Herman Cain schools a black (racist) man, who needed education on what the true racist party is in the US.
http://www.caintv.com/a-caller-gets-schooled-by-herm
[h=1]News Nugget: A Caller Gets Schooled By Herman[/h]
http://www.caintv.com/a-caller-gets-schooled-by-herm
[h=1]News Nugget: A Caller Gets Schooled By Herman[/h]
[h=2]Democrats Took Bribes to Oppose Voter ID: Where Is Holder?[/h] March 19th, 2014 - 7:24 am
Pennsylvania Democrats were caught on surveillance tape reportedly accepting cash bribes in return for opposing voter ID in the Pennsylvania legislature. Gifts of Tiffany’s jewelry were also given to Democrat legislators from Philadelphia, reportedly in exchange for “NO” votes on a Pennsylvania voter ID bill that passed in 2012.
Despite this evidence, Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane has not charged any officials. Kane is a Democrat.
Kane’s excuse for her inaction? Racism: some of the legislators caught on tape accepting bribes were black Democrats from Philadelphia. From the Philadelphia Inquirer:
inShare3
Pennsylvania Democrats were caught on surveillance tape reportedly accepting cash bribes in return for opposing voter ID in the Pennsylvania legislature. Gifts of Tiffany’s jewelry were also given to Democrat legislators from Philadelphia, reportedly in exchange for “NO” votes on a Pennsylvania voter ID bill that passed in 2012.
Despite this evidence, Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane has not charged any officials. Kane is a Democrat.
Kane’s excuse for her inaction? Racism: some of the legislators caught on tape accepting bribes were black Democrats from Philadelphia. From the Philadelphia Inquirer:
In a statement to The Inquirer on Friday, Kane called the investigation poorly conceived, badly managed, and tainted by racism, saying it had targeted African Americans.
Those who favored the sting believe Kane killed a solid investigation, led by experienced prosecutor Frank G. Fina, that had ensnared several public officials and had the potential to capture more. They said they were outraged at Kane’s allegation that race had played a role in the case.
Before Kane ended the investigation, sources familiar with the inquiry said, prosecutors amassed 400 hours of audio and videotape that documented at least four city Democrats taking payments in cash or money orders, and in one case a $2,000 Tiffany bracelet.
Fine — a Pennsylvania Democrat won’t do anything about other corrupt Pennsylvania Democrats. But what about Eric Holder? After all, Holder has shown a tough-as-nails willingness to go after elected officials who accept gifts in exchange for official actions.Those who favored the sting believe Kane killed a solid investigation, led by experienced prosecutor Frank G. Fina, that had ensnared several public officials and had the potential to capture more. They said they were outraged at Kane’s allegation that race had played a role in the case.
Before Kane ended the investigation, sources familiar with the inquiry said, prosecutors amassed 400 hours of audio and videotape that documented at least four city Democrats taking payments in cash or money orders, and in one case a $2,000 Tiffany bracelet.
[h=1]Dale Schultz: 'I am not willing to defend them anymore'[/h]
March 18, 2014 2:00 pm • JACK CRAVER | The Capital Times | [email]jcraver@madison.com[/email]
Wisconsin state Sen. Dale Schultz, R-Richland Center, will not ride off quietly into the sunset.
In an appearance on the Devil’s Advocate radio show (The Mic/92.1 FM) last week, Schultz told hosts Mike Crute and Dominic Salvia that his party’s support for a series of election law changes was indefensible.
“I am not willing to defend them anymore,” he explained when Salvia asked why Republicans sought to limit the number of voting hours a municipality could offer. “I’m just not and I’m embarrassed by this.”
Since announcing his retirement in the face of a tough primary challenge from conservative state Rep. Howard Marklein, R-Spring Green, the Republican iconoclast has become more strident in criticizing the party in which he has made a political career. Schultz has served as a legislator from southwestern Wisconsin since 1983, including two stints as Senate majority leader in 2003 and 2005.
Last week, Schultz argued that there were no legitimate justifications for some of the election reforms pushed by Republicans.
