Who Will Guard Us From Our Guardians?

Obama Big Brother SC Who Will Guard Us from Our Guardians?

The government scandals of the day are packed with irony:   from the seizure of reporters’ phone record to the bungling in Benghazi; from the president’s slight of Thomas Jefferson to the IRS targeting opponents of big government.  If Woody Allen, Carol Brunette, Mark Twain, and anyone else who made the observation that comedy is tragedy plus time  are correct, perhaps this will be the fodder of funny men in the future, much as Monty Python tried to milk a few laughs from the Black Plague from the safe distance of 600 years.

But the Plague wasn’t funny then to the hundreds of millions who lived through it and died from it.  And there is not much laughing room now in watching our government grow more lawless by the day.

Nothing can really top the irony of President Obama’s belittling just days ago of people who say we need to be aware that governments can become tyrannical.  Presumably, Obama’s disdain extends to people like Thomas Jefferson who have warned about the need for vigilance against government abuse.

Such people “gum up the works,” said Obama.

What works, specifically, are those?  The answer came within only days with the discovery that the IRS was politicizing enforcement of tax provisions.   To make the irony complete, that story was immediately followed by news that the Justice department was snooping on reporters’ phone records without benefit of court orders or warrants.

The news that the Justice Department has been snooping through reporters’ phone records at least got the attention of the news media.  It would be nice if the media were as concerned with the rest of the government’s neglect of the Constitution.  It would be nice to see the lapdog press turn into the watchdog press.

Speaking of ironies, there are probably many in the media who don’t at all mind the IRS targeting opponents of big government – Tea Partiers and those interested in the Constitution – just as there are probably many conservatives who really don’t mind big government harassing big media.

Just when you think all of that is enough, we get the news that the Justice Department, itself suspected of gross indifference to the formalities of warrants, is now charged with investigating the IRS, which is indifferent to just about everything.

Meanwhile, those shocked – shocked, I tell you – to discover that the IRS has politicized tax enforcement are either wet behind the ears, or just dangerously naïve.  We know that presidents from FDR to Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon all used the IRS to target their opponents.

But use of the IRS as a weapon has not been limited to the executive branch.  In a Wall Street Journal column (“A Brief History of IRS Political Targeting,” 5/14/2013), James Bovard recounts episodes of congressional abuse, for example of  “an IRS official who had explained at an IRS meeting in San Francisco that audit requests from members of Congress or their staff had been shredded and also suggested how future requests from Capitol Hill could be camouflaged.”

Of the same practice used again, Bovard reports, “Audit requests from congressmen were marked ‘expedite’ or ‘hot politically’ and IRS officials were obliged to respond within 15 days. Permitting congressmen to secretly and effortlessly sic G-men on whomever they pleased epitomized official Washington’s contempt for average Americans and fair play. But because the abuse was bipartisan, there was little enthusiasm on Capitol Hill for an investigation.”

Sadly, it is true that the only time there is enthusiasm on Capitol Hill is when an investigation can produce partisan victories and electoral advantage.  That would explain Capitol Hill’s interest in the Benghazi fiasco:  If Hillary can be neutralized, and if Democrats can be faulted for mishandling Benghazi, Republicans are on the case.  But their interest stops dead in its track at the question of what we were up to in Libya to begin with.  After all, both Republican and Democrat fingerprints are all over the intervention in Libya.  And if the government was using Benghazi as a staging area to run guns to rebels in Syria – fighters uncomfortably similar to Al Qaeda -  then nobody wants to know.

The death of Ambassador Stevens and other Americans in Benghazi is a tragedy; but if the so-called diplomatic mission there was a CIA base, we deserve to know.  We do know that whatever it was in Benghazi, it wasn’t an embassy.  Or a consulate.

If the ambassador was really a CIA agent, that is a violation of our laws.  We deserve to know.  There is no law that commits the United States to protect illegal gunrunning.  And there is no diplomatic immunity for weapons dealers.

Where would the Benghazi trail lead if Congress cared about more than their own political fortunes?  Here’s a hint:  what we do know is that of the people evacuated by air from Benghazi the night of the attack, seven were diplomatic and State Department workers.  Twenty-three were CIA officers.

So from illegal operations overseas (does anybody remember a Constitutional declaration of war that authorized the U.S. to topple the government in Libya?) to snoops in the Justice department; from the targeting of political opponents by the IRS to a Congress concerned solely with the next election; from one badly stained department of government charged with investigating another to the president’s derision of Jeffersonian vigilance; from all this we are left to ask: who will guard us from our guardians?

Maybe it will all prove to be hysterically funny with the passage of enough time.

But for now, Ron Paul deserves apologies from those who, like Obama, believed that his calls for us to be vigilant about intrusive government were over the top.

 

Charles Goyette  is the author of the New York Times bestseller The Dollar Meltdown. His new book is Red and Blue and Broke All Over: Restoring America’s Free Economy.

This article is taken from Charles Goyette’s  Freedom & Prosperity Letter, a monthly political and financial newsletter, helping Americans protect themselves and their families.  GO HERE.

 

Photo credit: waif69 (Creative Commons)

Obama’s Assets Worth Between $1.8M And $6.8M

Barack Obama speech 11 SC Obama’s assets worth between $1.8M and $6.8M

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama held assets last year that were worth between $1.8 million and nearly $7 million, according to federal financial disclosure forms the White House released Wednesday.

Required by law, the forms allow public officials to list their assets in broad ranges, such as between $1 million and $5 million, which makes it difficult to determine a precise net worth.

