Categories
Archives
HELP US KEEP YOU BETTER INFORMED ABOUT THE TRICKS OF THE RADICAL PROGRESSIVE REVOLUTION PLEASE DONATE ANY AMOUNT YOU CAN
target="_top">

Posts Tagged ‘White House’

WHITE HOUSE FIRE DEPARTMENT

2014-11-19-JGHRU

Boehner: IRS scandal touches Oval Office

john_boehnerHouse Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, says it’s inconceivable President Obama did not know about the Internal Revenue Service decision to arbitrarily discriminate against conservative, tea-party and Christian organizations with invasive and probably illegal delays and questioning.

“It just doesn’t pass the straight-face test,” he said on a recent “Good Morning America” appearance. “How could – how can your chief of staff – your general counsel know, and you not know?”

The suggestion comes even as the IRS scandal that horrified the nation and already has brought a series of legal cases against the federal agency was being overshadowed by another scandal, the revelations of Obama’s spying on American citizens and their telephone and Internet records.

But Boehner insisted Congress will hold the IRS accountable.

“Our committees are going to do their job,” Boehner said. “Under the Constitution, we’re required to provide oversight in the executive branch.”

While the Washington Post noted that one of the officials in the division that targeted non-profit organizations, Holly Paz, has been replaced, others still need to be held accountable.

Lois Lerner, another official in that division, remains on full pay on leave while still another, Steven Miller, stepped down.

Writer Jason Stverak at Forbes put it bluntly.

“Through either gross incompetence or political malfeasance, Lois Lerner, the IRS director of tax exempt groups, allowed her department to target groups that didn’t agree with the Obama administration,” he wrote. “Among the litany of questions that remain, one of the most glaring is, ‘Why hasn’t Lois Lerner been fired yet?’”

In a commentary, Dr. James Dobson, founder of FamilyTalk, explained how his organization was targeted by the IRS.

“The arrogant power grab is leading us down a path toward a nanny state,” he said. “We don’t believe the government should have the power to control our speech, our religious liberties and now our health care. No wonder they also want to control our guns.”

NBC News reported, meanwhile, that the IRS scandal has prompted “intra-agency finger-pointing between the IRS central office and its much-maligned Cincinnati satellite.”

The report said accusations have spilled into Congress, where lawmakers are focusing on selected portions of the testimony of IRS staffers to try to sort out what happened.

National Review said it’s become clear hat the scandal encompasses much more than “a few rogue agents” in Cincinnati.

“Employees in the Cincinnati office made clear to members of the House Oversight Committee that they received direction from the Exempt Organizations Technical Unit in Washington,” the report said.

Secondly, there is evidence the targeting of conservative groups continued even after it was revealed, the report said.

Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice charged that “without question, the IRS misconduct of harassing and abusing our clients was still in high gear from May 2012 through May of this year.”

The National Review report said it was a myth that liberal groups also were targeted, arguing groups with words like “Progress” or “Progressive’”in their names were quickly approved.

There also is strong evidence that politics was a factor, the report said.

“Douglas Shulman, who was IRS commissioner when most of the targeting occurred, is a Democratic donor, and he is married to [a] liberal activist with ties to the Occupy Wall Street movement. IRS employees donated twice as much money to President Obama s they did to Mitt Romney in 2012, and nearly 30 times as much to Obama over his 2008 challenger John McCain,” the report said.

The report said the insistence of House Oversight Committee ranking member Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Ga., that the scandal is over is unfounded.

Cummings claims an anonymous IRS manager who labeled himself a “conservative Republican” said he was the one who started the targeting of the groups, meaning it wasn’t politically motivated.

“Based upon everything I’ve seen, the case is solved. If it were me, I would wrap this case up and move on,” Cummings said.

Majority Republicans in the House disagreed.

“The American people know instinctively that there is a serious problem at the Internal Revenue Service and that this is the moment to resolve the issue – not sweep it under the rug,” said Rep. James Lankford, R-Okla.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/boehner-irs-scandal-touches-oval-office/#RxYbKesVLQOeKG1V.99

