Obama’s Watergate moment is here

Posted on by ( 73 comments already! )
Spread the love

Loading

obama-nixon

Back in June of 2013 Elijah Cummings declared the IRS investigation over, despite the continued stonewalling by the Obama administration:

Based upon everything I’ve seen, the case is solved. If it were me, I would wrap this case up and move on, to be frank with you. The IG made some recommendations, those recommendations are being adopted by the IRS, we’ve got a new commissioner in, acting commissioner in, Danny Werfel is doing a great job, I think we’re in great shape.

Last month all of the democrat members of the House Oversight Committee demanded Darryl Issa end the IRS investigation.

Now we know why, and why the next public word out of Cummings’ mouth will be “racism.”

Cummings pushed the IRS to harass True the Vote.

Today Issa released information about communications between the IRS and Cummings vis-à-vis True the Vote:

Issa said records obtained last week from the IRS show communications from the office of ranking member Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., about True the Vote, a Texas-based, non-profit conservative group that aims to prevent voter fraud.

The communications at one point involved Lois Lerner, the ex-IRS official whom Issa’s panel is poised to hold in contempt of Congress on Thursday for refusing to provide testimony about her involvement in targeting conservative groups.

“The IRS and the Oversight Minority made numerous requests for virtually identical information from True the Vote, raising concerns that the IRS improperly shared protected taxpayer information with Rep. Cummings’ staff,” a statement from the Oversight panel reads.

According to Issa, Cummings and his staff sought “copies of all training materials used for volunteers, affiliates, or other entities,” from True the Vote.

Five days after the Cummings inquiry, the IRS sent True the Vote an email requesting “a copy of [True the Vote’s] volunteer registration form,” “… the process you use to assign volunteers,” “how you keep your volunteers in teams,” and “how your volunteers are deployed … following the training they receive by you.”

Issa said Cummings and his office asked for more information in January 2013 about True the Vote, this time getting Lerner involved.

At one point, an email revealed, Lerner asked her deputy, “Did we find anything?”

When the deputy said she had not received any new information, Lerner responded, “thanks – check tomorrow please.”

Issa said Cummings had previously denied asking the IRS about True the Vote.

Next thing you know, True the Vote’s Engelbrecht is being harassed by the IRS:

Nonetheless, Engelbrecht’s True the Vote received a letter from the IRS with inquiries that agency officials have testified were unprecedented in scope. Cummings’s letter contained questions that closely mirrored those posed by the IRS, and Issa details them in his letter, strongly implying that one was modeled on the other.

In a February hearing, True the Vote’s lawyer, Cleta Mitchell, raised the prospect that the minority staff had exchanged information with the IRS. “We want to get to the bottom of how these coincidences happened,” Mitchell said, “and we’re trying to figure out whether any — if there was any staff on this committee that might have been involved in putting True the Vote on the radar screen of some of these federal agencies.” Cummings said in response that Mitchell’s tacit allegation was “absolutely incorrect and not true.”

“Although you have previously denied that your staff made inquiries to the IRS about conservative organization True the Vote that may have led to additional agency scrutiny, communication records between your staff and IRS officials – which you did not disclose to Majority Members or staff – indicates otherwise,” Issa said. “As the Committee is scheduled to consider a resolution holding Ms. Lerner, a participant in responding to your communications that you failed to disclose, in contempt of Congress, you have an obligation to fully explain your staff’s undisclosed contacts with the IRS.”

And not just the IRS. There’s more here and here. Cummings and the IRS and the BATF all but raped Engelbrecht. This was a real war on a woman. This was the very definition of persecution. Since when does your Congressman pay you a personal visit to harass you?

In an email Lois Lerner also suggested the possibility of her getting a job with the DC office of Obama’s Organizing for Action. It’s conjectured that it might have been a joke. Obama also “joked” about using the IRS to audit his enemies.

Lois Lerner has been referred to the Justice Department for prosecution. Make no mistake, this is a Watergate moment.

The legitimacy of the Obama Presidency now rests on the actions of Eric Holder. If he claims the “vast discretion” he spoke of and chooses not to pursue the Lerner referral, it’s over.

It would be time for a Special Prosecutor.

Or, failing that, a rebellion.

Fortunately, the House does not rule out arresting Lerner if the Department of Injustice does not. Criminal acts have been committed and the people’s trust in a government institution has been violated and faith been destroyed.

Eric Holder is without the least shred of integrity. He is thoroughly dishonest. He was put in place to do one thing and that is to protect his boss’s ass from the law. Two years ago I put up a post about the Republican a-holes who voted to confirm this POS. You can see the list here. As much as your anger should be directed at Obama and Holder, it should also be aimed at those idiots. I knew this was coming and they should have. We’re looking at a full blown Constitutional crisis. Nixon had Attorneys General with a conscience. Not so with the man who freed Marc Rich and the FALN terrorists. Conscience has no purchase of Eric Holder and neither does the law.

UPDATE

Oversight Committee votes to find Lerner in contempt

0 0 votes
Article Rating
73 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

@Redteam, #49:

You obviously believe there’s compelling evidence of something illegal that any reasonable person would find convincing. Although I can’t help but notice that no one has stated specifically what that compelling evidence is, and specifically what illegal act it clearly demonstrates took place.

That somebody finds something “suggestive” is totally meaningless. I, for example, find the same information suggestive of the possibility that Issa is abusing his public office by engaging in another politically motivated witch hunt. That, of course, is Issa’s assignment; to try to do to Obama what was previously done to Clinton. So, there have been endless fishing expeditions. None have resulted in an actual fish, but there’s no end to the fish stories.

0

@Greg:

You obviously believe there’s compelling evidence of something illegal

And that’s because it has been enumerated clearly on this thread and I have no problem recognizing crooked dealings when I see them. Seems as if Dims have led a sheltered life and schooled by those with lots of knowledge of how to conceal crimes. Some can’t be covered up, as in this one. Just re-read above and believe what you see.

0

@Greg:

I can’t put much stock in a website run by people who are so abysmally dense they don’t even realize they’ve headed the page with a picture that looks like Uncle Sam sitting on a post-colonial crapper.

That’s interesting, because I seem to recall someone also saying that…

I get the impression that some people automatically discredit all media sources that disagree with them. The anathema list has become very long. Soon it will be easier just to list the approved outlets.

Regardless, while the American Thinker logo is of course modeled after the famous Auguste Rodin sculpture, it isn’t too surprising that a drone would immediately leap to the “crapper” conclusion given the Collective’s notorious undying love affair with all things fecal.

Nevertheless, I’m pleased that you’ve opened this door, because it will allow us to examine the prospect.org articles a similar manner as I find a bit more time.

0

@Redteam, #53:

And that’s because it has been enumerated clearly on this thread and I have no problem recognizing crooked dealings when I see them.

Really? And where was that?

Perhaps you can give me a quick summation of the specific illegal acts that Cummings has supposedly committed, and the specific evidence that clearly supports such a conclusion.

If his accusers had clearly defined crimes and evidence, they wouldn’t be yapping about what this or that suggests.

Like all of their other contrived scandals, when you blow away all of the smoke there’s nothing left to see. There’s nothing that stands up to close examination. It’s all about creating a perception that something is there, to sway people who don’t require evidence to be convinced.

0

@Greg:

Perhaps you can give me a quick summation of the specific illegal acts that Cummings has supposedly committed, and the specific evidence that clearly supports such a conclusion.

There are none so blind as those that will not see. Greg, the real problem is that no amount of evidence will convince you that those wascally Dimocrats are crooks. re-read the thread, all the proof necessary is there. If you can’t find it, I’d suggest an eye exam.

0

No one should be surprised by such a response. No specific details is pretty much typical of everything coming from the right these days. It’s just as true of campaign platforms and hypothetical alternatives to Democratic healthcare legislation as it is to accusations such as—whatever the criminal act here is supposed to have been.

0

@Greg:

No one should be surprised by such a response. No specific details is pretty much typical of everything

The fact that you can’t see the iron clad proof in the links in the thread pretty well says you don’t want to see it. Re-stating evidence that is already clearly displayed is un-necessary and maybe not kosher, so if you’re interested, just read it for yourself. I don’t expect you to because you clearly had your mind made up before you even read it.

