[Daily Caller] Democratic New Hampshire Sen. Jeanne Shaheen was principally involved in a plot with Lois Lerner and President Champ’s political appointee at the IRS to lead a program of harassment against conservative nonprofit groups during the 2012 election, according to letters exclusively obtained by The Daily Caller.
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) did not want to publicly release 2012 correspondences exchanged between the IRS and Jeanne Shaheen at her personal Washington office: the agency delayed releasing the information to a major conservative super PAC multiple times, even threatening to see the super PAC in court, according to emails. Related: Liens Filed Against Dem Senator Jeanne Shaheen and Her Husband For Failure To Pay Creditors
#2
Glenmore - I've been following the IRS scandal pretty closely, since it's in my realm of professional interest. Some details may be new, but I've heard about this at least three or four months ago, when there were a number of Dem senators who signed a letter urging Lerner, et. al., to go after 501(c)(4) groups with 'conservative' sounding names back in 2011 / 2012.
Conservative guerrilla filmmaker James O'Keefe pretended to be a series of North Carolinians who hadn't voted in years
In precinct after precinct, election officials offered him ballots without confirming his identity
Only one polling place turned him away without an ID, but officials there were breaking the rules in order to do it
O'Keefe famously embarrassed US Attorney General Eric Holder by obtaining the cabinet member's ballot in Washington as a protest against the lack of an ID mandate at the polls â a racially charged US controversy
New Mexico officials said Saturday that someone had fraudulently voted in the name of a man who later showed up in person to cast his ballot
Posted by: Fred ||
11/04/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Throw everything out in NC. Fine these people $10,000 each. Hire new people and start over.
Racist dog whistle!
In the full audio of the interview, Michelle Obama gives everyone who votes permission to eat fried chicken.
Martin asked (at 7:15), “So can we, if we go out to the polls, can we, say, we have a souls to polls on Sunday, can we do soul food after we vote?”
Obama responded, “Absolutely. I give everyone full permission to eat some fried chicken after they vote. Only after, if you haven’t voted… You make a good point. Because I am, I do talk about health. But I think that a good victory for Democrats on Tuesday, you know, should be rewarded with some fried chicken.” On occasion, some people miss a good opportunity to shut the fuck up...
#2
Well, I can't wait to go vote and then have me some fried chicken, with her permission. Yes-sir-ree-bob.
Posted by: Bobby ||
11/04/2014 15:32 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I stopped at KFC for lunch beforehand. But that's because I'm going to vote straight Republican as soon as trailing daughter #1 gets back from the doctor. I've no idea how she'll vote -- she's considerably less liberal than I was at her age, but I put together a voter guide for her (the candidates and issues, so that she can decide for herself).
[WEEKLYSTANDARD] The Virginia Republican party says there are problems with some touchscreen voting machines in Virginia Beach and other communities. The party sent out a video of one voter attempting to vote for Republican House member Scott Rigell. As the voter's finger touches Rigell's box, the vote is registered for Suzanne Patrick.
The state GOP has written a letter to Virginia's department of elections alerting the agency to similar irregularities they've had reported elsewhere in Virginia Beach as well as in Arlington, Prince William, and Spotsylvania counties.
Voters in Illinois have also provided video evidence that their votes for Republicans during early voting last month were switched to the Democratic candidates. Local elections officials had admitted some previous problems with the touchscreen vote machine calibration.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/04/2014 12:34 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
But that's not the same a voter fraud. You dumb Trunks fell for the ol' switcheroo! You're watchin' the dead vote, and we gotta machine that guarantees a (D) win!
Used to live in Chicago Bobby
Posted by: Bobby ||
11/04/2014 15:19 Comments ||
Top||
#2
What kind of 'calibration' is required to ensure that the button you press registers the vote you intended?
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/04/2014 16:35 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Get back to Paper Ballots and carry a second pencil with you for "calibration".
Posted by: Bob Ghibelline1669 ||
11/04/2014 16:54 Comments ||
Top||
[Breitbart] Monday on TV One, a cable channel who's programming is geared for African-American adults, first lady Michelle Obama told Roland Martin the candidate on the ballot and what they say or do should not matter to African-Americans because voting for a straight Democratic ticket best serves their communities.