“It’s all predicated on some belief there is a massive fraud or irregularities, something my colleagues have been hot on the trail for three years and have failed miserably at demonstrating,” he said.
However, the suggestion that his party holds a sincere but misguided belief constituted one of Schultz’s gentler criticisms of the GOP. He hinted that Republicans are trying to gain an electoral advantage by depressing voter turnout.
“It’s just sad when a political party has so lost faith in its ideas that it’s pouring all of its energy into election mechanics,” Schultz said. “We should be pitching as political parties our ideas for improving things in the future rather than mucking around in the mechanics and making it more confrontational at the voting sites and trying to suppress the vote.”
Although Schultz voted for the voter ID bill passed by the Legislature in 2011, now tied up in the courts, he said he now believes that a lack of access to the polls poses a far greater threat to the integrity of state elections than voter fraud.
The course his Republican colleagues are charting, he said, is a depressing departure from the legacy set by those who championed voting rights during Reconstruction and later during the Civil Rights Era.
“In the spirit of the champion of the 1957 Voting Rights Act, I have been trying to send a message that we are not encouraging voting, we are not making voting easier in any way, shape or form with these bills,” he explained. “Back in 1957 with the leadership of Dwight Eisenhower, Republicans were doing that. And that makes me sad, frankly.”
Later, Schultz attacked a bill aimed at helping companies escape asbestos litigation that has been criticized by groups representing veterans, who account for a disproportionate number of those suffering from mesothelioma, a cancer linked to asbestos exposure.
“This bill is certainly a slap in the face at the very least to some of the people who gave some of the most vital years of their life in the service of their country,” he said.
So far Marklein is the only Republican candidate for the 17th Senate seat that Schultz will vacate after this year, although State Senate Democratic Committee executive director Beau Stafford said last week that a moderate candidate, who he declined to name, might challenge Marklein in the primary.
Ernie Wittwer is the only declared Democratic candidate in the race, although Pat Bomhack, a law student who is currently a candidate for the Assembly seat that Marklein is vacating, is rumored to be considering leaving that race to run for Senate instead.
Schultz has only said that he will not back Marklein. Whether or how he gets involved in the race remains unclear.
March 18, 2014 2:00 pm • JACK CRAVER | The Capital Times | [email]jcraver@madison.com[/email]
Wisconsin state Sen. Dale Schultz, R-Richland Center, will not ride off quietly into the sunset.
In an appearance on the Devil’s Advocate radio show (The Mic/92.1 FM) last week, Schultz told hosts Mike Crute and Dominic Salvia that his party’s support for a series of election law changes was indefensible.
“I am not willing to defend them anymore,” he explained when Salvia asked why Republicans sought to limit the number of voting hours a municipality could offer. “I’m just not and I’m embarrassed by this.”
Since announcing his retirement in the face of a tough primary challenge from conservative state Rep. Howard Marklein, R-Spring Green, the Republican iconoclast has become more strident in criticizing the party in which he has made a political career. Schultz has served as a legislator from southwestern Wisconsin since 1983, including two stints as Senate majority leader in 2003 and 2005.
Last week, Schultz argued that there were no legitimate justifications for some of the election reforms pushed by Republicans.
“It’s all predicated on some belief there is a massive fraud or irregularities, something my colleagues have been hot on the trail for three years and have failed miserably at demonstrating,” he said.
However, the suggestion that his party holds a sincere but misguided belief constituted one of Schultz’s gentler criticisms of the GOP. He hinted that Republicans are trying to gain an electoral advantage by depressing voter turnout.
“It’s just sad when a political party has so lost faith in its ideas that it’s pouring all of its energy into election mechanics,” Schultz said. “We should be pitching as political parties our ideas for improving things in the future rather than mucking around in the mechanics and making it more confrontational at the voting sites and trying to suppress the vote.”
Although Schultz voted for the voter ID bill passed by the Legislature in 2011, now tied up in the courts, he said he now believes that a lack of access to the polls poses a far greater threat to the integrity of state elections than voter fraud.
