Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976?Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use. Unless you are in this field of investigative journalism, especially covering extremely sensitive subjects and potentially dangerous subjects as well, you simply cannot understand the complexities and difficulties involved with this work that I face every day.
Monday, June 9, 2014
Sunday, June 8, 2014
House Republicans Vote to Deny Second Amendment Rights to Millions
House Republicans Vote to Deny Second Amendment Rights to Millions
Last week while the NRA was spending their time and our money supporting Thad Cochran and denigrating those of us who supported Chis McDaniel, many Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives were busy passing more gun-control legislation.
According to Dudley Brown of the National Association of Gun Rights one in three Republicans decided to vote against your rights by supporting Barack Obama’s agenda to label millions of American’s “mentally ill”. The Obama administration has been successful in denying more over 175,000 of our nations veterans their Second Amendment rights in this manner and are attempting to expand this to every American.
The amendment provids $20 million additional dollars for the federal government to acquire as many private medical records as possible and dump them into a national database. Once these records are obtained millions of citizens will be labeled mentally ill and denied their right to possess a firearm.
The mental illness threat is largely made up by those seeking to limit our rights and destroy the Second Amendment. In research published by The American Journal of Psychiatry, VOL. 163, No. 8, Dr. Paul S. Appelbaum found through his research that only 5% of those convicted of violent crimes were people who suffered from a mental disorder.
Following his research, Dr. Appelbaum came to two conclusions, First, the proportion of violence that they (people with mental disorders) account for is relatively small, suggesting that the well-documented public perception of the mentally ill as dangerous persons is substantially exaggerated. Secondly, that the disproportionate attention given to their acts of violence by the media and by our elected representatives is unwarranted.
The assault on our rights and the Second Amendment comes from many directions. The Republicans who followed the lead of the Democrats and voted for this amendment are either allies with Obama in his attempt to destroy our rights or simply not smart enough to understand the real issue. Either way, they need to be sent home.
Here is the list provided by the National Association of Gun Rights of the Republicans who voted for this amendment:
| Alabama Spencer Bachus III (202) 225-4921California Darrell Issa (202) 225-3906 Edward Royce (202) 225-4111 Jeff Denham (202) 225-4540 David Valadao (202) 225-4695 Colorado Mike Coffman (202) 225-7882 Florida Vern Buchanan (202) 225-5015 Ander Crenshaw (202) 225-2501 Mario Diaz-Balart (202) 225-4211 Dennis Ross (202) 225-1252 David Jolly (202) 225-5961 Georgia Rob Woodall (202) 225-4272 Illinois Peter Roskam (202) 225-4561 Aaron Schock (202) 225-6201 Adam Kinzinger (202) 225-3635 Rodney Davis (202) 225-2371 Indiana Larry Bucshon (202) 225-4636 Todd Young (202) 225-5315 Susan Brooks (202) 225-2276 Iowa Tom Latham (202) 225-5476 Kentucky Harold Rogers (202) 225-4601 Ed Whitfield (202) 225-3115 Michigan Dave Camp (202) 225-3561 Mike Rogers (202) 225-4872 Fred Upton (202) 225-3761 Minnesota Erik Paulsen (202) 225-2871 Missouri Blaine Luetkemeyer (202) 225-2956 Ann Wagner (202) 225-1621 Nevada Joseph Heck (202) 225-32521 Mark Amodei (202) 225-6155 New Jersey Rodney Frelinghuysen (202) 225-5034 Frank LoBiondo (202) 225-6572 Christopher Smith (202) 225-3765 Leonard Lance (202) 225-5361 Jon Runyan (202) 225-4765 |
New York Peter King (202) 225-7896 Tom Reed II (202) 225-3161 Michael Grimm (202) 225-3371 Christopher Gibson (202) 225-5614North Carolina Walter Jones Jr. (202) 225-3415 Ohio Patrick Tiberi (202) 225-5355 Michael Turner (202) 225-6465 Steve Stivers (202) 225-2015 James Renacci (202) 225-3876 Bob Gibbs (202) 225-6265 David Joyce (202) 225-5731 Oregon Greg Walden (202) 225-6730 Pennsylvania Jim Gerlach (202) 225-4315 Tim Murphy (202) 225-2301 Joseph Pitts (202) 225-2411 Michael Fitzpatrick (202) 225-4276 Charles Dent (202) 225-6411 Glenn Thompson (202) 225-5121 Mike Kelly (202) 225-5406 Patrick Meehan (202) 225-2011 Tom Marino (202) 225-3731 Lou Barletta (202) 225-6511 Keith Rothfus (202) 225-2065 South Carolina Trey Gowdy (202) 225-6030 Mick Mulvaney (202) 225-5501 Tom Rice (202) 225-9895 South Dakota Kristi Noem (202) 225-2801 Virginia Eric Cantor (202) 225-2815 Bob Goodlatte (202) 225-5431 Frank Wolf (202) 225-5136 Scott Rigell (202) 225-4215 Robert Hurt (202) 225-4711 Washington Doc Hastings (202) 225-5816 Cathy McMorris Rodgers (202) 225-2006 David Reichert (202) 225-7761 Jaime Herrera Beutler (202) 225-3536 West Virginia David McKinley (202) 225-4172 Wisconsin Paul Ryan (202) 225-3031 Jim Sensenbrenner (202) 225-5101 Sean Duffy (202) 225-3365 Reid Ribble (202) 225-5665 |
(Source = 2014 House Roll Call Vote #249)
Please take a moment to call the members from your area and give them an earful.