The first lady said, "Thats my message to voters, this isn't about Barack, It's not about person on that ballot, its about you, and for most of the people we are talking to, a Democratic ticket is the clear ticket that we should be voting on regardless of who said what or did this, that shouldn't even come into the equation." There it is, she actually came out and said it.
#3
That's right, Moochie. And so, in spite of everything you folks say about Carl DeMaio, he's a reliable vote against raising the debt ceiling and against amnesty so he's my guy.
#5
"Our community". The Rev. Dr. M.L. King would be so proud.
Posted by: Bobby ||
11/04/2014 12:45 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Represents
American Communist Party - First
National Association for the Advancement of Crazy People - Close First
"Our Community" - Close - Close First
Any Other Cause, Organization, or Weird Issue Besides America - Close - Close - Close First
Posted by: Bob Ghibelline1669 ||
11/04/2014 16:49 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Obviously what she said has been put to practice; her doofus husband ended up as POTUS twice. "These people (Alinskites)" believe in parsing out groups and creating divisions and hatred where none exists.
[Washington Post] Independent Kansas Senate candidate Greg Orman sent a 256-word e-mail to former Senate majority leader Bob Dole last Friday, denying that he referred to the Republican luminary as a "clown" last week.
"I want to assure you that this is not true and is not my opinion of you in any way, shape or form," Orman wrote. "My reference to a 'clown car' was commenting on the near-endless number of political supporters of Senator [Pat] Roberts who have piled out of Washington to support him, none of whom I think are clowns. I certainly wasn't calling you - or any of the others supporting Senator Roberts - a 'clown.'"
Speaking earlier last Friday, Orman derided the stream of GOP surrogates who have come to Kansas to boost Sen. Pat Roberts (R), three-term incumbent. Political visitors have included Willard Mitt Romney ...former governor of Massachussetts, the Publican nominee for president in 2012. He is the son of the former governor of Michigan, George Romney, who himself ran for president after saving American Motors from failure, though not permanently. Romney has a record as a successful businessman, heading Bain Capital, and he rescued the 2002 Winter Olympics from the midst of bribery and mismanagement scandals.... , Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), and Rep. Paul Ryan ...U.S. Representative for Wisconsin's 1st congressional district, serving since 1999. He is a member of the Republican Party. He proposed an alternative to President Obama's 2011 budget and made himself the target of both Democrat and Republican verbal pies... (R-Wis.). "It sort of seems like a Washington establishment clown car to me. Every day a new person comes out of that car," Orman said.
Dole, 91, shared the email with The Washington Post on Monday. In an interview, he described the e-mail as an "apology," and said he disagreed with the characterization of it by Orman's front man, who has called Orman's previously undisclosed note an attempt to set the record straight.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/04/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
[THEHILL] President B.O. believes that Democrats will hold the Senate in Tuesday's midterm elections, expecting a strong ground game to help vulnerable members of his party locked in tough reelection battles.
White House press secretary Josh Earnest was asked Monday if Obama agreed with Vice President Biden, who told CNN earlier in the day that he did not "agree with the odds-makers" and thought Democrats would "keep the Senate."
"He does," Earnest said, adding that confidence was rooted in the idea voters would hone in on whether they would "be supportive of a candidate who is fighting for policies that benefit middle-class families."
"So that is a very strong argument for Democrats to effectively make in the context of this campaign," Earnest said. "They're are also backed by a tried-and-true ground campaign strategy that, in the context of a very close race, can provide a 2-3-point margin that could eventually make up the difference."
But despite that optimism, the White House on Monday was looking to pre-emptively downplay the results of the election. Noting that the "vast majority" of close Senate races were taking place in states President B.O. did not win in 2012, Earnest argued "the electorate is different this time than it is in a traditional presidential election."
Posted by: Fred ||
11/04/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Our ballot box stuffing experts has been dispatched. DOJ stands ready to investigate complaints of voting fraud wherever Republicans win"?
#4
Holder has reportedly sent DOJ inspectors, whomever to 18 state election committees. Evidently they were dispatched without invitation from the states. I hope this entire exercise doesn't turn into some kind of legal, civil rights manufactured hell.
