Former US Attorney: Hillary will be Indicted

1 Comment

This is from Freedom Force.

This is the only thing I would support Hillary for in 2016.


Image Credit: GOP Daily Dose

A former U.S. Attorney predicts a Watergate-style showdown in the Department of Justice if Attorney General Loretta Lynch overrules a potential FBI recommendation to indict Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

“The [FBI] has so much information about criminal conduct by her and her staff that there is no way that they walk away from this,” Joseph diGenova, formerly the District of Columbia’s U.S. Attorney, told Laura Ingrahamin a Tuesday radio interview. “They are going to make a recommendation that people be charged and then Loretta Lynch is going to have the decision of a lifetime.

“I believe that the evidence that the FBI is compiling will be so compelling that, unless [Lynch] agrees to the charges, there will be a massive revolt inside the FBI, which she will not be able to survive as an attorney general. It will be like Watergate. It will be unbelievable.”

DiGenova is referring to the Watergate scandal’s “Saturday Night Massacre” Oct. 20, 1973, when President Richard Nixon sacked Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox and Attorney General Elliot Richardson and Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus resigned in protest.

DiGenova is well-sourced throughout the law enforcement community and his assessment has to be taken seriously. But interviews with other knowledgeable Washington insiders present a somewhat less concrete scenario developing around the former secretary of state.

At the center of Clinton’s difficulties is her use of a private email account and a home-brew server located in her New York home toconduct official business while serving as America’s chief diplomat between 2009 and 2013. Several of her closest aides also used the private server.

Clinton clearly didn’t abide by federal regulations requiring officials like her to use government computers and email accounts to conduct official business and take all of the necessary steps to preserve all such correspondence concerning official business.

As first reported by The Daily Caller News Foundation, Clinton emailed Center for American Progress President Neera Tanden Sept. 7, 2010, asking for advice on what she, President Barack Obama and Democratic campaign officials should do to prevent a Republican victory in the upcoming congressional elections.

“Do you and CAP have any ideas as to how to change the dynamic before it’s too late? Losing the House would be a disaster in every way,” Clinton told Tanden. The CAP chief responded at length with clearly partisan recommendations, noted her supposedly non-partisan think tank’s polling efforts to identify winning themes for Democrats and described her conversations relaying her advice to Obama and other senior White House officials.

On its face, the Sept. 7 Clinton email appears to be a violation of the Hatch Act, which bars partisan political activities by officials using government property while on official duty. But Clinton found a clever way to get around the law, according to a senior non-profit official with extensive experience investigating such activities. The official spoke on condition of anonymity.

First, that official said, by not preserving her email records until after she resigned as secretary of state, Clinton avoided an investigation by the Office of Special Counsel (OSC), which handles Hatch Act violations. The reason is simple – OSC has no authority over former federal employees in Hatch Act matters.

Second, by refusing to comply “with Federal Records Act requirements to use an approved system for preserving records, [Clinton] arguably did not engage in political activities while on official duty or while using federal resources because she communicated with a personal computer,” the official said.

In other words, “had Secretary Clinton used a State Department e-mail address and a government computer and had Secretary Clinton complied with federal record-keeping and open government laws, [her] violations would have been discoverable under the Freedom of Information Act and could have been remedied while Secretary Clinton was still in office.”

Thus, don’t expect a Clinton indictment for a Hatch Act violation.

But Clinton is far from out of the woods, according to a congressional source who is deeply involved in the multiple investigations of Clinton. This source, who also spoke only on condition of anonymity, pointed to the hundreds of Clinton emails that contained classified information.

“Her problem is the sheer volume of emails that were deemed classified,” said this source. “Her first defense was that she didn’t send any classified information in her emails. But that claim has been clearly rendered false because so many of the emails were later marked classified.”

As the Department of State has released the Clinton emails she provided after leaving office, more than a thousand were marked classified after being reviewed prior to their public release. So what about Clinton’s subsequent distinction that she sent no information in her emails that was “marked classified” when it was sent?

“The volume matters because a reasonable person knows somebody who like the Secretary of State, who is allowed herself to classify materials, who has handled it for 25 years or more, at some point the law says you are responsible for recognizing classified material when you see it. That gets to the negligence issue,” the issue said.

Negligence is critical because Clinton signed a Non-Disclosure Agreement in 2009 regarding classified information that stated, among much else, that “Sensitive Compartmented Information involves or derives from intelligence sources or methods that is classified or is involved in a classification determination …”

Clinton and several of her closest aides must have read information “derived from intelligence sources or methods” on a daily or near-daily basis.

There is an ominous sentence buried in that agreement Clinton signed: “Nothing in this agreement constitutes a waiver by the United States of the right to prosecute me for any statutory violations.”