Please take a moment to call the members from your area and give them an earful.
BREAKING: Ethics Charges Filed for Multiple Democrat Senators for Corruption
BREAKING: Ethics Charges Filed for Multiple Democrat Senators for Corruption
One thing in particular that has been learned is that the IRS targeting occurred at the behest of several Democrat Senators, and that the IRS broke the law by providing tax information to these Senators and their allies in order to help the Democrat Party mitigate their losses in the 2010 and 2012 elections.
It all stems from President Obama and the Democrats frustration over the Citizens United Supreme Court decision that cleared the way for conservative and libertarian political groups to get more involved in the political process.
The Center for Competitive Politics, which opposes campaign finance restrictions and other limits on political speech, filed a complaint with the Senate Select Committee on Ethics against nine Democratic senators, most notably Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin of Illinois and Carl Levin of Michigan, for repeated lobbying of the IRS to probe conservative groups.David Keating, President of the organization, made note of the IRS abuses that occurred under President Nixon, and the laws passed after Watergate, by Democrats, that would purportedly prevent such abuse from occurring again, especially from the White House.
It also specifically cites Charles Schumer of New York, who was the lead author of letters to the IRS signed by Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire; Tom Udall of New Mexico; Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island; Al Franken of Minnesota; Michael Bennet of Colorado; and Jeff Merkley of Oregon.
“If someone in the White House was connected it would make it a real criminal violation and a very sensational thing,” Keating told TheBlaze. “I doubt that happened. But there was huge heat coming from the Senate.”A staffer for the Senate Ethics Committee refused to confirm whether the matter would be investigated, but said that all charges are taken seriously.
“I don’t think it’s ever appropriate for Congress to ask a law enforcement agency to go investigate this group, go audit that group,” he added. “Congress is not the FBI. It is not the Justice Department.”
The complaint says the senators interfered with executive branch agency proceeding, misused official resources for campaign purposes, gave at least the appearance of impropriety, and engaged in conduct that might reflect poorly on the Senate.The complaint also notes that the targeting began almost immediately after Obama called out the Supreme Court and disparaged their Citizens United decision during one of his State of the Union addresses, inferring that all conservative groups were only posing as non-profits, and taking advantage of loopholes to conduct partisan political business.
“All of these actions appear to have been undertaken for electoral, rather than official purposes – Sens. Durbin and Schumer, in particular, have openly stated as much,” the complaint says. “Additionally, Sen. Levin’s repeated requests for information, after being explicitly informed that the information could not lawfully be disclosed, violate Paragraph 2 of the Code of Ethics for U.S. Government Service. We request that the Committee, in accordance with its mandate, investigate each violation accordingly and impose appropriate sanctions.”
“Within days, a member of the United States Senate abused his office to advance his political party’s midterm election campaign efforts by using official resources to pressure the Internal Revenue Service to investigate certain conservative organizations that Democrats had not been able to silence with legislation,” the complaint says, referring to Sen. Max Baucus (D-Montana), who became the U.S. ambassador to China earlier this year.This could very well be the smoking gun behind the IRS attacks on conservative and Tea Party groups. The IRS would likely not have gone after these groups the way that they did if they hadn’t been pressured to do so by Democrats in Congress.
Levin, the chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, had 14 correspondence to and from IRS officials from March 2012 to March 2013, where he urged the IRS to probe the nonprofit groups. In one he called for the IRS to send “a message…to Section 501(c)(4) entities on an urgent basis.” He also asked the agency to provide tax information about the political activity of the groups, to which IRS officials told him they could not legally provide him.