White House Freaks Out Over Online Petition To Charge Sen. Feinstein With Treason Reaching 50,000 Votes

by Warner Todd Hustonfeinstein-guns
A petition to charge Dianne Feinstein with treason that has gotten nearly 50,000 signatures is causing a bit of heartburn in Obama’s White House forcing team Obama to come to Di Fi’s defense.
One of the somewhat silly things that team Obama did when it came to office was to set up a website where Americans could float petitions filled with ideas and issues that they want Obama to address. Now, in theory this idea sounds great. But in practice, Obama just ignores all these things. But they do offer an interesting story from time to time.
A recent petition offers one of those stories. It is the petition to charge California Senator Dianne Feinstein with treason for her constant attacks on the U.S. Constitution, the Second Amendment in particular.The strength of the petition has caused Obama to come to Feinstein’s defense. Ah, schadenfreude.
The anti-DiFi petition was created in December of last year and only five months later it had gained nearly 50,000 signatures. The fifty thousand mark is where Obama’s perpetual political campaign/White House staff have said that they will publicly address an issue directly.
The Petition
Here is the text of the petition:
Try Senator Dianne Feinstein in a Federal Court For Treason To The Constitution
The Constitution was written to restrain the government. No amendment is more important for this purpose than the 2nd amendment. The 2nd amendment was written so the power could be kept with the citizenry in the face of a tyrannical government. It was well understood the Constitution acknowledged certain rights that could not be limited by government.
Senator Dianne Feinstein has made it clear she does not believe in the Constitution or the inalienable rights of Americans to keep and bear arms. She is actively working to destroy the 2nd amendment with her 2013 assault weapons ban. For this reason we the people of the united States petition for her to be tried in Federal Court for treason to the Constitution.
By the end of May the petition had 41,162 signatures. If you want to sign, see the petition HERE.
We all know how Feinstein hates guns, of course. Remember this…

And it actually seems like we’re starting from a place of common agreement: Like many of you, President Obama believes that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms.
That’s never been in question with this discussion. What we’ve proposed are steps within the framework of that constitutional right to protect our communities from shootings and violence. If you want to see the specifics of our plan, you should visit WhiteHouse.gov/NowIsTheTime.
Now generally, it’s up to our courts to resolve matters of constitutionality. But no less an authority than Justice Antonin Scalia has written, “Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose” — so we’re pretty confident that we’re on solid ground when we say we support Senator Feinstein’s legislation to that effect.
We also believe that there’s room for a civil discourse on matters of public policy — where we don’t try to silence our political opponents just because we disagree with them. In America, all of us, even those with whom you disagree, have the right to help to set our nation’s course.
Which is exactly why we created the We the People platform. Even if you disagree with everything you just read, we want you to walk away from this process with knowledge that we’re doing our best to listen — even to our harshest critics.
Apparently the White House feels that insulting our intelligence by claiming that Obama respects the Second Amendment and the U.S. Constitution is the way to go, eh?
But, Obama is just as bad a lair and demagogue about guns as DiFi, so it shouldn’t be surprising that he is running to her support.

It is also a bit disingenuous to claim that DiFi is just doing her duty as a lawmaker, too. She tried this failed gun ban business back in 1995 and dozens of times since. With as many times as she’s tried and failed to get the Second Amendment nullified with un-Constitutional federal laws one would think that her lawless agenda would be pretty clear by now.
But, maybe I’m wrong? Is Dianne Feinstein just doing her duty? You tell me below.

Benghazi Talking Points Changed 12 Times

by Katie PavlichWhite House
It is no surprise by now if you’ve been paying any attention to the Benghazi scandal that the Obama administration totally ignored reports from the ground in Libya on September 11, 2012 when it came to developing talking points for the American public. From the beginning, President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary of Clinton, UN Ambassador Susan Rice and White House Press Secretary Jay Carney all told the American people the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were a result of a protest over a YouTube video raging out of control. As we’ve known for months and revisited Wednesday through testimony from whistleblower Greg Hicks, there was no protest. The video claim is completely fabricated. What happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack and was reported as such to Hillary Clinton at 2 a.m. Reports of a protest outside of the consulate were never issued from Libya to Washington because there wasn’t one.

Regardless, the White House, not the intelligence community, came up with falsified talking points. According to ABC News, they were changed 12 times.

ABC News has obtained 12 different versions of the talking points that show they were extensively edited as they evolved from the drafts first written entirely by the CIA to the final version distributed to Congress and to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice before she appeared on five talk shows the Sunday after that attack.

White House emails reviewed by ABC News suggest the edits were made with extensive input from the State Department. The edits included requests from the State Department that references to the Al Qaeda-affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia be deleted as well references to CIA warnings about terrorist threats in Benghazi in the months preceding the attack.

FLASHBACK:

That would appear to directly contradict what White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said about the talking points in November.

“Those talking points originated from the intelligence community. They reflect the IC’s best assessments of what they thought had happened,” Carney told reporters at the White House press briefing on November 28, 2012. “The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two institutions were changing the word ‘consulate’ to ‘diplomatic facility’ because ‘consulate’ was inaccurate.”

And about that whole al Qaeda thing? State Department Spokesman Victoria Nuland really didn’t like that, so she had it scrubbed. A final meeting at the White House before the talking points were used publicly eliminated any reference to al Qaeda and the warning signs about an attack and terrorism in Benghazi.