What if Clinton is indicted for negligence in handling classified information? DiGenova predicts a showdown within a couple of months that will put Lynch in the same hot seat that prompted Nixon to fire Cox for getting too close to the truth about Watergate.

A Republican with direct knowledge of the investigation predicted political chaos if Lynch doesn’t decide to prosecute Clinton, a chaos that “would be the gift that keeps on giving right through the election.”

With or without resignations of FBI officials to protest such a decision, there would be a blizzard of news releases from congressional GOPers condemning Lynch, followed by hearings in which both the attorney general and FBI Director James Comey would be put under oath and asked about their actions.



DOJ Joins with SPLC against Domestic Terrorists (Meaning Conservative America)

Leave a comment

This is from Freedom OutPost. 

We are fast becoming Nazi Germany and Communist Russia combined.

For the people that say it cannot happen here read the following.

“First They Came for the Jews”
By Pastor Niemoller

 First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists, and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.


Whether Americans thought about the potential or not, the Obama administration is making sure it comes to fruition — a new office within the Department of Justice teaming with the Southern Poverty Law Center to track and coordinate investigations into “domestic terrorism.” In an October 14 speech delivered at George Washington University, Assistant Attorney General John Carlin told attendees the new office would “be the point of contact for US attorneys working on domestic terrorism cases.” Carlin mentioned Islam only twice, but claimed domestic terrorism by groups touting “anti-government animus, eco-radicalism, and racism” pose a danger just as great, “despite the smaller number of incidents sponsored by such groups.”

Carlin failed to provide statistics supporting incidents sponsored by such groups. Teaming with the Southern Poverty Law Center poses a great concern. The group is known to “monitor and track” groups and organizations they designate and declare as “hate groups” — amounting to 784 identified for this year. When looking under the different classifications, one will find the following listed as hate groups: American College of Pediatricians in Gainesville, FL; Bradlee Dean’s You Can Run But You Cannot Hide in Minnesota; Jewish Political Action Committee in New York; American Freedom Defense Initiative in New York; Jihad Watch and Bare Naked Islam in California; and the Family Research Council in Washington, along with many more. Since when is freedom of speech, freedom of religion, speaking truth, and raising awareness on issues known as “hate” and associating with like-minded individuals designate one as being in a “hate group?”

Conspicuously lacking in the SPLC’s listing of “hate groups” were Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), and the Muslim Brotherhood. Despite listing the “Nation of Islam,” headed by Louis Farrakhan, and the “New Black Panther Party,” both present in every state, Louis Farrakhan walks around a free man after issuing terroristic threats in calling for 10,000 to “kill whites.”

Carlin stated in his speech:

The new DT Counsel will not only help ensure that DT cases are properly coordinated but also will play a key role in our headquarters-level efforts to identify trends to help shape our strategy, and to analyze legal gaps or enhancements required to ensure we can combat these threats.

Referencing the “increase in lone wolf attack” and blaming the internet as a tool for organization, Carlin stated, “Lone offenders, or other small groups plan and carry out their attacks with limited assistance.”

One can’t help but question the increase in these “lone wolf incidences” over the last few months as instigated and planned by the administration and its CIA psy-op coverts to further an agenda. First, more gun control laws are being advocated and now this “new office” partnering with the SPLC that targets many conservative and Christian groups as “hate groups.”

SPLC’s top dog, Mark Potock stated the SPLC had been pushing for something like this for quite some time. He called it a “step forward” while at the same time saying, “we’ll have to see how it works out.” Potock claimed this “step forward” would “restore ‘balance’ to the State Department’s efforts to fight terrorism.”

Restore balance? When was the fight on terrorism ever about balance? Citizens have suffered the insolent, degrading and humiliation of searches by TSA bordering on sexual assault since airplanes flew into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in 2001 in order to board an airplane while other “individuals” receive exemption because of the claim “racial profiling.” A one hundred mile area along the entire US borders are designated “constitution-free” zones where constitutionally guaranteed rights are suspended or void. Instead of targeting terrorists and terrorism, US citizens have had their rights encroached upon by government because of the 2001 incident perpetrated by Muslims. Instead of limiting Muslim entry into this nation, our government staunchly advocates it while ignoring Christians. There is no balance at all much less any balance to “restore.” It’s tipped against US citizens critical of government over-reach.

As many are aware, the media and the government consider the SPLC an “expert” source when it comes to identifying “hate groups.” However, it is only one organization and even the FBI has difficulty substantiating their claims. So, how is it that a less than credible source gained such “prestige” from the media and government alike?

Carlin continued on to echo Potock’s “concern” over the SPLC’s designated “hate groups.”