The complaint says the action by the senators may have triggered audits, citing a May 12, 2011 article in the New York Times that reported the IRS is sent letters to donors of 501(c)(4) groups “informing [the donors] that their contributions may be subject to gift taxes depending on whether the donations exceeded limits under the tax laws.”
The Times said “[t]he timing of the agency’s moves, as the 2012 election cycle gets under way, is prompting some tax law and campaign finance experts to question whether the I.R.S. could be sending a signal in an effort to curtail big donations.”
The Citizens United decision, which leveled the playing field and allowed regular conservative citizens to compete in the political arena against the established leftist groups and unions, has proven to be a thorn in the side of Democrats. They hate that decision because it lessened the advantage they had built up through the unions and Democrat machinery.
There is likely still more to be learned about the IRS targeting scandal, and it is now more apparent than ever that there must be special prosecutors appointed who can conduct outside investigations and determine the involvement of the numerous Senators implicated, along with the Justice Department and the White House.
Please share this on Facebook and Twitter if you are glad Democrats are getting hit with ethics charges for their role in the IRS scandal, and think they ought to lose their seats in Congress as well.
If you thought Judge Jeanine was mad at Obama before, buckle up!
If you thought Judge Jeanine was mad at Obama before, buckle up!
Judge Jeanine Pirro demanded President Obama’s impeachment for endangering national security in violation of his oath, Saturday.In a six and a half minute tirade on her Fox News show, “Justice with Judge Jeanine,” Pirro vilified the president for breaking “the sacred trust” between himself and “the people he leads.”
The former New York prosecutor and judge accused Obama of endangering our very existence for releasing 5 mass murderers, scorned him for elevating an incompetent Susan Rice to National Security Adviser after her despicable Benghazi lies on the Sunday morning talk shows, and for respinning his excuse to swap Bowe Bergdahl from “ill health” to “death threat.”
“My sources tell me, Mr. President, that you knew Bergdahl’s location for months,” she said. “Why didn’t you send in Seal Team Six? Why didn’t you send in those drones? Could it be that he was your excuse to release those 5 men from Gitmo?”
Pirro ripped Obama’s acceptance of the Qatari word that the killers would do us no harm and scoffed at his belief that 12 years in Gitmo hadn’t hardened their resolve to kill Americans.
“Mr. President,” she exclaimed, “you didn’t just release them, you unleashed them! And you, and you alone, will be responsible for the hell that will be unleashed on us.”
Pirro called his characterization of the murderous detainees as “POWs” hogwash.
“The Taliban is not a country and they are not POWs,” she said. “They are enemy combatants…I don’t give a damn whether you try them in Gitmo, a military tribunal, or a federal court. United States Attorneys have prosecuted these dirtbags and convicted them time and time again.”
“Demand impeachment,” she concluded, noting that we impeached one president for lying about sex with an intern and that Obama’s actions were far more egregious.
Judge in Reno orders Harvey Whittemore to prison Aug. 6
Judge in Reno orders Harvey Whittemore to prison Aug. 6
Martha Bellisle, RGJ
5:42 a.m. PDT June 6, 2014
U.S. District Judge Larry Hicks had allowed Whittemore to remain free while his appeal is decided, but after the U.S. Supreme Court issued a narrow ruling in a high-profile campaign finance case — a case Whittemore hoped would help him, his appeal lost its strength, the U.S. Attorney's Office said when it asked Hicks to reconsider the earlier order.
On Thursday, Hicks granted the prosecutor's request.
"In reviewing the remaining issues pending in Whittemore's appeal, the court finds that his appeal now fails to raise a substantial question likely to result in a reversal or a new trial," Hicks said.
Whittemore lawyer Justin Bustos said in an email: "we have no comment."
Nevada U.S. Attorney Dan Bogden said in an email: "The government did not believe under the Bail Reform Act or case law that Harvey Whittemore should be released pending appeal. We are very pleased with what we consider the fair and just decision of the court in this case."
At issue was the case McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, which said that setting limits on campaign contributions violated the First Amendment. Whittemore's lawyers had argued that a positive ruling could positively impact his appeal.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on April 2 that setting limits on "aggregate" contribution limits was unconstitutional, but they did not expand that to all types of contributions.
The following day, Bogden's office asked Hicks to reverse is order letting Whittemore stay free. They argued that "the underlying basis for the court's order granting his release no longer exists," according to Hicks' order.
Whittemore's lawyers responded by saying that regardless of the Supreme Court's order, Whittemore's appeal raises enough issues to put his conviction into question.
But Hicks disagreed.