0

@Redteam, #58:

The fact that you can’t see the iron clad proof in the links in the thread pretty well says you don’t want to see it. Re-stating evidence that is already clearly displayed is unnecessary…

I think what you mean is that it’s impossible, because the specifics aren’t there to begin with.

0

@Greg: Nope, didn’t mean that at all. All the evidence is there, you’ve read it several times. It’s not gonna sink in if you read it again so I’d suggest you don’t waste your time.

0

If it were there, you could quickly state what it is. Which I don’t see you or anyone else doing.

0

Greg
YOU ARE LIKE A BLIND BAT, YOU DON’T SEE THE DARKNESS, WHEN THE BATS GO SUCK ON THE CATTLE,
YOU ARE AMONG THEM HERE TRYING TO ASK QUESTIONS,
PRETENDING THE DARKNESS DOES’N’T EXIST, BECAUSE YOU ONLY SEE THE LIGHT,

0

@Greg: It’s been stated quickly several times and you still haven’t picked it up. No wait, let me change that. You still don’t acknowledge seeing it. Need an eye doctors phone number?

0

@Greg:

Drones are ineducable.

No one should be surprised by such a response. No specific details is pretty much typical of everything coming from the right these days. It’s just as true of campaign platforms and hypothetical alternatives to Democratic healthcare legislation as it is to accusations such as—whatever the criminal act here is supposed to have been.

This isn’t the first time that I’ve supplied that link to Greg. And it won’t be the last time that he’ll continue to parrot his fantasy-based talking point directives on the matter.

0

Kraken
yes the people would feel more secure if the republicans gops tea_party would design an alternative to
that hated OBAMACARE, THEY ALREADY MADE AN ALTTERNATIVE PLAN,
BUT OBAMA DOESN’T NEGOCIATE A PLAN HE NEVER READ, AND THE REPUBLICANS WHERE NOT ASK TO VOTE,
OBAMA AND PELOSI AND HARRY REID SEND THE BOOK TO BE PASS, AND THEY ALSO NEVER
READ IT,
THOSE ARE THE ONE MAKING LAWS, FOR THE GOOD PEOPLE OF AMERICA,
THEY ALMOST START A WAR THIS WEEK , NOW THEY ARE PICKING ON THOSE MAKING CATTLE FOOD FOR THE FARMERS, THEY SAY REGULATING AND SUCKING MONEY FROM THEM AGAIN,
THERE WE GO AGAIN, THE SKUNKS ALWAYS STINK,

0

@Greg:

So, let’s go ahead and examine the prospect.org article.

As the early-voting period began, reports had begun to trickle out about white poll watchers arriving at minority precincts and intimidating voters.

I would be interested in reading these reports. Where can I find them?

As I walked into the building, I asked one of the custodians how to spot the poll watchers. “Just look for the white people!” he told me. He said that he’d heard about people who were afraid to bring elderly relatives to vote because “first thing [they’d] be thinking about is 1960.”

Do you think the “white people” poll watchers were as intimidating as these guys?

The stories I wrote for The Texas Observer explained why voters could easily feel threatened: “Around the lines of voting booths, ramps into the building created a mini-balcony, from which two poll watchers looked down at the voters. Both older white men, they maintained a serious expression for the entirety of the two hours I was there. Sometimes they wandered amidst the voting booths. Since everything was crammed together, it wasn’t hard to imagine how one of the watchers could feel intrusive to a voter. There was barely room for people standing in their rows.”

Now, what’s interesting to note from this paragraph, is how it differs from the paragraph in the original November 1st 2010 Texas Observer article that she cites:

By Oct. 28, Acres Homes already had seen seven separate complaints against the poll watchers, mostly for intimidation. It was easy to see how things could get tense. Around the lines of voting booths, ramps in the building created a mini-balcony, from which two older white male poll watchers looked down at the voters. Sometimes they wandered amidst the voting booths, crammed together. Since there was barely room for people standing in their rows, it wasn’t hard to imagine how one of the watchers could feel intrusive to a voter.