The attorney general noted this summer that these kinds of hate crimes are the original domestic terrorism. Among domestic extremist movements in the United States, white supremacists are most violent. The Charleston shooter, who had a manifesto laying out a racist worldview, is just one example. His actions followed earlier deadly shooting sprees by white supremacists in Kansas, Wisconsin and elsewhere.

Pardon me while I digress for just a moment. Has everyone noticed that all of a sudden these “white supremacists” and “lone wolf” shooters are leaving these long-winded “manifestos” for government to definitively declare the whys on these events? Doesn’t leave much for the FBI profilers to do anymore. No need to figure out anything as these “introverted lone wolves” are detailing it all in “manifestos,” a convenient term thrown out there for “diary,” and in some cases video documentaries. How convenient. How many males keep a “diary?”

The Obama administration clearly brushes off Islam and Muslims as terror threats since they designate 72 groups of individuals as potential “domestic terrorists” while scrubbing all mention of Islam and Muslims. If you are a member of a Tea Party organization, a Christian, a veteran, a military member, a patriot, against Islam, against illegal immigration, and support the Constitution, etc., you are a potential “domestic terrorist” according to your own government.

In fact, Obama and his stooge administration are so confident in their designation of these groups as terrorists, they are joining hands with the United Nations to “allow international police agencies to help program how American cities respond to terrorism.” Despite its unconstitutional nature, Obama and Attorney General Loretta Lynch are all but cheering to enforce tyranny, despotism and eradication of individual God-given constitutionally guaranteed rights of groups and individuals designated as “domestic terrorists.” And, they will use any means necessary to justify the end — the destruction of the US. All the while, Congress continues in its complicity of these travesties sucking on their thumb as they wait for their “bottle” from Obama.

The SPLC has been “legitimized” by this rogue administration and a Department of (In) Justice. Because they cite “organization via the internet,” one can bet this new “alliance” will have tremendous influence over the FCC to “curb” and “control” more internet content, meaning censorship and infringing on freedom of speech. This “collusion” against conservative America, Christians, patriots, veterans and other groups is blatant, unapologetic, intentional, and set to “force” subjugation.

The police and surveillance state was a precursor as to what comes next. Since they have all the information they need, they can now begin to “root out” the “problems” by utilizing an “international police agency” or multiple agencies. To those who said, “If you aren’t doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about,” you were wrong.

Just being a Christian is now a reason for concern as well as exercising free speech, free association, keeping a diary which could be termed a “manifesto” to be used against you, and being conservative. You don’t have to do “anything wrong,” all you have to do is be “designated” by the government as a threat or involved with any group the SPLC declares as a “hate group.” If you doubt that, you might want to look at the links for the SPLC and the 72 groups or types of individuals the government considers “domestic terrorists.”

America, once the land of the free and the home of the brave, is now reduced to the land of the terrorized and the home of the spied upon and the nation of “domestic terrorists.” Ain’t she grand?

Eric Holder’s gun-ban list of ‘mental defectives’ is mostly veterans

Leave a comment

This is from The Washington Times.

The only mental defectives that belong on this list should be members of the Obama Regime.

You do not get more honorable and patriotic than the men and women in uniform or retired.


Chuck Grassley wants explanation of why Justice keeps VA’s names on background-check list.

The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee wants Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to explain why a Department of Justice gun ban list has a “mental defective” category consisting almost entirely of names belonging to military veterans and their dependents.

“It’s disturbing to think that the men and women who dedicated themselves to defending our freedom and values face undue threats to their fundamental Second Amendment rights from the very agency established to serve them,” Sen. Chuck Grassley, Iowa Republican, said in a statement Wednesday. “A veteran or dependent shouldn’t lose their constitutional rights because they need help with bookkeeping.”

Mr. Grassley outlined his concerns about the list to Mr. Holder in a letter dated this week. It included various failures by the Department of Justice — including the inconsistent application of standards and weak due process protections — that have led to the Department of Veterans Affairs adding “a disproportionate number of names” to the federal gun ban list.

All federal agencies are required to report names of individuals who are dangers to themselves or others to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System’s “mental defective” category — a status that prevents them from owning or possessing guns.

That means that veterans “are particularly singled out,” Mr. Grassley said. Those veterans should not be required by the Department of Veterans Affairs “to prove that they have the ability to exercise their Second Amendment rights,” he said.

“According to the Congressional Research Service, as of June 1, 2012, 99.3% of all names reported to the NICS list’s ‘mental defective’ category were provided by the Veterans Administration (VA) even though reporting requirements apply to all federal agencies,” Mr. Grassley’s letter said.