Obama signed the eight-page report Tuesday and the White House released it Wednesday as the president remained on the defensive over how the administration explained last September’s attack on a diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador.

Obama also has been buffeted in recent days by the disclosure that the Internal Revenue Service targeted conservative groups and the Justice Department’s decision to secretly obtain two months of records for multiple telephone lines used by Associated Press reporters and editors.

The disclosure forms show the largest jointly owned asset was Treasury notes worth $1 million-$5 million. The Obamas also had $250,001-$500,000 in a JPMorgan Chase checking account, and $100,001-$250,000 in Treasury bills.

Read More at OfficialWire . By Darlene Superville.

Imagine…

Supported By Media Obama Knocked Out SC Imagine...

Remember the 1996 movie, “A Time to Kill”?

An adaptation of John Grisham’s 1989 legal thriller, it stars Matthew McConaughey as a small-town lawyer in Mississippi who defends a black man who killed the two white racists who had raped his 10-year-old daughter.

In his closing arguments, McConaughey asks the jury to close their eyes and listen to the painful details of a story about the brutal rape of an innocent little girl.

Then he ends his gripping story with a powerful request to the jury — “Now imagine she’s white.”

I was reminded of that powerful scene in “A Time to Kill” as I watched the raggedy parade of scandals coming out of Obama’s Washington last week.

The tragedy in Benghazi and subsequent spinning and covering up. The IRS harassment and abuse of conservative political groups prior to the 2012 election. The Justice Department’s seizure of Associated Press reporters’ phone records.

Now, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, close your eyes and think about the details of these crimes against the people by the Obama administration — and then imagine the president is George W. Bush or Ronald Reagan. `

Do you think the Benghazi, IRS, and AP stories might have been covered any differently if the president’s name didn’t start with “O” and his party didn’t start with “D”?

Of course they would have.

Do you think the American people would know a little more about Benghazi today if editors last fall at The Washington Post, The New York Times, or “60 Minutes” had issued orders to dig into what really happened there and why Ambassador Stevens was targeted for assassination?

I don’t know all the facts and answers about Benghazi or the IRS. But lots of folks in the Obama government do, and digging them up is supposed to be the job of an honest news media — some members of which are being shamed into finally doing their jobs.

It’s pretty amazing. Thanks to the IRS’ dirty tricks, even liberals are turning on St. Barack.

He now is being compared to Nixon, the only president every American is allowed to hate. Liberal pundits are dusting off the old “W” word — Watergate — and recycling forgotten terms like “enemies list.”

Of course the golfer in chief says he’s shocked — shocked, he tells us — to learn that IRS bureaucrats were doing dirty work on his behalf.

Of course the president knew nothing about the IRS’ crimes until last week. It was not his fault. It was those darn underlings again. He can’t help it if they love him so much they break the law.

And when the Justice Department went fishing at the AP last year for information about reporters’ phone calls, it was new news to the Prez. “I must have been golfing with Tiger that weekend,” I think I heard him say, “but I’ll get to the bottom of it and fire a few secretaries.”

Seriously.

Shouldn’t the media be asking if Obama has an enemies list? Or are enemies lists things that are only kept by Republicans and conservatives?

These major scandals rising out of the Obama administration — each pre-dating the 2012 election — are only now starting to attract the mainstream media attention they deserve.

The New York-DC media ignored Benghazi or pooh-poohed its importance until Obama was safely re-elected.

Now it’s beginning to sound like we should have known about those partisan crimes at the IRS last year, too — and we would have if Big Liberal Media had been acting like watchdogs instead of Obama lapdogs.

It’s great to see the shine finally coming off of President Obama’s phony halo. But it’s not the result of the “Second Term Curse,” as some of his apologists would like us to believe.

And it’s not because the mainstream media have finally stepped up and done their jobs as fair and honest journalists. It’s simply the result of the president’s character and the character of his sleazy regime.

Photo credit: terrellaftermath

RNC Chairman Says Holder Should Resign

Eric Holder 3 SC RNC chairman says Holder should resign

WASHINGTON — The chairman of the Republican National Committee says Attorney General Eric Holder should resign over the decision by the Justice Department to secretly obtain two months of telephone records of reporters and editors for The Associated Press.

RNC chairman Reince Priebus (ryns PREE’-bus) says Holder has “trampled on the First Amendment” by allowing the Justice Department to issue secret subpoenas to “spy” on The AP.

Read More at OfficialWire . By Ken Thomas.

A Timeline Of The IRS’s Scrutiny Of The Right

Build It IRS Will Come SC A timeline of the IRS’s scrutiny of the right

A look at events leading to the disclosure that the Internal Revenue Service placed conservative groups under special scrutiny for 18 months before the 2012 elections, a practice that has prompted congressional inquiries and a Justice Department criminal investigation:

2010:

March-April: IRS agents begin giving extra attention to tax-exempt applications from groups associated with the tea party or with a political sounding agenda in their names, such as “Patriots,” ”Take Back the Country” or “We the People,” according to the IRS inspector general.

August: The first IRS “BOLO” listing — meaning Be on the Lookout — is issued for “various local organizations in the Tea Party movement” that are seeking tax-exempt status.

___

2011:

June: Lawmakers send the first of at least eight letters asking the IRS to address complaints that conservative groups are being subjected to burdensome screening in their applications for tax-exempt status.

Read More at OfficialWire . By Calvin Woodward.

Photo credit: terrellaftermath