"Whittemore's appeal raises several arguments that have already been discounted by the court both at trial and in several post-trial motions," Hicks said. "Further, in addressing Whittemore's motion for release, the court specifically found that it had already considered and rejected the prospective appellate issues Whittemore raised.
"There are no new issues raised in his appeal that could constitute a substantial question likely to result in either a reversal or an order for new trial.
"Therefore, the court finds that Whittemore is no longer entitled to release pending appeal."
After What Allen West Just Did, Obama Might Be Wishing He’d Never Heard Of Bowe Bergdahl
After What Allen West Just Did, Obama Might Be Wishing He’d Never Heard Of Bowe Bergdahl
Allen West, former Congressman, just took it to another level...
Calls for impeachment hearings against Barack Obama
have been common throughout his presidency, which has been plagued by
numerous scandals and allegations of increasingly brazen cover-ups.
The latest controversy surrounding the release of Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl has given those proponents even more ammunition to use against Obama. It has also brought new voices in favor of impeachment to the debate.
Among those are former U.S. Army Lt. Col. Allen West, who explained Tuesday
why he feels the circumstances surrounding Bergdahl’s release from
Taliban custody likely warrant impeachment. He listed a number of
factors that helped him reach this opinion.
First, he explained that Obama unilaterally declared unconstitutional a measure he himself signed into law requiring he give 30 days’ notice to Congress before releasing Guantanamo Bay prisoners.
“Once again Obama used selective discretion as to what law he feels he must adhere to – in this case it has severe ramifications for our national security,” West wrote.
The White House negotiated with the Taliban, he continued, which is a “non-state, non-uniform terrorist organization.”
Furthermore, when choosing which five terrorists he would allow to be exchanged for Bergdahl, West noted he picked a quintet of the most dangerous terrorists in the facility.
“There are some 141 detainees at GITMO,” he wrote. “The five released were senior Taliban officials, basically members of Mullah Omar’s inner circle. If we wanted to release detainees in exchange for Bergahl, there were many others to choose from. Why these?”
The recidivism rate among released terrorists has doubled, he wrote; and even administration sources up to and including Obama admit these five released prisoners pose a real threat to American safety.
In exchange for setting such dangerous individuals free, West concluded that America received in return a “deserter, who by his own self-proclamation harbors anti-American sentiments.”
While Obama claims that “no American should be left behind,” West points out the apparent hypocrisy of that statement, wondering if he has “forgotten about Benghazi and Marine SGT Tahmooressi.”
West concludes by declaring Obama’s “unilateral negotiations with terrorists and the ensuing release of their key leadership without consult – mandated by law – with the U.S. Congress represents high crimes and misdemeanors, an impeachable offense.”
He went on to call on congressional leaders “to draft articles of impeachment as no one is above the law in America.”
The latest controversy surrounding the release of Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl has given those proponents even more ammunition to use against Obama. It has also brought new voices in favor of impeachment to the debate.
First, he explained that Obama unilaterally declared unconstitutional a measure he himself signed into law requiring he give 30 days’ notice to Congress before releasing Guantanamo Bay prisoners.
“Once again Obama used selective discretion as to what law he feels he must adhere to – in this case it has severe ramifications for our national security,” West wrote.
The White House negotiated with the Taliban, he continued, which is a “non-state, non-uniform terrorist organization.”
Furthermore, when choosing which five terrorists he would allow to be exchanged for Bergdahl, West noted he picked a quintet of the most dangerous terrorists in the facility.
“There are some 141 detainees at GITMO,” he wrote. “The five released were senior Taliban officials, basically members of Mullah Omar’s inner circle. If we wanted to release detainees in exchange for Bergahl, there were many others to choose from. Why these?”
The recidivism rate among released terrorists has doubled, he wrote; and even administration sources up to and including Obama admit these five released prisoners pose a real threat to American safety.
In exchange for setting such dangerous individuals free, West concluded that America received in return a “deserter, who by his own self-proclamation harbors anti-American sentiments.”
While Obama claims that “no American should be left behind,” West points out the apparent hypocrisy of that statement, wondering if he has “forgotten about Benghazi and Marine SGT Tahmooressi.”
West concludes by declaring Obama’s “unilateral negotiations with terrorists and the ensuing release of their key leadership without consult – mandated by law – with the U.S. Congress represents high crimes and misdemeanors, an impeachable offense.”
He went on to call on congressional leaders “to draft articles of impeachment as no one is above the law in America.”
Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/allen-west-announces-support-impeachment-great-argument/#KX1becyAzu6xfS7B.99
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)