Read more:
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

Justice Department Bringing Corruption Charges Against Democrat Senator Bob Menendez

Leave a comment

This is from Independent Journal Review.

How corrupt is Senator Robert Menedez (D-NJ) if the Obama Regime is bringing charges against him?


CNN reports that the Department of Justice is preparing to file corruption charges against Senator Robert Menedez (D-NJ), for allegedly using his influence to propel “business interest” of a friend and fellow political donor in exchange for gifts:

According to CNN:

“People briefed on the case say Attorney General Eric Holder has signed off on prosecutors’ request to proceed with charges, CNN has learned exclusively. An announcement could come within weeks. Prosecutors are under pressure in part because of the statute of limitation on some of the allegations.

The case could pose a high-profile test of the Justice Department’s ability to prosecute sitting lawmakers, having already spawned a legal battle over whether key evidence the government has gathered is protected by the Constitution’s Speech and Debate clause.”

The corruption charges will be primarily focused on Menedez and his affiliation with Salomon Melgen. Melgen, an ophthalmologist, has been a long time political donor and advocate for Menendez.

Menendez has long been the subject of political controversy. In 2012, it was rumored that he paid for sex in the Dominican Republic. He later described this as a smear campaign.

Menendez also went on vacation with Melgen to the Dominican Republic in 2010. The trip cost came in at $58,000, which Menendez was required to pay back after failing to disclose the nature of the excursion.

Melgen’s offices in West Palm Beach, Florida were raided by the FBI twice over concerns about his professional financial practices, though the Justice Department has said that those matters will not be a part of the case against Sen. Menendez.

Another Day, Another Shoddy Anti-Gun Study From The Left

Leave a comment

This is from Town Hall.

With the anti gun crowd the ends justify the means.

Lie, cheat and obfuscate anything to advance the anti gun agenda.

Fortunately the lies are easy to debunk. 

“There is a crisis of youth gun violence in this country,” reads January’s Center for American Progress’ (CAP) 13-page report that shows how our Second Amendment rights are devastating the Millennial generation. According to their data, most of which is from the Centers for Disease Control and the Department of Justice, “gun deaths are on track to surpass motor vehicle traffic deaths for this age group in 2015.”

Well, that’s certainly a horrid milestone, but like most anti-gun studies, the data is often skewed or includes debatable subcategories, like suicides, to inflate the numbers in order to add to the narrative that America has a gun violence epidemic; it doesn’t.

In the CAP study, they include suicide as gun violence, saying, “the third highest cause of death for this age group [15-24] in 2010 was suicide, and again, guns played a large role, accounting for a plurality—45 percent—of those deaths.” In that same year, the second most frequent cause of death was homicide, wherein a firearm was used in 83 percent of the cases.

Suicide is tragic, but it’s debatable to consider it gun violence. Furthermore, when police engage armed felons with their service pistols, should that be considered gun violence? If we’re tracking gun violence (i.e. homicides or other acts of violence committed by one person against another) in instances that resulted in fatalities, then the study has inflated numbers.

Here’s the introduction [emphasis mine]:

Even though violent crime has steadily declined in recent years—overall violent crime declined 19 percent between 2003 and 2012, and the murder rate declined 17 percent during that period—rates of gun violence remain unacceptably high. On average, 33,000 Americans are killed with guns each year, and the burden of this violence falls disproportionately on young people: 54 percent of people murdered with guns in 2010 were under the age of 30.3 Young people are also disproportionately the perpetrators of gun violence, as weak gun laws offer easy access to guns in many parts of the country. Far too often, a gun not only takes the life of one young American but also contributes to ruining the life of another young person who pulls the trigger.

So, CAP just admitted that the murder rate has gone down. In fact, firearm-related homicides have declined 39 percent between 1993-2011. That’s based on figures from the Department of Justice (via WaPo):

The report, by the department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, painted an encouraging picture of long-term trends at a time of divisive political debate over guns and legislation to regulate them. Firearms-related homicides declined 39 percent between 1993 and 2011, the report said, while nonfatal firearms crimes fell 69 percent during that period.…

Overall, the Justice Department report said, firearm-related homicides dropped from 18,253 homicides in 1993 to 11,101 in 2011, while nonfatal firearm crimes declined from 1.5 million in 1993 to 467,300 in 2011. The drop extended to schools: Homicides at schools declined from an average of 29 per year in the 1990s to an average of 20 per year in the 2000s.

Moreover, Pew Research also conducted a study finding that gun crime dropped 49 percent between 1993-2010:

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S.gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.…

Despite national attention to the issue of firearm violence, most Americans are unaware that gun crime is lower today than it was two decades ago. According to a new Pew Research Center survey, today 56% of Americans believe gun crime is higher than 20 years ago and only 12% think it is lower.

