ACTION

The IRS Tea Party Scandal grows exponentially daily as more and more revelations of the degree of harassment against the Tea Party organizations, and dozens of other conservative groups, deepen. What is clear and certain with each twisted statement uttered by White House Press Secretary Jay Carney at his daily briefings is the drip, drip, drip of apparent cover up conduct.

Now it has been revealed by Fox News that even the IRS Inspector General’s audit report on Tea Party was coordinated between the IRS, Department of the Treasury and the White House Chief of Staff and the White House Counsel well before the president admitted knowledge of it from news reports.

In actuality, according to J. Russell George, the Treasury inspector general for tax administration admitted last week before the House Ways and Means Committee, that he informed officials of a Tea Party conduct audit at Treasury on June 4 2012, according to the Associated Press. Those officials were Treasury’s general counsel, on June 4, 2012, and Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin afterward.

The facts that are now being strained by the congressional Oversight Committee from administration witnesses in response to the IRS Inspector General Report are merely the tip of the iceberg. The reality that basic civil liberties of all Americans are at stake if a rouge operation exists within this organization and can impede and invade the rights of Tea Party members.

Only a House Select Committee can combine resources and investigators into who is involved, what was covered up and, as Speaker Boehner said, who should go to jail.

After all, this was not just a break-in of a political office, but was a breakdown of the administration of law and an invasion of the rights of America citizens who care deeply about this nation. The crime they committed, according to the IRS’ offensive criminal conduct, was being a member of Tea Party organizations or other conservative groups.

Impeachment Article 2:4 states in part:

“He has failed to take care that the laws were faithfully executed by failing to act when he knew or had reason to know that his close subordinates endeavoured to impede and frustrate lawful inquiries by duly constituted executive, judicial and legislative entities.”

Read more: http://clashdaily.com/2013/05/nixon-and-obama-impeachment-for-irs-scandal/#ixzz2U8NwCEGQ

                                              Will Hillary Clinton damage 2016 presidential run with Benghazi attack

                                      cover up Congressional committee testimony

Typically, when most liberal political kingmakers pontificate about the next Clinton to grasp the presidential mantle, it is done with an air of obvious entitlement.  Hillary Clinton has positioned herself for this office ever since her days as a staff attorney for the House Judiciary Committee, which was investigating Watergate.

It was in the congressional backrooms that Hillary, began a pattern of alleged deceitful behavior that would serve her through many a state and federal prosecutorial investigation.  These investigations followed her and her husband, Bill Clinton from Arkansas to the White House, and now beyond.

Yet, the most onerous of Hillary claims has been linked to a web of mangled White House storylines concerning Benghazi Consulate security, attack, murders and what the president knew and when did he know it.

Fabrication of events is not new for Hillary Clinton, and according to her former boss Jerry Zeifman, who was “counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee,”  Hillary Clinton was fired from her position on the committee as a s...

 

The mainstream media kept this embarrassing side note out of the public eye when her husband, Bill Clinton ran for President in 1992 and in her own run for the U.S. seat from New York in 2000.

Yet, Jerry Zeifman, seemed compelled to alert the nation about Hillary Clinton, who in 2006 was making coordinated moves to run for President in 2008.  In his book, “Hillary Pursuit of Power,” he stressed, while working on the Judiciary Committee, Clinton, “… engaged in a variety of self-serving unethical practices in violation of House rules."

Therefore it should be of surprise to no one that she was caught up in purported lies while First Lady of Arkansas as well as First Lady of the United States.  These scandals included in Whitewater illegal activities, the Travelgate cover up and her conveniently manufactured lie about coming under attack while visiting Bosnia.

( Click to read more )

This week former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin penned an article on Facebook with the title "Obama's Shuck and Jive Ends With Benghazi Lies,” This has set off a firestorm of criticism throughout the liberal punditry world.  MNBC’s Chris Matthews has railed against Palin, calling her comments of having "a particular ethnic connection" and that she aimed "to throw it at the president as an ethnic shot is pretty blatant."

What about President Obama’s own White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, who used the phrase last year in September 2011?  In talking to the press corps at the beginning of a White House briefing, he stated, "Sorry. I'm going to shuck and jive! Time to shuck and jive."  So America gets it, only certain people can say it. Where was the liberal rap on the knuckles for insulting black people or his boss?