[BREITBART] Monday afternoon on MSNBC, NBC News' Tom Brokaw was asked what Americans are thinking heading into Tuesday's midterm election.
"Well, they're thinking that they'd like to have Washington get something done," Brokaw said. "The question is, not just which party can get it done, but how can they change the tone of Washington so they can work together."
"I was listening to Gov. Haley Barbour a moment ago, no one is shrewder in the Republican party than Haley, and last week Senator Portman from Ohio was talking about the agenda for the Republicans if they gain control of the Senate; the question then is, what are they prepared to give to the Democrats to meet them in the middle ground?"
"What are they going to do about immigration, what are they going to do about the minimum wage?" Brokaw continued. "Things have not been done in the last couple of years, in part because both parties have staked out positions at either end of the spectrum and refuse to meet in the middle. That's the question I think that the country is really fed up with."
"If you go around America, city councils in Seattle, Los Angeles and Atlanta are getting things done because they work together. It doesn't happen in Washington."
Posted by: Fred ||
11/04/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Why must republicans always "give" to "get something done"? Let the left give up something for a change.
#3
Depends on the meaning of "get things done". Screw up health care? Mess up the economy? Kill jobs? Drive up energy prices? Maybe when it comes to "getting things done", less is more.
#6
In my adult lifetime Democrats have compromised exactly three times with Republicans.
-Clinton signing a Republican balanced budget
-Clinton signing a welfare reform bill
-Clinton signing NAFTA
Every other time, without exception, "compromise" has been defined as the center and right coming 95%-99% of the way towards the Democrat position. No exceptions. Thousands of bills and policy decisions.
When Republicans win, it's always talk about what they should give up. When Democrats win, they say the same. Heads we win, tails we lose. How very mature and "progressive".
You can go to hell, Mr. Brokaw.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
11/04/2014 4:54 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
11/04/2014 6:24 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Considering the Dems will most likely have McConnell and Boehner instead of Cruz and Issa as leaders to work with I would say they already got enough.
#10
We'll give you firm opposition to the Democrats' statist agenda, in the shape of deregulation, the abolition of several agencies, and ending usurpation of powers by the executive and judicial branches.
Anything else we can help you with? how about voter IDs with swift punishment for fraud?
Posted by: Si vis pacem para bellum ||
11/04/2014 8:03 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Brokaw can go fuck himself with a hockey stick.
[RASMUSSENREPORTS] Voters, regardless of race, agree that most politicians play the so-called "race card" just to pick up votes. Still, blacks strongly believe that those who oppose President B.O. are racist. 77% of potential voters think politicians promise pie in the sky. 42% expect to eat it.
Just nine percent (9%) of Likely U.S. Voters think most politicians raise racial issues to address real problems, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Seventy-eight percent (78%) say they bring up race just to get elected. Thirteen percent (13%) aren't sure. "Whut?... Couldja repeat the question?... Oh, sure. I think."
There is surprising racial agreement. Sixty-eight percent (68%) of blacks agree with 79% of whites and 81% of other minority voters that most politicians raise racial issues just to get reelected. Most pols will let you have sex with their grannies to get elected.
These findings are similar to those regarding another common political charge these days, that some candidates are engaging in a "war on women." But 59% of voters say the "war on women" is primarily a slogan used for political purposes. Only 22% believe there really is a political "war on women" going on. You want to see a "war on women", look anywhere from Mosul to Riyadh to Lahore.
When it comes to the specifics of the president, however, a racial divide is evident. Eighty-seven percent (87%) of black voters believe those who oppose Obama's policies do so because of racism. Sixty-seven percent (67%) of whites and 56% of other minority voters think instead that opposition is primarily because they believe the president's policies are bad.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/04/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
[CNSNEWS] "The public is concerned and frightened because it's a frightening world. A lot has happened," Vice President Joe Foreign Policy Whiz Kid Biden The former Senator-for-Life from Delaware, an example of the kind of top-notch Washington intellect to be found in the World's Greatest Deliberative Body... told CNN in an interview that aired on Sunday.
Biden noted that in every crisis, "there's all kinds of attention" from Twitter and the news media. But later, "when we put it under control," there's not much follow-up, Biden complained.