While Pew noted that the gun homicide rates are the highest for the 18-24, 25-40 demographic; the rate is also on a precipitous decline.

Additionally, mass shootings aren’t on the rise. School shootings haven’t risenabove 1990s levels. At the same time, women are the fastest demographic of new gun owners–and they’re lining up for concealed carry permits across the country.

As for the annual rate of deaths, I’ve seen the figure of 30,000+ Americans dying from gun violence each year tossed about by pro-gun control groups; the CAP study cites it. Is it true?

The left-leaning Slate publication tracked the number of gun deaths from the day the tragic Newtown shooting occurred in December of 2012 to December 31, 2013; it barely broke 12,000. The final figure was 12,042.

Are these statistics tragic? Yes. Any death is awful, but tobacco useand automobile accidents kill far more people than firearms in America every year. In the end, the statistics are probably inflated due to the inclusion of suicide–and gun negligence–being listed as acts of gun violence. On a side note, the rate of suicide is increasing, while homicide is dropping. So, once again, it appears that curbing what gun violence we have in the United States is based on rebuilding and reforming our mental health system. This is something that both sides can agree on, but is always treated as a periphery issue for our left-leaning friends; they’re concerned about access to firearms and how scary they look.

Another issue the study raises is the disproportionate amount of blacks that are affected by gun violence. CAP cited that “young black men in this age group [15-24] are killed by a gun at a rate that is 4.5 times higher than their white counterparts.” It also noted that 65 percent of gun homicide victims in 2010 between the ages of 15-24 were black.

It’s not news that gang violence is ripping the black community apart. It’s considered a serious problem in every major city in the country. In some cases, 8-year-olds are recruited into such activities.

Additionally, for cities that are hot spots for gun crime and gang violence, like Chicago, their stringent anti-gun laws did little to curb the violence. Granted, the city has seen a 20 percent drop in homicides, but shootings continue to plague the city. We shall see what effects Illinois’ relatively new concealed law has on crime. When the Heller case in D.C. struck down the city’s handgun ban as unconstitutional, the District’s homicide rate dropped to its lowest levels since 1963. In Illinois, at one time, registration for concealed carry permits outpaced Obamacare enrollment.

So, while gang warfare is an issue, it’s hardly a generational problem.

The premise of the CAP report is that young Americans are being bled dry from gun violence. They must demand their representatives take action to curb Second Amendment rights–our civil rights–to prevent further loss of life. After all, a Democratic polling firm–GBA Strategies–says young people think gun culture is out of control.

In reality, they’re inflating the numbers, and desperately grasping for straws by trying to say that gang violence is a Millennial problem. It’s not.

Just like the bogus report Everytown conducted on Vermont gun sales, the laughable AK-47 video produced by Time, and naming Boston Bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev as a victim of gun violence, it’s part of the sloppiness that plagues the gun control movement.×9&widgetId=2&trackingGroup=69017

Attkisson: 9 Requests Lawmakers Should Make About Lois Lerner’s Missing Emails

Leave a comment

This is from The Daily Signal.

Will these questions ever be asked?

I seriously doubt them being asked.

If they are asked they will never be answered.


As congressional investigators ponder how a computer crash caused two years of Lois Lerner’s emails to disappear, investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson outlined several questions lawmakers should be asking the Internal Revenue Service.

During Lerner’s tenure at the IRS, tea party groups applying for tax-exempt status routinely were subjected to additional scrutiny and delays in their applications. The IRS informed Congress last week that it had lost an unknown number of emails from Lerner.

>>> Paul Ryan Confronts IRS Commissioner: ‘I Don’t Believe You’

Now, as congressional Republicans call on the Department of Justice to open an investigation into the computer crash, Attkisson, a Daily Signal senior independent contributor, explained exactly what information investigators should seek regarding Lerner’s missing emails:

  1. Please provide a timeline of the crash and documentation covering when it was first discovered and by whom; when, how and by whom it was learned that materials were lost; the official documentation reporting the crash and federal data loss; documentation reflecting all attempts to recover the materials; and the remediation records documenting the fix. This material should include the names of all officials and technicians involved, as well as all internal communications about the matter.
  2. Please provide all documents and emails that refer to the crash from the time that it happened through the IRS’ disclosure to Congress Friday that it had occurred.
  3. Please provide the documents that show the computer crash and lost data were appropriately reported to the required entities including any contractor servicing the IRS. If the incident was not reported, please explain why.
  4. Please provide a list summarizing what other data was irretrievably lost in the computer crash. If the loss involved any personal data, was the loss disclosed to those impacted? If not, why?
  5. Please provide documentation reflecting any security analyses done to assess the impact of the crash and lost materials. If such analyses were not performed, why not?
  6. Please provide documentation showing the steps taken to recover the material, and the names of all technicians who attempted the recovery.
  7. Please explain why redundancies required for federal systems were either not used or were not effective in restoring the lost materials, and provide documentation showing how this shortfall has been remediated.
  8. Please provide any documents reflecting an investigation into how the crash resulted in the irretrievable loss of federal data and what factors were found to be responsible for the existence of this situation.
  9. I would also ask for those who discovered and reported the crash to testify under oath, as well as any officials who reported the materials as having been irretrievably lost.