The course his Republican colleagues are charting, he said, is a depressing departure from the legacy set by those who championed voting rights during Reconstruction and later during the Civil Rights Era.
“In the spirit of the champion of the 1957 Voting Rights Act, I have been trying to send a message that we are not encouraging voting, we are not making voting easier in any way, shape or form with these bills,” he explained. “Back in 1957 with the leadership of Dwight Eisenhower, Republicans were doing that. And that makes me sad, frankly.”
Later, Schultz attacked a bill aimed at helping companies escape asbestos litigation that has been criticized by groups representing veterans, who account for a disproportionate number of those suffering from mesothelioma, a cancer linked to asbestos exposure.
“This bill is certainly a slap in the face at the very least to some of the people who gave some of the most vital years of their life in the service of their country,” he said.
So far Marklein is the only Republican candidate for the 17th Senate seat that Schultz will vacate after this year, although State Senate Democratic Committee executive director Beau Stafford said last week that a moderate candidate, who he declined to name, might challenge Marklein in the primary.
Ernie Wittwer is the only declared Democratic candidate in the race, although Pat Bomhack, a law student who is currently a candidate for the Assembly seat that Marklein is vacating, is rumored to be considering leaving that race to run for Senate instead.
Schultz has only said that he will not back Marklein. Whether or how he gets involved in the race remains unclear.
[h=1]Pa. attorney general explains controversial decision[/h](Video will not embed)
http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/local&id=9474452
http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/local&id=9474452
[h=1]DOJ Rejects Ted Cruz's Request for Special Prosecutor in IRS Scandal[/h]
145
8
165
4
Email Article
Print article Send a Tip
by Kristin Tate 20 Mar 2014 654post a comment
[h=2]The Holder Department of Justice (DOJ) rejected a request from Texas Senator Ted Cruz to appoint a special prosecutor for the investigation into the IRS scandal in a letter released this week. The DOJ argued that it saw no apparent conflict of interest with its current investigator Barbara Bosserman—who has contributed thousands of dollars to Obama and other Democrats according to recent Breitbart News reports.[/h]Despite the DOJ's denial of his request, the junior Texas Senator's office said it will not give up the fight to hold the Obama Administration accountable. A Cruz spokesperson told Breitbart Texas, "We will certainly push back...This is an issue that Cruz remains committed to."
In response to the DOJ's denial of his request, Cruz said in a statement, "It is the height of hypocrisy for the Obama Administration to claim that the investigator leading the investigation into the IRS's illegal program has no conflict of interest. The investigator is a partisan Democrat who has donated over six thousand dollars to President Obama and Democrat causes… Nobody should trust a partisan Obama donor to investigate the IRS's political targeting of President Obama's enemies."
Cruz sent his initial request to Attorney General Eric Holder on January 22. He wrote in a letter, "It strains credulity to say that, out of the over 114,000 employees of the Department of Justice, the only possible choice to lead the investigation was a major political donor to President Obama. This, on its face, is a significant conflict of interest... General Holder... I would ask you to immediately appoint a special prosecutor, with meaningful independence, to investigate the IRS' illegal targeting of conservative groups."
Nearly two months later on March 10, the DOJ responded to Cruz in writing. A letter signed by Peter J. Kadzik, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, said that the appointment of a special prosecutor "is not warranted." Kadzik admitted in his letter that such an appointment is permitted when a DOJ investigation presents a conflict of interest--but he denied the presence of any such conflict. Bosserman's name was not mentioned in the letter.
Cruz responded to the rejection by citing the Nixon and Clinton administrations, which both appointed non-partisan investigators in relation to major scandals. "Just as nobody would trust John Mitchell to investigate Richard Nixon, nobody should trust a partisan Obama donor to investigate the IRS's political targeting of President Obama's enemies," Cruz said. "Sadly, 'in the discretion of the Attorney General,' Eric Holder has chosen to reject the bipartisan tradition of the Department of Justice of putting rule of law above political allegiance."
He concluded, "To date, nine months after a damning Inspector General report, nobody has been indicted, many of the victims have not even been interviewed, and Lois Lerner has twice pleaded the Fifth. And yet the Attorney General refuses to allow a genuine--and impartial--investigation."