So the public shouldn't be anxious about Ebola and ISIS? the news hound asked him.
"I think the public should not be as anxious as they are, but it's understandable why they are. There is no existential threat to the United States right now.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/04/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"I think the public should not be as anxious as they are, but it's understandable why they are.
The little people just don't get it, do they Plugs ?
#3
Come on Mugsy, you know Joe can't help himself because
"May 04, 1988 · Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. underwent surgery today to correct an aneurysm in an artery that supplies blood to the right side of the brain, a spokesman …"
But I will admit 'Public Is...Frightened Because It's a Frightening World Biden'
[UNIONLEADER] A few issues went missing from the debate in this year's elections, none more important than efforts to violate the people's constitutional rights (real efforts, not imagined ones). That is rather stunning, not to mention disappointing.
U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen has co-sponsored a constitutional amendment that would allow the federal government and the states to regulate speech. It would allow government to abridge speech, thus nullifying that section of the First Amendment.
The First Amendment states clearly that "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...." The amendment Shaheen co-sponsored would add clauses empowering both Congress and the states to regulate donations to candidates and spending that influences elections.
Suddenly, Congress and the states could regulate everything from yard signs to Internet videos -- anything that costs money and influences an election. The government could decree that no one may spend money on political messages within 30 days of an election, or that no one may buy pizza for campaign volunteers, or that no one may create a website designed to influence the outcome of an election in an election year.
Think this is far-fetched? The chairman of the Federal Election Commission said last week that commission members are considering creating a review board to oversee online videos to make sure that anyone who posts an election-related video has complied with federal campaign finance laws. Give government the broad authority to regulate all election-related expenditures, and there would be no end to the suppression of citizens' political speech.
Posted by: Fred ||
11/04/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
What do the Donks want to do, replace the 1st Amendment with some statement of "Political Correctness" to separate the socialists from the communists?
By DAVID SCHANZER and JAY SULLIVAN
[NY Times] By Tuesday night about 90 million Americans will have cast ballots in an election that's almost certain to create greater partisan divisions, increase gridlock and render governance of our complex nation even more difficult. Meaning the Dems are gonna get stomped and deservedly so.
Ninety million sounds like a lot, but that means that less than 40 percent of the electorate will bother to vote, even though candidates, advocacy groups and shadowy "super PACs" will have spent more than $1 billion to air more than two million ads to influence the election. Voting in the U.S. is a right, not an obligation. If you don't vote you end up with what everybody else voted for. Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
11/04/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
There's an obvious, simple fix, though. The government should, through a constitutional amendment, extend the term of House members to four years and adjust the term of senators to either four or eight years, so that all elected federal officials would be chosen during presidential election years.
Wat the bloody hell! Why not simply make lifetime appointments. They're losing, so now they want to alter the process. NICE !
#4
Continuing to buy or otherwise support the NYT is support for fascism in America.
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
11/04/2014 6:23 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Maybe it would be better for America to have a handful of really smart ivy leaguers; who have travelled extensively with a broad world view, pick and choose the leaders. And the chosen will need approval from the Nobel committee and the UN Secretary General. This would guarantee diversity, save money and stop the partisanship.
#9
The first steps in totalitarianism. If the NYT's had it their way we would suspend all blue state elections and leave Obama in office forever...
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
11/04/2014 10:52 Comments ||
Top||
#10
There's an obvious, simple fix, though. The government should, through a constitutional amendment, revolk the First Amendment rights for the NYT.
Posted by: regular joe ||
11/04/2014 11:56 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Midterms are fundamental.
Here in Europe we don't have midterms and since the Presidentail and legislative elections are held sme day or close to one another through dissolution it means legislative is ver of the same side than the president. In other words it doesn't control executive at all anbd wil approve any nomination in the judiciary. In addition the "amplificative" effect of many electoral systems makes the president has a super-majority perhaps even one string enough to amend the Constitution. After one year we discover the Great Man is not so great but we can do nothing about it: we voted the mlegislature in tyhe wake of his election and w e repent but we can do nothiung but armed insurection.