In testimony before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in March, IRS Commissioner John Koskinen told lawmakers agency emails “get taken off and stored in servers.” Yet the IRS  said Lerner’s correspondence, sent between January 2009 and April 2011, is irretrievable.

>>> Hollywood Plots ‘More Believable’ Than IRS, White House on Missing Emails

Congressional investigators are working to determine whether Lerner acted alone or on orders handed down by the White House. House Ways and Means Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., said in a statement Friday the IRS’ loss of documents makes it more difficult for investigators to determine who, besides Lerner, was involved in the scandal.

Lerner testified twice on Capitol Hill about the targeting, but invoked the Fifth Amendment both times. In May, the House voted to hold her in contempt for refusing to cooperate with investigations.


Convenient: IRS Has ‘Lost’ Two Years of Lois Lerner’s Emails

Leave a comment

This is from Town Hall.

Do you smell what I smell?

It smells like Bravo Sierra.



According to the House Ways and Means Committee, the IRS has “lost” two years of emails belonging to former head of tax exempt organizations Lois Lerner. The IRS doesn’t have a record of her emails to outside groups or government agencies from January 2009 through April 2011, conveniently encompassing some of the same time when tea party groups were being targeted for extra scrutiny and possible criminal prosecution. The IRS says the loss of emails is due to a “computer crash” and claims emails from or to Lerner from the White House, Democratic members of Congress, the Treasury Department, FEC and Department of Justice cannot be located. They do however have emails belonging to Lerner that she sent to other IRS employees.

“The fact that I am just learning about this, over a year into the investigation, is completely unacceptable and now calls into question the credibility of the IRS’s response to Congressional inquiries. There needs to be an immediate investigation and forensic audit by Department of Justice as well as the Inspector General,” Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp said in a statement. “Just a short time ago, Commissioner Koskinen promised to produce all Lerner documents. It appears now that was an empty promise. Frankly, these are the critical years of the targeting of conservative groups that could explain who knew what when, and what, if any, coordination there was between agencies. Instead, because of this loss of documents, we are conveniently left to believe that Lois Lerner acted alone. This failure of the IRS requires the White House, which promised to get to the bottom of this, to do an Administration-wide search and production of any emails to or from Lois Lerner. The Administration has repeatedly referred us back to the IRS for production of materials. It is clear that is wholly insufficient when it comes to determining the full scope of the violation of taxpayer rights.”

Emails belonging to Lerner that were not “lost” have shown that she was contactin with Democratic members of Congress and the Department of Justice about prosecuting tea party groups. Just this week, emails surfaced showing Lerner sent confidential tax information belonging to conservative groups to the FBI for investigation just before the 2010 midterm elections.

According to Camp, this is the first time the IRS has disclosed the loss of emails since the investigation into IRS targeting of conservatives started more than a year ago.

Camp: Learning about this over a year into the investigation is unacceptable & calls into question the credibility of the IRS’s response

UPDATE: Chairman of the House Oversight Committee Darrell Issa responds:

 “Isn’t it convenient for the Obama Administration that the IRS now says it has suddenly realized it lost Lois Lerner’s emails requested by Congress and promised by Commissioner John Koskinen? Do they really expect the American people to believe that, after having withheld these emails for a year, they’re just now realizing the most critical time period is missing? Congressional oversight has revealed that the IRS has –potentially illegally– shared confidential taxpayer information with the FBI and lost crucial email records even as the agency continues to withhold information by not fully complying with the Committee’s subpoena. Left to the IRS’ own preferences, the White House would still be retelling the lie that this was all about mismanagement confined to a local office. The supposed loss of Lerner’s emails further blows a hole in the credibility of claims that the IRS is complying with Congressional requests and their repeated assurances that they’re working to get to the truth. If there wasn’t nefarious conduct that went much higher than Lois Lerner in the IRS targeting scandal, why are they playing these games?”


This post has been updated.

Guess Who Bailed on Lerner’s Contempt Vote?


This is from Town Hall.

San Fran Nan is a shameless  soulless DemocRat hack.