Now, there’s some rewording of the sentences towards the end of the paragraph, but what interests us here, is the addition of this sentence:

Both older white men, they maintained a serious expression for the entirety of the two hours I was there.

Now, that sentence doesn’t appear anywhere in the original Texas Observer article, all the way up to the most recent Wayback Machine capture on October 30th of 2012. So that means this sentence was either added to the original article after that date, two years after the article was originally published, or it was added after the fact in the prospect.org piece, which was also published two years after the original Texas Observer article. In either case, this little tidbit is likely being added to enhance and exaggerate the laughable point that the article is trying to get across; that white poll watchers with stern faces intimidate minority voters.

In the parking lot, I interviewed Gloria Alfred, who’d been disabled by a stroke and brought her son to help her vote. But after her son got sworn in by poll workers and began accompanying her to the booth, Alfred said that a poll watcher appeared and told him sternly, “You can’t help her!” While her son knew enough about the rules to explain he’d been sworn in and get on with things, his mother was shaken by the incident. “I might have been to the point where I couldn’t even have voted,” she said, if not for her son.

So the poll watcher misperceived a issue, and backed off when told what the real issue was. What’s the problem. She was shaken by this? Are we sure that Abby isn’t being a tad bit melo-dramatic here?

By the end of the election, 56 complaints had been filed by Harris County voters, many for voter intimidation. Voters reported hovering and intimidating poll watchers; meanwhile, True the Vote’s poll watchers complained that they were harassed by voters. To keep things from getting out of hand, the county attorney set up “strike teams” made up of peace officers, attorneys, and investigators who were dispatched wherever there were conflicts. The election, needless to say, was a tense affair.

I’d be interested in reading these 56 complaints. Where can I find them?

Here’s the problem with the reported conversations above. They just don’t seem real. Rather, they have the quality of contrived on-the-nose dialogue written by freshmen screen writing students. They’re anecdotal, and thus there just isn’t any evidence that they ever took place. Combine that with a lack of video, in the age of ubiquitous video camera presence, and it’s all doubly incredulous.

The group, which describes itself as a non-partisan effort that mobilizes citizens to combat “voter fraud,” has gone national—and stirred up a much larger hornet’s nest.

Using sneer quotes to denote adolescent snark, rather than using quotation marks for their intended purpose, is one of the hallmark signs of partisan hackmanship.

True the Vote says its mission is to help cleanse voting rolls of illegitimate and deceased voters, and to recruit and train poll watchers who can report irregularities. The press accounts, both mainstream and progressive, paint a vastly different picture—one of a zealous group of predominantly white Tea Partiers whose real plan is to “true” elections in Republicans’ favor by targeting poor and nonwhite voters in presidential battleground states.

What press accounts, specifically? What is the actual evidence for these claims?

But it’s unclear whether True the Vote’s impact will be as great as advertised. So far, its efforts to purge voters from the rolls haven’t exactly gone as planned; in several states, including Ohio, North Carolina, and Maryland, elections officials have mostly rejected the thousands of challenges to voter registrations that volunteers have put forth, often for lack of evidence.

I would be interested in reading about these instances. Where can I find reports about them?

As national attention ratchets up, it’s possible that some voters from marginalized communities might think twice before heading to the polls—either for fear of harassment, or because they simply don’t want to bother with the hassle.

Is this something that has actually happened or is the author merely speculating?

“What I’m really afraid of is there are people who will see the news and then say there are people who will be at the polls and then won’t show up,” says Doug Ray, the senior deputy county attorney in Harris County, where True the Vote got its start. Ray worked hard in 2010 to keep all sides calm, creating teams of investigators and attorneys who could show up quickly at any poll place when there was a dispute. He hoped no one would be afraid to show up at the polls. But with so much attention to the group, he worries that some will be unnecessarily reticent about voting. “I think there are people who will not vote because they don’t want to deal with it.”

And he’s basing this on…feelings?

Part 2 to come…

0

@Greg:

Prospect.org Part Deux

As epic battle music plays, far-right activist David Horowitz comes on screen.

It’s interesting that Abby would describe Mr Horowitz as being “far-right” considering his history. As I’m guessing Abby is blissfully unaware, Mr. Horowitz himself previously belonged to the Collective before he freed his mind. So he’s fully aware of how the Collective chooses to operate.

As the video illustrates, True the Vote unites a clear, conservative bent with a general message of paranoia: The elections are corrupt, especially in the nonwhite parts of town—and that’s why Democrats are winning.

What’s interesting about this sentence, is that after reviewing the 8 pus minute video that is embedded in the article, one finds absolutely no mention to race, nonwhite or otherwise. Once again we find the Collective passionately arguing against points that no one is making. I often wonder who this imaginary boogeyman is that they’re arguing against. Perhaps it’s a hold over of the imaginary friend of adolescence that turns sour?

True the Vote began in Harris County, Texas (home of Houston), as a project of the local King Street Patriots, one of the thousands of Tea Party groups that cropped up around the country in 2009. The King Street Patriots’ (KSP) formation, like that of its many counterparts, seemed to be a direct response to the election of the nation’s first black president. Engelbrecht herself doesn’t quite put it that way. After years of being apolitical, “something clicked” in 2008, she told The New York Times.

Abby maybe unaware that President Obama is also half white. Regardless, this is interesting because as Pew recently discovered, the majority of Americans don’t view President Obama as black. This puts a damper on the Collective’s deeply sick obsession with race.

But joint events between True the Vote and the King Street Patriots often featured Republican candidates speaking to Tea Party enthusiasts. Their Democratic counterparts said they did not get invitations.

Can you tell me, how many Republican counterparts get invitations to joint events between Battleground Texas and OFA? Hum?

The group became infamous in nonwhite communities for training white poll watchers who showed up in minority precincts on Election Day, and soon faced accusations of intimidation. Additionally, the group has faced criticism and legal action for its Republican ties.

I’d be very interested in reading about these instances. Where can I find accurate reports about them?

Texans for Public Justice, a state good-government group, filed a complaint alleging that True the Vote trainings served as in-kind donations to the state GOP. According to the complaint, the group’s poll-watching guide referred readers to the Harris County Republican Party’s website and told poll watchers to send their Election Day notes to Brian Bishop of the Harris County Ballot Security Committee, who worked for the county GOP. The state Democratic Party soon brought suit and, earlier this year, a judge ruled that based on its partisan activities, the King Street Patriots could not be a nonprofit corporation and was instead an unregistered political action committee.

Exercise Caution when Reading about Recent Ruling on King Street Patriots

http://www.kingstreetpatriots.org/news/word-on-the-street/what-happened

Then there was last Wednesday’s bombshell. The website Facing South discovered that in August, True the Vote donated $5,000 to the Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC), a political organization focused on electing GOP candidates at the state level. As Facing South notes, the contribution is not necessarily illegal—so long as the donation isn’t used for a prohibited activity. But there’s no doubt that contributing to the RSLC is supporting a partisan group with clear partisan goals. The check is also a hefty one for the organization; in 2011, True the Vote only raised a total of $137,000.

Considering how much unions, ACORN, OFA and the plethora of the Collective’s activist organizations have laundered money for the Democratic Party, I’d hardly call this a bombshell.

(For those who haven’t been hanging around Tea Party chatrooms, ”RINO” stands for “Republican In Name Only.”)

Actually the term RINO predates the modern Tea Party.

Along with charges of being partisan, True the Vote has also been accused of overt racism.

Of course.

The group seems to target its appeals to white voters who feel that advocates for people of color have gone too far. White victimhood is a consistent theme in their rhetoric.

Can we see some actual quotes?

True the Vote’s introductory video became famous not only for showing pictures of black voters as it discussed voter fraud, but also for featuring an altered photograph of an African-American woman holding up a sign: “I only got to vote once.” The original photograph said “Don’t mess with my vote.” That initial slide has since been removed, and some of the captions were changed. Even the edited version of video has become hard to find now on the internet.

I genuinely feel sorry for these folks if they fell for an obviously horribly Photoshopped image. They should have used this story instead. No Photoshopping necessary.

One key piece of evidence that’s been repeated against and again by True the Vote leaders is the story of a vacant lot where multiple voters were registered. True the Vote considered it a smoking gun. However, according to Doug Ray, the senior deputy attorney in the Harris County Attorney’s Office, the vacant lot had been a subdivided house until the owner sold it and everything was knocked down. “It’s not an example of voter fraud, “ Ray says. “It’s just an example of how mobile the population of Houston is.”

Oh my God, is this hilarious. They’re so incredibly mobile in Houston! They just aren’t mobile enough to be able to get to the DMV to get an ID. It’s as though the Collective never stops to think before it lies. lol!

Lewis said that after the True the Vote claims, the registration drive’s funding largely dried up and volunteers quit. “Houston Votes was viciously and falsely attacked for alleged ‘voter fraud’ to impede our voter registration of lower income and minority citizens and to scare up Tea Party poll watchers for minority areas,” he wrote in an e-mail.

Poor Houtson Votes.

Engelbrecht herself has accused Houston Votes of being part of the New Black Panther Party.

But the group does little to fight allegations of racism. In 2010, when I asked True the Vote attorney Kelly Shackelford about the allegations, he brushed them off. “A lot of districts who’ve never had poll watchers, then poll watchers show up for the first time and they’re a different color than them and they just don’t like that,” he said. Instead, he explained, the real issue was intimidation of the poll watchers by the voters.

So are we to gather from this that Abby’s assertion is that use of white poll workers is racist?

Later in her presentation, however, Engelbrecht got serious. “Be prepared,” she said. “Because you will be vilified. We have been called the largest voter suppression effort ever in the history of the country by the Huffington Post.”

The crowd cheered at that remark, as she said ruefully, “in some circles that would not be an applause line.”

It’s pretty clear here that the crowd was applauding the Huffington Post’s disapproval, not a function as a voter suppression effort.

Now, when we go the about page for prospect.org, we find this:

What’s it mean to be a liberal magazine?
Good question. It doesn’t mean all our contributors agree with each other, but we do share a broad commitment to working toward a society in which everyone gets a fair shot and is treated equally and with respect by our institutions. If you put our vision on a bumper sticker, it would read: Hey, We’re in This Together or—according to our fans on Facebook—Hey, We Actually Care About People! You can read more about who we are here.

So the site admits to its “liberal” positions. Which is fine. But then we also find this:

How can you be objective if you’re liberal?
Our idea of journalism is different from the mainstream media’s. We don’t subscribe to the simple notion that IDEA + OPPOSITE IDEA = OBJECTIVITY. We get the numbers and the historical facts right, but we acknowledge that we bring a particular worldview to our work.

We try our best to represent conservative ideas fairly, even if we disagree with them, but you’ll also notice our contributors often disagree most fiercely with each other. You won’t see us arguing about whether or not someone without insurance deserves health care, but you will find us duking it out over the best way of providing it.

So the site is either wanting to be liberal and objective simultaneously, which is weird considering that the two are clearly mutually exclusive. Or it’s attempting to be disingenuous by publishing liberal tripe while proclaiming, “hey, we’re objective.” Sure. lol

0

@Greg:

Not to mention the fact that Matthew Vadum’s article itself is a load of crap. There’s no evidence for his assertion that “double voting is distressingly common.”

How about sextuple voting?

Anyone who genuinely believes the facts cited in the linked P J Tatler article are evidence of widespread voting fraud has got to be a bit simple. All they’re actually evidence of is poor voter roll management.

Can we cite Politico instead?

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/nc-probes-possible-double-voting-105335.html

But this is the primary difference between the prospect.org and American Thinker articles. While one provides linked citations to its claims which can then be argued about, the other mostly provides anecdotes reminiscent of public radio ruminations, and uncited unlinked claims.

0

Social Justice

or is that Economic Justice?

Just how many different justices are there anyway?

0

IRS demands Ron Paul’s list of donors

Ron Paul group to defy IRS

0

Kraken
ONE MORE ON THEIR LIST, I THINK THEY HAVE THE WRONG ONE,
RON PAUL IS A FIGHTER,
BYE.

0

lerner is scare to death that’s how the irs loose their arrogance,
more of them will follow,the people are not done with them,

0
1 2