And taht is what is greta in midterms: perople vote for Obama because they told them Bush was eeeeeevil and vote Democrat for Congress becauise , well Bush was a Republican and Obama is so cool and has a nice dog. But two years later when minds have cooled and people notice begin to judge Obama by what he is and not by the fact he is not the eeeeeeeevil Bush, when they begin to notice he is not that great adnd there are no blue unicorns they can restrain what President can do. And that is good (TM). And that helps a bit to keep both the President and the Representives honest: because they know gfar too well that in two years they will face new elections they cannot afford to be mere "Yes, men" to the President. It is not perfect (cf Obamacare) but it helps. We in Europe are sentenced to four, in some countries five years of chief of executive doing what hge wants and legislative bodies voting wahtever the exceutive orders hwoever crazy it can be.
#13
Just change to a parliamentary system with proportional representation.
In parliamentary systembecause executive has to be approven by the Parliament and in addition gas the power of dissolving it the end result is the Parliament ends dancing to the tune played by the executive.
IN a proporional system it means a blatant paedophile will be elected whatever the voters think if he is number one or two in the list of a Party that is expected to get two hundred represntatives. In a proportional system a hinghe pârty repersenting two, pêrcent of electors or more excgtaly its leaders hold the key of power and will act as kingmakers meaningt it is thel, not the people who have the power. In a propsrtional sysem after elections big parties negotiate wiit the hinge aprty without voters having any saying abou that.
Proportional system was born in aristocratic countries wanting to give the illusions of democracy all while holding the people a s far away from power as possible.
#14
JFM, it's the other way around. The Parliament can throw out the chief executive with a simple vote of confidence (50% + 1). In addition, in proportional representation, there are always coalition negotiations. Which, somebody like Obama would never survive: you can fool the sheeple but not the other wolves.
#15
David Schanzer is a professor of public policy and Jay Sullivan is a junior at Duke.
Looking forward to the NYT editorial demanding that Obama be made President For Life, written by Mrs. Zwicky's kindergarten class and Pinch Sulzberger's cat.
#16
Despite what progressives say, the "deadlock" between the Congress and the President is a FEATURE of the Constitution, not a bug. As JFM has pointed out, in other countries, the executive can do as he wishes, as long as he retains a majority and the confidence of the legislature.
In America, the Founding Fathers were very big on limited government.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
11/04/2014 18:11 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Simple, scare panic the people into einto voting YOUR way.
Posted by: Redneck jim ||
11/04/2014 18:20 Comments ||
Top||
[FREEBEACON] B.O. regime National Security Adviser Susan Rice rudely mocked Israel's ambassador during a recent meeting with an American Jewish leader.
Rice, who is known to dislike the Israeli government, was asked in a recent meeting with a top American Jewish leader why she had not taken meetings with Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer.
"Rice responded, with her characteristic sarcasm, 'He never asked to meet me,'" Haaretz reported Rice as saying.
The president's top aide then mocked Dermer and conservative casino magnate Sheldon Adelson.
"Besides, I understood that he's too busy traveling to Sheldon Adelson's events in Las Vegas," Rice reportedly said with contempt.
Rice, Haaretz reported, "was referring to Dermer's exceptional attendance as guest of honor at a gathering of the Republican Jewish Coalition in March. That event served to prove to Obama's aides that despite the 'new leaf' Dermer had promised when he arrived in Washington only a few months earlier, he continued to dabble in American domestic politics as a sympathizer with the red, Republican side."
Posted by: Fred ||
11/04/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Can we now assume Rice is also the source of the recent derog reference to Netanyahu ?
#3
From an Middle East intelligence sharing and collaboration aspect, one has to wonder at what point Aman and Mossad told U.S. Intelligence to go fok off. I simply cannot imagine a business as usual situation.
#4
A bit more on India's decision to buy the Israeli anti-tank system [over the U.S. system]. The story ran here the other day. This one has a photo of the actual IS system.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[WEEKLYSTANDARD] The Virginia Republican party says there are problems with some touchscreen voting machines in Virginia Beach and other communities. The party sent out a video of one voter attempting to vote for Republican House member Scott Rigell. As the voter's finger touches Rigell's box, the vote is registered for Suzanne Patrick. 
[THEHILL] 
It's not working, it's just not working. 
Joe 