The CIA in its earlier versions of the talking points:

“The Agency has produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa’ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya. These noted that, since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador’s convoy. We cannot rule out the individuals has previously surveilled the U.S. facilities, also contributing to the efficacy of the attacks.”

In an email to officials at the White House and the intelligence agencies, State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland took issue with including that information because it “could be abused by members [of Congress] to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings, so why would we want to feed that either? Concerned …”

The paragraph was entirely deleted.

The CIA and the intelligence community were thrown under the bus by the Obama administration on Benghazi from day one, yet, the CIA was the only agency willing to actually tell the truth about what happened. The CIA gave the White House and the State Department accurate and factual information about al Qaeda and terrorist threats in Benghazi. They were ignored before the attack and then stripped after the threats came to fruition.

Is Obama Building A Bunker Under The White House Lawn?

by Zeke Millerwhite-house-hole-bunker

For over two years, crews have torn up the North Lawn of the White House just outside the West Wing for what the General Services Administration calls a “utility upgrade.”
But it seems everyone — including people who work at the White House — think something else is going on.
One West Wing official told The New York Times last month that “It is security-related construction,” adding “Even we don’t know exactly what.”
There are two other bunkers on the White House grounds — the hardened Situation Room, and the nuclear shelter under the East Wing. Is this a third? Is this some other secret underground project?
Tell us what you think in the comments below.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/obamas-new-bunker-2011-11#ixzz2HCbyo11m

National Security Leaks from White House

Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA), Chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, on Monday said the White House appears to be responsible for leaking classified national security information.

‘‘I think the White House has to understand that some of this is coming from their ranks,’’ Feinstein said at a World Affairs Council forum, according to the Associated Press (AP).

Republicans, such as Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), have accused the Obama administration of leaking national security information to win votes. Specifically, McCain mentioned the computer virus program that disabled some of Iran’s nuclear facilities — and other sensitive national security matters.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSemJz1d6zQ[/youtube]

The uproar intensified when the The New York Times ran a story titled, “Obama order sped up wave of cyberattacks against Iran.” The Times has also published stories on Obama’s “kill lists” with sources that were all affiliated with the Obama administration. TheTimes has denied that the Obama administration leaked information to them.
Democrat Pat Caddell has pointed the finger at National Security Adviser Tom Donilon as the primary leaker of sensitive national security information.

THEIR IS PINK SMOKE RISING FROM THE WHITE HOUSE’- AFTER OBAMA’S MARRIAGE FLIP-FLOP

Rush Limbaugh often takes opportunities to demonstrate his sense of humor, and to give credit to funny people, even when they come from a different position than him. The conservative talker has lent his voice, for instance, to the highly anti-conservative television show “Family Guy” as a favor to the show’s creator, with whom Limbaugh is friends.

And today, after Obama’s abrupt flip flop on marriage, Limbaugh decided to quote a sarcastic tweet from progressive consultant Jesse Berney, who took to Twitter after the President’s interview to post the following (apparently entirely facetious) Tweet:
Listen to the segment where Limbaugh quoted the Tweet below, courtesy of the Daily Rushbo:
Limbaugh’s website has also produced a satirical image riffing off the concept, reproduced below:

White House Realizes Error in Obama’s Supreme Court Attacks: Goes into Damage Control

The White House was forced on the defensive on Wednesday as it sought to explain controversial remarks President Barack Obama made earlier in the week about the Supreme Court’s review of his signature healthcare reform law.

“What he did was make an unremarkable observation about 80 years of Supreme Court history,” Carney told reporters during a White House briefing dominated by the topic.

Obama expressed confidence on Monday that the Court would not take an “unprecedented, extraordinary step” by overturning the law, provoking a storm of protest that he had been inaccurate and was challenging the nation’s top judges in an election year.

The Supreme Court could decide to reject his Affordable Care Act to expand health insurance to millions of Americans, striking down a key achievement of his presidency and potentially harming Obama’s bid for re-election on Nov. 6.

The president, who taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago, qualified the remark a day later by stressing he meant action by the Court on a matter of commerce, a legal distinction that cut little ice with his critics.

South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley, who backs Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination to confront Obama, told Fox News the president was “bullying the Supreme Court,” and the White House was grilled on whether he had gone too far.

During robust questioning when Carney was told at one point that he had mischaracterized what the president had said, the press secretary was forced to repeatedly defend the remarks of his boss as an observation of fact.

“Since the 1930s the Supreme Court has without exception deferred to Congress when it comes to Congress’s authority to pass legislation to regulate matters of national economic importance such as health care, 80 years,” Carney said.

“He did not mean and did not suggest that … it would be unprecedented for the court to rule that a law was unconstitutional. That’s what the Supreme Court is there to do,” Carney said.

Arguments in the case were heard over three days last week. A decision by the Supreme Court is expected by late June. (Reporting By Alister Bull)

Obama Joins with Egypt’s Brotherhood at White House – Promotes Muslim Way of life

White House officials held talks with representatives of the Muslim Brotherhood in Washington this week, as the Islamist group threw itself into the fray in Egypt’s presidential election.
The meeting on Tuesday with low-level National Security Council staff was part of a series of US efforts to broaden engagement with new and emerging political parties following Egypt’s revolution last year, a US official said.
The White House pointed out that Republican Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain, and other US lawmakers and officials had also met with Brotherhood representatives in Egypt and elsewhere in recent months.
“We believe that it is in the interest of the United States to engage with all parties that are committed to democratic principles, especially nonviolence,” said National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor.
“In all our conversations with these groups, we emphasize the importance of respect for minority rights, the full inclusion of women, and our regional security concerns.”
The Muslim Brotherhood’s political arm, the Freedom and Justice Party, said on Saturday it would nominate Khairat al-Shater, a professor of engineering and business tycoon, to contest Egypt’s first presidential election since a popular uprising ousted Hosni Mubarak last year.
The Islamists, who control parliament, had repeatedly said they would not put forward a member for the election in order to mitigate fears that they were trying to monopolize power.

WHITE HOUSE TRIES TO REBRAND OBAMACARE MANDATE EARNEST CALLS GOVERNMENT MANDATE ‘PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY CLAUSE

WHITE HOUSE TRIES TO REBRAND MANDATE
EARNEST CALLS GOVERNMENT MANDATE ‘PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY CLAUSE’
EMAIL US
BY: Bill McMorris – March 28, 2012 3:25 pm
The Obama administration is now referring to Obamacare as a “bi-partisan bill” and calling the unpopular individual mandate “a Republican idea,” following three days of tough questioning by the Supreme Court.

“The Affordable Care Act is a bipartisan plan and one that we think is constitutional,” Deputy White House press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters on Wednesday afternoon.

No Republican voted for the Affordable Care Act on final passage.

He also referred to the individual mandate as the “individual responsibility” clause of the bill, in an attempt to distance the administration from the term individual mandate.

“The administration remains confident that the Affordable Care Act is constitutional; one of the reasons for that is that the original personal responsibility clause…was a conservative idea,” he said.

Conservatives have blasted the administration for the individual mandate and only one Republican voted for Obamacare in both houses of the legislature.

Earnest deflected questions about the future of the law and Solicitor General Donald Verrilli. Many analysts have said that the court is likely to overturn Obama’s signature law after conservative members of the court, as well as Obama appointee Justice Sonia Sotomayor, bombarded Verilli with blistering questions over the mandate.

“There have been lower court cases where conservative judges have posed difficult, tough questions to Department of Justice lawyers … and conservative judges, who posed tough questions ended up upholding the Affordable Care Act,” he said.

Some also questioned the Verrilli’s performance, as he stumbled and coughed at times in defending the bill on Tuesday. Earnest defended the attorney.

“He’s one of the brightest legal minds in Washington, D.C.,” he said. “He gave a very solid performance before the Supreme Court, that’s just a fact.”

The spokesman did not know if President Obama had listened to trial transcripts, as he was flying back from Seoul, South Korea. He repeatedly said that the administration is not preparing contingency plans if Obamacare is struck down.

“We are focused on implementing all of the provisions of the law because they are important benefits,” he said, adding “we’re not, no,” when reporters asked again if alternative strategies are being considered.

“If there’s a reason or a need to consider contingencies down the line, then we will.”

The Heritage Foundation has been credited with introducing the concept of the individual mandate during the debate over Hillary Clinton’s healthcare reform almost 20 years ago, but has since come to oppose it. It is not the only group that has changed sides on the issue: Obama slammed then-rival Hillary Clinton over the mandate on the campaign trail.

“We still don’t know how Sen. Clinton intends to enforce a mandate … you can have a situation, which we are seeing right now in the state of Massachusetts, where people are being fined for not having purchased health care but choose to accept the fine because they still can’t afford it, even with the subsidies,” Obama said. “They are then worse off: They then have no health care, and are paying a fine above and beyond that.”

The mandate helped Obama win favor among the healthcare industry, which donated $2.3 million to his 2008 campaign. His fundraising among the healthcare industry has not slowed in 2012, with Obama raking in more than $360,000 from drug makers.

The Supreme Court finished its final day of hearings concerning Obamacare today, with arguments focused on whether a rejection of the individual mandate would invalidate the entire law.

The court is expected to issue a ruling in June.