"It is going to take the grassroots across the nation, as well as other members of Congress, to hold this administration accountable," Cruz's office told Breitbart Texas. "This is an issue [Cruz] will continue to shine a light on."
Email Article
by Kristin Tate 20 Mar 2014 654post a comment
[h=2]The Holder Department of Justice (DOJ) rejected a request from Texas Senator Ted Cruz to appoint a special prosecutor for the investigation into the IRS scandal in a letter released this week. The DOJ argued that it saw no apparent conflict of interest with its current investigator Barbara Bosserman—who has contributed thousands of dollars to Obama and other Democrats according to recent Breitbart News reports.[/h]Despite the DOJ's denial of his request, the junior Texas Senator's office said it will not give up the fight to hold the Obama Administration accountable. A Cruz spokesperson told Breitbart Texas, "We will certainly push back...This is an issue that Cruz remains committed to."
In response to the DOJ's denial of his request, Cruz said in a statement, "It is the height of hypocrisy for the Obama Administration to claim that the investigator leading the investigation into the IRS's illegal program has no conflict of interest. The investigator is a partisan Democrat who has donated over six thousand dollars to President Obama and Democrat causes… Nobody should trust a partisan Obama donor to investigate the IRS's political targeting of President Obama's enemies."
Cruz sent his initial request to Attorney General Eric Holder on January 22. He wrote in a letter, "It strains credulity to say that, out of the over 114,000 employees of the Department of Justice, the only possible choice to lead the investigation was a major political donor to President Obama. This, on its face, is a significant conflict of interest... General Holder... I would ask you to immediately appoint a special prosecutor, with meaningful independence, to investigate the IRS' illegal targeting of conservative groups."
Nearly two months later on March 10, the DOJ responded to Cruz in writing. A letter signed by Peter J. Kadzik, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, said that the appointment of a special prosecutor "is not warranted." Kadzik admitted in his letter that such an appointment is permitted when a DOJ investigation presents a conflict of interest--but he denied the presence of any such conflict. Bosserman's name was not mentioned in the letter.
Cruz responded to the rejection by citing the Nixon and Clinton administrations, which both appointed non-partisan investigators in relation to major scandals. "Just as nobody would trust John Mitchell to investigate Richard Nixon, nobody should trust a partisan Obama donor to investigate the IRS's political targeting of President Obama's enemies," Cruz said. "Sadly, 'in the discretion of the Attorney General,' Eric Holder has chosen to reject the bipartisan tradition of the Department of Justice of putting rule of law above political allegiance."
He concluded, "To date, nine months after a damning Inspector General report, nobody has been indicted, many of the victims have not even been interviewed, and Lois Lerner has twice pleaded the Fifth. And yet the Attorney General refuses to allow a genuine--and impartial--investigation."
"It is going to take the grassroots across the nation, as well as other members of Congress, to hold this administration accountable," Cruz's office told Breitbart Texas. "This is an issue [Cruz] will continue to shine a light on."
DOJ Rejects Ted Cruz's Request for Special Prosecutor in IRS Scandal
145
8
165
4
Email ArticlePrint article Send a Tip
by Kristin Tate 20 Mar 2014 654post a comment
The Holder Department of Justice (DOJ) rejected a request from Texas Senator Ted Cruz to appoint a special prosecutor for the investigation into the IRS scandal in a letter released this week. The DOJ argued that it saw no apparent conflict of interest with its current investigator Barbara Bosserman—who has contributed thousands of dollars to Obama and other Democrats according to recent Breitbart News reports.
Despite the DOJ's denial of his request, the junior Texas Senator's office said it will not give up the fight to hold the Obama Administration accountable. A Cruz spokesperson told Breitbart Texas, "We will certainly push back...This is an issue that Cruz remains committed to."
In response to the DOJ's denial of his request, Cruz said in a statement, "It is the height of hypocrisy for the Obama Administration to claim that the investigator leading the investigation into the IRS's illegal program has no conflict of interest. The investigator is a partisan Democrat who has donated over six thousand dollars to President Obama and Democrat causes… Nobody should trust a partisan Obama donor to investigate the IRS's political targeting of President Obama's enemies."
Cruz sent his initial request to Attorney General Eric Holder on January 22. He wrote in a letter, "It strains credulity to say that, out of the over 114,000 employees of the Department of Justice, the only possible choice to lead the investigation was a major political donor to President Obama. This, on its face, is a significant conflict of interest... General Holder... I would ask you to immediately appoint a special prosecutor, with meaningful independence, to investigate the IRS' illegal targeting of conservative groups."
Nearly two months later on March 10, the DOJ responded to Cruz in writing. A letter signed by Peter J. Kadzik, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, said that the appointment of a special prosecutor "is not warranted." Kadzik admitted in his letter that such an appointment is permitted when a DOJ investigation presents a conflict of interest--but he denied the presence of any such conflict. Bosserman's name was not mentioned in the letter.
Cruz responded to the rejection by citing the Nixon and Clinton administrations, which both appointed non-partisan investigators in relation to major scandals. "Just as nobody would trust John Mitchell to investigate Richard Nixon, nobody should trust a partisan Obama donor to investigate the IRS's political targeting of President Obama's enemies," Cruz said. "Sadly, 'in the discretion of the Attorney General,' Eric Holder has chosen to reject the bipartisan tradition of the Department of Justice of putting rule of law above political allegiance."
He concluded, "To date, nine months after a damning Inspector General report, nobody has been indicted, many of the victims have not even been interviewed, and Lois Lerner has twice pleaded the Fifth. And yet the Attorney General refuses to allow a genuine--and impartial--investigation."
"It is going to take the grassroots across the nation, as well as other members of Congress, to hold this administration accountable," Cruz's office told Breitbart Texas. "This is an issue [Cruz] will continue to shine a light on."
Repubs just need to hang on through the midterms, then there will be nothing Holder can do anymore to hold off the dogs. Not that it matters much, the evidence is buried, burned and destroyed to the point where all they have to do is plead the 5th, just like scumbag Lois Lerner.
[h=2]Politico Buries Democrat Politician's Arms Trafficking Indictment[/h]
The world of political news was captivated by Thursday’s report of the arrest for gun trafficking of a famously anti-gun California state senator. Yet while most other news outlets reported the incident, Politico, an outlet that supposedly leads the nation in political news, didn't post a single story on the incident the day the news broke.
The world of political news was captivated by Thursday’s report of the arrest for gun trafficking of a famously anti-gun California state senator. Yet while most other news outlets reported the incident, Politico, an outlet that supposedly leads the nation in political news, didn't post a single story on the incident the day the news broke.[h=1]Obama's Disapproval Hits New High as His Handling of Ukraine Hits Low[/h]
63
0
15
2
[h=2]According to The Washington Post, an Associated Press/GfK Poll shows "59 percent of Americans now disapprove of Obama -- a point higher than the previous high set in December."[/h] His approval rating is at 41 percent, which is "the second lowest figure the poll has ever found."
At the same time, the poll shows that the Ukrainian crisis is hurting Obama.
According to the Associated Press, "close to 9 our of 10 Americans support sanctions as a response to Russia's annexation of the Crimean peninsula." And they give Obama "low marks for [how he handled] Russia's swoop into Ukraine."
This contributes to his "new low on international relations," where his approval is just 40 percent.
63
0
15
2
[h=2]According to The Washington Post, an Associated Press/GfK Poll shows "59 percent of Americans now disapprove of Obama -- a point higher than the previous high set in December."[/h] His approval rating is at 41 percent, which is "the second lowest figure the poll has ever found."
At the same time, the poll shows that the Ukrainian crisis is hurting Obama.
According to the Associated Press, "close to 9 our of 10 Americans support sanctions as a response to Russia's annexation of the Crimean peninsula." And they give Obama "low marks for [how he handled] Russia's swoop into Ukraine."
This contributes to his "new low on international relations," where his approval is just 40 percent.