San Fran Nan is hoping to become Dictator  Speaker of the House once more.   



In case you missed it last night, Democrats and Republicans in the House of Representatives voted 250-168 to hold Lois Lerner in contempt of Congress. Guess who bailed out on the vote? Former Madam Speaker Nancy Pelosi. More from The Hill:

 House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) did not attend the Wednesday evening vote series to hold former IRS official Lois Lerner in contempt for refusing to testify about the agency’s improper scrutiny of Tea Party groups.

She was, however, at a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee fundraiser attended by the president and roughly 90 guests at the home of Disney Chairman Alan Horn in Bel Air, Calif., according to a White House pool report.


Pelosi also failed to cast a vote on a resolution asking the Department of Justice to appoint special counsel to investigate the IRS scandal.

Twenty Years of Brady Law Failure

Leave a comment

This is from AmmoLand.

I will use Mark Twains quote on lies be my only comment.

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.” – Mark Twain



Buckeye, AZ –-( The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence is touting the 20th anniversary of implementation of the Brady Law, requiring that buyers at gun shops pass a background check before every purchase.

They’re marking the anniversary with a “report” extolling the program’s success and promoting their current target: criminalization of private firearm transfers.

The catch phrase for that campaign is “Finish the job.” The problem is that the job will never be finished.

The Brady’s solution for failed gun control laws is always additional restrictions on guns, and those “steps in the right direction” lead directly to bans, registration, and confiscation – as happened in the UK, Australia, pre-war Germany, the Soviet Union, etc., and as is currently happening in “baby steps” in California, New York, Connecticut, and New Jersey.

The Brady Law is a dismal failure, despite the Brady’s loudly trumpeted claim of 2.1 million firearm purchases blocked over the past 19 years. While that number sounds impressive, it is meaningless in real terms of reducing violent “gun-crime.”

Federal prohibitions on gun ownership are extremely broad. Anyone who has ever been convicted of any felony – violent or not – is prohibited from ever possessing a gun or ammunition – or employing anyone who possesses a gun or ammunition – for life. Same for anyone ever convicted of a violent misdemeanor against a domestic partner – like slapping a cheating boyfriend – even if the incident happened decades ago. The lifelong ban also applies to anyone ever dishonorably discharged from the military. People who legally, under state laws, use medical marijuana or marijuana-based extracts for treatment of pain or side-effects of chemotherapy are also prohibited from guns and ammunition. Legal recreational marijuana users in Colorado and Oregon are also subject to the ban.

Possibly the most egregious category of prohibited persons is those who are labeled “mentally incompetent,” This category includes adults with Down ’s syndrome, victims of Alzheimer’s, and over 100,000 veterans suffering from things like head trauma or PTSD. Many of these people are very competent and functional in most areas, but might have trouble dealing with bank accounts or legal documents. Under current law, it is a federal felony for the father of an adult with Down’s syndrome, or the life-long shooting buddy of an Alzheimer’s patient to take their child or friend to the shooting range for an afternoon of harmless plinking.

With such a broad range of people prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms, it’s no wonder that we still get people applying to purchase a gun who don’t realize they’re prohibited. These people account for about 1% of all background checks submitted. They are not dangerous, but they are legally prohibited from purchasing firearms, and their attempts at doing so are effectively blocked by the Brady Law. About 25% of those blocked file appeals challenging their denial, and about 5% win. The other 20%, who obviously, strongly believed that they were not legally prohibited, lost their appeal and the denial was sustained.

To put things in perspective, in 2010, the last year for which we have good numbers, over 6 million applications were filed with NICS. Of those, 72,659 were denied. That seems like a lot, but here are the really significant numbers: Of the 72,659 prohibited persons who illegally attempted to purchase a firearm from a licensed dealer, only 62 were considered worthy of prosecution, and of those only 13 were found guilty.

That means that each year, you and I pay hundreds of millions of dollars to investigate millions of lawful firearm purchases, only to prevent a few thousands of sales to people who federal officers and prosecutors don’t consider dangerous, and ultimately fine or incarcerate a dozen or so criminals.

That doesn’t seem like a very efficient use of resources, does it? And the Department of Justice has requested an additional $100 million for NICS in 2014, and an additional $50 million to help states improve their reporting to NICS.

While the Brady Bunch claims that the Brady Law made a significant impact on “gun-crime” over the past 20 years – and they have a fancy impressive graph to prove it – the reality is that violent crime – both with and without guns – started trending down long before the Brady Law went into effect and the trend continued steadily through the first five years of Brady implementation. After that, murders climbed slightly for the next 7 years before beginning another downward trend. States that already had stricter laws than Brady, experienced statistically identical reductions in violent crime and“gun-crime” as the Brady states. And all of this crime reduction took place at a time when firearm sales and ownership were trending into record territory. A study by researchers Jens Ludwig and Philip Cook – no friends to gun owners – done in 2000 found no correlation between the Brady Law and reductions in crime. Researchers have since apparently stopped looking at the issue since they can’t get the data to match up with their agendas.

