holder's Justice Department responds not by releasing the names of the al Qaeda Seven but with an attempt to change the argument entirely. POLITICO posted the DOJ's response to this controversy:

As we noted in a letter to Senators, the Justice Department's attorneys are subject to ethics and disclosure rules as required under both Department guidelines and this administration's own ethics rules, which are the strongest in history. One week after this Department secured a guilty plea from Najibullah Zazi for attempting to attack the New York subway system and indicted two of his co-conspirators for their alleged role in that attack, it should be clear that fighting terrorism and keeping the American people safe is our number one priority.

This administration has perfected the nasty habit of completely avoiding the issues at the heart of important debates. Nowhere in that DOJ diatribe is an explanation provided for WHY the Al Qaeda Seven remain anonymous.

The DOJ has apparently decided to take a more diplomatic tack than John Podesta's group when it comes to dealing with those who are simply demanding answers to questions that are fair and not the least bit unreasonable. Via POLITICO:

"This is plainly unacceptable in the United States," Ken Gude of the Center for American Progress, wrote in an e-mail this morning. "Condemnation is not sufficient. This is pure McCarthyism."

At least McCarthy had names to work with. That said, this stonewalling is a disturbing trend with Holder. Getting the names of these seven individuals should not be like pulling teeth. They are public servants and their employer has a right to know who they are if that employer (taxpayers) so desires.

h/t to NRO

APOLOGIST FOR OBAMA'S ISLAMIC ENVOY CHIMES IN

Josh Goldberg, High School classmate and friend of current Obama envoy to the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC), Rashad Hussain, has written a column in defense of his friend. Before I get to Goldberg's column, here are some indisputable and irrefutable facts.

* Rashad Hussain spoke at a 2004 Muslim Student Association (MSA) event.

* MSA founded the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Trial.

* A publication quoted Hussain as saying things sympathetic to convicted terrorist Sami al-Arian at the 2004 event.

* The quotes attributed to Hussain were removed from the article sometime after 2007. The editor of the publication suggested it was removed in February of 2009, weeks after Hussain took a job as an attorney in Obama's Justice Department.

* The editor of the publication said she couldn't remember who told her but that the quotes attributed to Hussain were actually not said by him but al-Arian's daughter, Laila.

* The writer of the article, apparently thrown under the bus by someone, stood by her story - that Hussain was the one who said those sympathetic things about al-Arian.

* Politico reported on February 19th that it had obtained a recording of the event and Hussain actually DID say those things about al-Arian.

* Hussain admitted to saying those things about al-Arian shortly after Politico presented the recording to the White House.

* Hussain confessed to being the one who went to the publication and asked them to delete his comments from the article.

* On February 22nd, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs announced that the White House was standing by Rashad Hussain.

These facts are sourced, linked, and further explained here and here.

Now to Goldberg's column via Mediaite:

Last week, television again gave me a front row seat to the politics of personal destruction. This time however it was different – it was not voyeuristic, watching someone whom I did not know become the latest casualty of the traveling carnival that is cable news.

The target was a man I have known all of my adult life and whom I profoundly respect and admire. I watched this man, my good friend, as he was labeled a “jihadist,” “terrorist sympathizer,” infiltrator and worse. My reaction was incredulous, as these absurd, outrageous and despicable claims were parroted across cable television, the blogosphere and Twitter.

I don't know what news report Goldberg was referring to but notice in all of the facts I listed above, nowhere will you find the terms "jihadist" or "terrorist sympathizer", let alone having them attributed to Hussain.

Goldberg continues...

Rashad was not simply a debate partner, but a close and trusted friend. And while some may argue that our friendship prevents me from thinking clearly, I know it gives me the unique perspective to speak to the things that matter – his character, his views and his love of country.

It is inexcusable to witness people who know nothing of Rashad, not his Wyoming roots nor his love of Carolina basketball, or his skill at impersonations – try to smear a good man. It is one of the reasons I felt compelled to write about the man I know and the great American public servant he is becoming.

Any of the facts I listed addressed yet? Nope. However, Hussain's love of basketball is. So far, Goldberg has revealed himself as nothing but a biased observer who refuses to confront some very disturbing facts about his friend. Maybe Goldberg is priming the pump by building up Hussain's character as a foundation on which he can build a credible argument against the facts.

Let's continue....

I have known Rashad for 17 years. I have eaten in his house more times that I can recall and discussed every issue imaginable – from Middle East peace to Tiger Woods.

And I can say without equivocation, hesitation or reservation, that Rashad is the ideal candidate for public service – he truly is a fantastic human being, and absolutely unrecognizable from the descriptions in the hate media.

Nope, not there either. However, Goldberg does again refer to a media that is using hateful descriptions of his friend. Hey, James, how about those facts? I noticed as I read a little further that Goldberg again focused on the television media that had reported on his friend. Perhaps he would address it here...

The proliferation of television channels and other media have enabled smear campaigns to occur at lightening speed. One moment a friend is the President’s new OIC envoy, and the next, he is decried as a jihadist. The need to shock and enrage audiences, to provoke and antagonize has never been greater, and in the process, we discredit the very people that are most qualified to help.

Goldberg still refuses to address any of the facts but is perfectly ok with demonizing those who bring them up. After reading Goldberg's entire piece, not one time did he address ANY of the disturbing facts surrounding Hussain's attendance at the 2004 MSA event, MSA's ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, Hussain's comments at that event, or Hussain's attempt to cover-up those comments. Instead, he communicates pure emotional support for Hussain while attacking those who raise questions about those facts.

Based on all of those facts, perhaps Goldberg should consider studying another Islamic term. That would be Taqiyya.

There are two forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, taqiyya and kitman. These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause Islam, in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.

Now, Mr. Goldberg, perhaps you should re-think your loyalty to Rashad Hussain based on facts that seem to indicate he has something to hide and precepts in Islam that encourage him to do so.

There is a name for defending those who pose a threat to oneself while demonizing those who are trying to save you. It's called Stockholm Syndrome.

via MediaIte

JOHN KERRY INVITED TO GIVE KEYNOTE AT MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD EVENT

Former U.S. Presidential candidate, current U.S. Senator, and Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, John Kerry has been invited to give the concluding keynote speech at a Muslim Brotherhood event on April 28th, 2010. While Kerry's attendance has not been confirmed, it would seem that he should have distanced himself from this event the second he was invited. Then again, we are talking about John Kerry.

I covered this story on my February 28th radio show as well. Not only is Kerry invited to give the concluding keynote but the grandson of the Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna will be giving the luncheon keynote. Courtesy of the Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report (GMBDR):

The Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID) has announced its 11th Annual Conference to be held in April and which is scheduled to feature prominent representatives of the U.S. government along with global Muslim Brotherhood figures including Tariq Ramadan, recently cleared for entry into the U.S. by the U.S. State Department. According to the CSID announcement the conference, titled “U.S. Relations with the Muslim World: One Year After Cairo”, will feature Ramadan as luncheon keynote speaker and, listed only as “invited”, Senator John Kerry as giving the concluding keynote. Also scheduled to speak at the conference are Salah Ali Abdulrahman, head of the Muslim Brotherhood of Bahrain, and Ruhail Gharaibeh the deputy leader of the political wing of the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood.

al-Banna's grandson, Tariq Ramadan is now free to enter the United States thanks to the stroke of Hillary Clinton's pen.

Here is a link to the page on the CSID website that lists Kerry as the invited concluding keynote speaker. Notice the name of the group is CSID but it is basically a who's who of the Muslim Brotherhood. Perhaps that is because the latter has built quite a negative reputation. If you'd like to read more about Ramadan's grandfather, click here. Just in case, I've captured the image of the part on the CSID event schedule that includes the Kerry invite as well as the date, time, and address of the event.

How about some history of the Muslim Brotherhood? It was formed in 1928 by al-Banna, who had a close personal friend named Amin Al-Husseini, who developed an extremely close alliance with Adolf Hitler in WWII. Hitler even put Husseini in charge of the Bosnian Muslim troops. The two met on more than one occasion.

In fact, the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Jews can be attributed to Al-Husseini. Via Tell the Children the Truth:

Muslim Brotherhood established in Egypt by Hassan El Banna [viii] in 1928. Amin Al-Husseini becomes a central member and ideological inspiration [ix] for the Muslim Brotherhood. Mother organization for today’s Egyptian Islamic Jihad and Hamas [x] . The Muslim Brotherhood preaches Wahhabi Islam [xi] , which justifies violent means to rid the ‘Muslim world’ of its non-Islamic element. It envisions a Pan-Islamic Empire, where strict Islamic law rules over all.

For more pictures as well as minutes from a meeting between Hitler and al-Husseini, click here. Some may object, calling this all guilt by association but I vehemently disagree. If Ramadan publicly denounced the Muslim Brotherhood and the actions of its founders and early leaders, like his grandfather and his grandfather's friend al-Husseini, that point may be valid. If the grandson of the KKK had an event today and members of the KKK were in attendance, would it matter what they said in their group's defense?

Should John Kerry appear at this event, he may just trump Al Gore as the biggest hypocrite of the modern world. Based on what you now know about the Muslim Brotherhood, take a look at Kerry's 1971 Senate testimony again.

MUSLIM LEADER SAYS ISLAM NOT PEACEFUL

A phobia is defined as an "irrational fear". Logically, someone with "Islamophobia" is someone who has an irrational fear of Islam. Perhaps those once identified as having it need to be re-diagnosed, based on the comments of possibly the most well known Islamic leader in Great Britain, Anjem Choudary. In fact, those Islamophobes may actually deserve a clean bill of health while their accusers should be checked for Veritophobia, otherwise known as alethophobia or fear of the truth.

Erick Stakelbeck of CBN interviewed Choudary:

"You can't say that Islam is a religion of peace," Choudary told CBN News. "Because Islam does not mean peace. Islam means submission. So the Muslim is one who submits. There is a place for violence in Islam. There is a place for jihad in Islam."

Choudary is the leader of Islam4UK, a group recently banned in Britain under the country's counter-terrorism laws. He wants Islamic Sharia law to rule the United Kingdom and is working to make that dream a reality.

While Islamic radicals in the United States usually prefer to speak in more moderate tones while in public, masking their true agenda, Choudary has no such inhibitions.

What say you, Veritophobes?

Read it all.

Video of Choudary from 2006



h/t to Logan's Warning