Should Chris Matthews and other liberals, receive a free pass when they have used the phrase on several occasions without similar howls of protest.

In fact, Chris Matthews the self appointed defender of the liberal faith used the phrase in 2010 when fellow MSNBC pundit Rachel Maddow was discussing her ratings driven trip to Afghanistan.  Matthews reportedly asked Maddow, “What has it been like, as you shuck and jive, hang out with the men over there, the women over there, in uniform risking their lives every day?”

Did Matthews become suddenly affected with “Obamnesia,” the known malady which infects liberals’ with sudden outbursts of hypocrisy and a temporary loss of liberal fictional talking points?  Matthews clearly had a strong case of this.  Yet, where was the outcry from the defenders of the liberal faith?  Was Matthews hoping that Maddow would discuss how she found proud black soldiers risking their lives, engaging in being foot shuffling’ Negros?

What about New Governor Andrew Cuomo, who while New York Attorney General, in 2008 targeted democrat presidential candidate U.S. Senator Barack Obama for his all too frequent side stepping of the facts?  Out of frustration, Cuomo blasted Obama in a radio interview by stating, "You can't shuck and jive at a press conference!"

Where were the liberal siren and alarm bells in 2008?  Where was Chris Matthew’s denunciation or even Rev. Jesse Jackson, or the other liberal pundits?  Meanwhile, some of the liberal cleanup crew likened Cuomo’s comments to a boxer who was “bobbing and weaving” around the facts.  So was it racist or was it inarticulate?

( read more )

With the continuing furor erupting concerning the highly partisan nature displayed by Candy Crowley during the second presidential debate, the real question has evaded the American voter.  Who is truly responsible for acts of journalistic misconduct and what should be done when a debate moderator decides to go rogue, as Crowley did in favoring Obama?

The Commission on Presidential Debates is the organization which sponsors the presidential and vice presidential debates and it claims that these debates will be conducted in “a professional and nonpartisan manner.”  What happens when the journalist moderator interjects herself into the debate, in order to blunt a candidate’s momentum, as Crowley did to republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney?

Presidential Debate Commission Rules:

“ (c) With respect to all questions...

(iv) The moderator will not ask follow-up questions or comment on either the questions asked by the audience or the answers of the candidates during the debate or otherwise intervene in the debate except to acknowledge the questioners from the audience or enforce the time limits,”

Crowley deliberately and intentionally broke the agreed upon rules, and decided as Obama has decided during the course of his administration, that rules don’t apply and the ends justify the means.

So, what recourse do the American people have when a journalist is selected who openly ignores the rules in conducting the debate and in comments leading up to the debate?  What happens when the journalist moderator interjects herself into the debate, in order to blunt a candidate’s momentum, as Crowley did to republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney?

The easy answer is to say; simply that Republicans and GOP candidates who are the favorite targets of biased coverage in the mainstream media should just grit their teeth and bare it.  But that is not what the American public needs to see or should have to endure.  If a presidential debate commission purports to field “unbiased reporters” who are going to be fair and balanced moderators, then failing to do so should result in a penalty, and or permanent suspension of the reporter and their affiliated network from future participation in debates.

According to the national Verified Voting Foundation, in 2012 there are approximately 180,802,372 registered voters in America.  Voters are entitled to see a debate that is free from a moderator who appears to purposely steer a debate, to benefit the incumbent president Obama. Crowley’s behavior becomes even more suspect when one considers that Obama was increasingly losing ground to the republican challenger Mitt Romney.

Did CNN senior political reporter Candace Crowley conduct herself in a professional and nonpartisan manner?  Examine her earlier statement, when she announced that she would evade and ignore the professional rules of journalistic conduct, and inject herself into the presidential debate if and when she saw fit. So one has to question, who judges the moderators when moderators declare that they are above the rules as Crowley did?

It’s possible that the American people can supply the answer. ( Read More )

I have been googling all over the place for more news, but it's really under the radar. I got the post from a Natural Food's site. Please everyone, see what you can dig up about this. If true, this will upend a lot more than this administration:  http://wakeup-world.com/2012/05/05/landmark-lawsuit-by-us-home-owners-implicates-obama-and-big-banks-in-massive-global-laundering-scheme/