Some, even in the gun rights camp, have called for increasing prosecutions for Brady denials and “enforcing the laws already on the books,” but such a plan would only add to the injustice and expense – again without doing anything to reduce crime.

It is interesting that, at a time when certain sectors are calling for reinstatement of voting rights for convicted felons, and arguing that requiring voters to show identification before casting a ballot is an unacceptable burden on people’s right to vote, many of those same people are calling for firearm purchasers – people exercising a right enumerated in the Bill of Rights – should be subject to more stringent proof of identity, deeper background checks, and more stringent restrictions and limitations, even though there is no evidence over the past twenty years that the existing “success” has played any role in public safety.

Criminals will always find a way to be criminals. They steal their guns, get them from friends or relatives who later report the guns as stolen, or buy them from their drug dealer or fence. They don’t get them from gun shops or from law-abiding gun owners in private transactions. It’s past time to reconsider the whole background check idea. It’s time to learn the lesson of the failed twenty-year experiment of the Brady law.

The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. The Firearms Coalition is a project of Neal Knox Associates, Manassas, VA. Visit:

©2014 The Firearms Coalition, all rights reserved. Reprinting, posting, and distributing permitted with inclusion of this copyright statement.

Read more:
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook


Existing law works to catch OH-NJ gun trafficker

1 Comment

This is from the Buckeye Firearms Association.

In spite of what the loony anti gun crowd says when the laws on the books are enforced they do work.

We have an administration and Department of Justice that does not give a Damn about enforcing any laws.


Gun control advocates constantly claim that illegal gun trafficking is occurring because current laws are inadequate. They say very little, however, when a case occurs that proves existing laws can be used with great effect.

According to the Columbus Dispatch, a New Jersey man is to be sentenced to prison this week for his role in a gun-trafficking scheme that stretched from Columbus to the East Coast.

From the article:

Terrance Laboo, 40, of Woodlynne, admitted in a Camden, N.J., federal courtroom that he was the eastern endpoint in the trafficking case.

Prosecutors said that three Columbus men bought guns from legitimate shops in central Ohio and sold them to a middleman who sold them to Laboo.

“There’s money to be made selling guns to people who otherwise can’t get guns,” said David Coulson, a senior special agent with the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in Chicago. “There’s a market out there.”

The Columbus men — William E. Johnson II, Joseph L. Berry and Antonio R. Berry — await sentencing in U.S. District Court in Columbus.

Johnson, 25, of 698 Wedgewood Dr. on the West Side, and Joseph Berry, 25, of 4124 Dundee Ave. on the East Side, pleaded guilty to conspiring to illegally purchase firearms and to making false statements during a firearms purchase.

Antonio Berry, 22, of 4092 Larry Place on the East Side, pleaded guilty to the conspiracy charge, which carries a maximum five-year prison term. The false-statement charge has a maximum 10-year prison term.

Each of the men bought guns from sources that included gun stores, pawnshops and individuals, court records show. They claimed on required federal forms that they were buying the guns for themselves.

From October 2009 to June 2010, they sold the guns to Joshua “Trent” Jackson, 33, of Willingboro, N.J., according to records.

A criminal complaint against Jackson says he bought about 280 guns from Ohio sellers, transported them in a rental car or Greyhound bus and sold them in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York and Massachusetts. He’s facing federal charges in New Jersey for selling guns without a federal firearms license.

Coulson also provided a quote to the Dispatch that shows why gun control laws are never going to stop criminal intent, no matter how many are passed:

“Firearms trafficking is common among drug dealers and gangs, in part because anyone who has been convicted of a felony can’t legally own a gun, “so they resort to secondary means,” he said. “It’s always going on, and we take it very seriously.”

Strangely, the article then devolves into a discussion over the “exploitation” of supposedly “inadequate” Ohio gun laws. But this isn’t an example of the exploitation of Ohio gun laws – it’s an example of someone breaking Ohio gun laws. And as Agent Coulson points out, illegal or not, people with criminal intent are going to “resort to secondary means.”

Much, I’m sure, to the chagrin of gun control advocates, this case proves that the system is working as designed. Guy buys guns under false pretense, guy sells guns illegally, guy goes to jail.

Chad D. Baus is the Buckeye Firearms Association Secretary, and BFA PAC Vice Chairman.

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: