Monday, November 30, 2015

Loretta Lynch: Abuse of Prosecutorial Discretion and Evasion of Duty = Lois 'Investigating Republican Sympathizers' Lerner Walks

God but it feels good to live in a country where White Liberal Guilt voted for a President based on his ethnicity over bothering to find out what he really was.

American Thinker
By James Longstreet
Prosecutorial discretion was first described to me thus:
If a police officer catches ten people speeding, and the traffic court has the resources to prosecute only five, then those five who were most egregiously in violation of the speed limit will be prosecuted.  The discretion is guided by a consideration, in this case by the limit of resources of the traffic court.
At the very worst, in the IRS Lerner case, we have a public servant using her position at a federal agency to impede the efforts of a political party to which she and the administration were opposed, and engaged against, in a national election.  And at the very worst, these actions swayed the national election results.
Loretta Lynch, Obama’s appointed attorney general, admitted that Lois Lerner was protected by prosecutorial discretion.
“I believe that in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion, the matter was handled and was resolved,” Attorney General Loretta Lynch told the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday morning.
Lynch continued,
Our review found that the management of the process by which tax-exempt applications were handled at the IRS was characterized by mismanagement and inefficiency in numerous circumstances.
May we ask Attorney General Lynch, “What guided the discretion used in the decision to not proceed with prosecution?  Mismanagement and inefficiencies directed at specific political opponents ceases to be frivolous or random.” 
The working definition of prosecutorial discretion in this case seems to be as follows:
Prosecutorial discretion refers to the fact that under American law, government prosecuting attorneys have nearly absolute powers. A prosecuting attorney has power on various matters including those relating to choosing whether or not to bring criminal charges, deciding the nature of charges, plea bargaining and sentence recommendation. This discretion of the prosecuting attorney is called prosecutorial discretion.
As we know, Lerner refused to testify.  Documents were not provided.  Communications between the IRS and then-AG Eric Holder were not provided.
Darrell Issa was adamant in his retort to Lynch’s assertion.
Per the Federal Statute:
Whenever a witness summoned as mentioned in section 192 of this title fails to appear to testify or fails to produce any books, papers, rec­ords, or documents, as required, or whenever any witness so summoned refuses to answer any question pertinent to the subject under inquiry… it shall be [the U.S. attorney’s duty] to bring the matter before the grand jury[.]
“Shall be the duty.”  Lynch has no power, no right to use discretion to shun her responsibilities of office.  On her part, it is a failure of duty and a breach of her oath.  Lynch’s duty seems to lie elsewhere, as did Holder’s.
Therefore, we are entitled to speculate, for we have been deprived the mechanics of truth discovery.
The speculation is thus.  We have a federal agency (IRS) hamstringing the efforts of the opposing party in an election year, the prosecution of which is short-circuited by a nebulous discretion, applied by an attorney general in violation of a federal statute, a person so appointed by the candidate who prevailed in the election in question over that opposing party so harmed by the abuses of said agency.
Why have an attorney general?  Slow-playing the Hillary document release, directing immigration officials to shirk their duties, suing states that assist in the implementation of federal law, fomenting racial frictions, refusing to appoint special prosecutors, and using undefined discretion to inhibit the discovery of truth are all curious activities for the alleged top legal official in the nation.
Serving at the pleasure of the president takes on a new meaning.  Apparently, that is why we have attorneys general.

Thank You Mr Longstreet and American Thinker.

pic cred to

Violence Problem Solved, Criminals To Buy Crime Insurance

Eric Holder in Drag.

State Dept To Release 7,800 New Carpetbagger Clinton E-Mails

And what will happen after Issa and America go through them?
Same thing that happened to Eric Holder and Lois Lerner.
Jack and Squat.
They're all Made Progs.

Damn emails.
State Department officials are set to release roughly 7,800 pages of Hillary Clinton’s private emails Monday amid new speculation about the former secretary of state’s official meeting schedule.
The email production Monday afternoon will kick off a countdown to the final two Clinton email releases, which will take place at the end of December and January respectively.
Hundreds of the official emails Clinton hosted on a private server in her home have been published in batches since May of this year.
Keep reading…
Thank You Wash Examiner and Bill.

Sunday, November 29, 2015

Obama: Do Not Acknowledge Terrorism Or They Win

User avatar
In response to the latest string of terrorist attacks in Egypt, Paris and Mali, President Obama has vowed to "never, ever, ever" discuss terrorism anymore, stating that "if we acknowledge terrorism exists, then the terrorists will have won."

Speaking from the White House Press Room, the President gave an example of the Eagles of Death Metal, an American rock band whose concert in Paris became a scene of a bloody terrorist attack earlier this month. "Those folks should have kept playing," he said. "When they stopped playing and ran for their lives, the terrorists won. I am encouraging all citizens: if you see anything suspicious, just ignore it and keep doing what you’re doing, or the terrorists will have won."

Taking his point further, President Obama presented his new plan to combat terrorism. "What we are determined to do is to create a safe space - right here in the White House Press Room - where we are free from the tyranny of offensive ideas, facts, and actions. So from now on, no more questions about politics, ISIS, or Donald Trump. None of that stuff. We can talk about basketball, nutrition, or beer. I've got some some new jokes too, if you want to hear them."

An awkward silence that followed was interrupted by a question from the back of the room about intelligence reports concerning the Mali bombings.

President Obama responded to it by placing his index fingers in his ears and humming loudly, saying he couldn’t hear anything due to the loud noise he was making. He then stopped abruptly and invited everyone in the room to try it and see how easy it is not to hear anything.

The President then ended the press conference by saying that there was a group of random protesters outside the White House and he couldn't wait to usher them in and meet their demands.

Thank You Komrad Melvin and The Cube.

Don't forget to click through and read the other Cubers responses or you'll miss out on 90% of the fun they're having at this Clown's expense.

Anti Terror Posters Deemed Unsafe For The Jihad On Campus

Never Forget that these Amusement Parks called Colleges and Universities are where Mental/Political Health is manured on your money and disseminated through your self appointed Nobility in Govt. on your money.

Cube Filed under news we just don't have time to report on:
Progressive scientists: Truth is a variable deduced by subtracting 'what is' from 'what ought to be' 

Shoe In For New FDA Commish Robert Califf: More Of The Same: Bought And Paid For Industry Insider

Robert Califf, MD, who is currently deputy commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), was nominated by President Barack Obama on Sept. 15, 2015, to be the FDA’s commissioner.
Califf was born in 1951 in Anderson, South Carolina, and grew up in Columbia, South Carolina. Califf was one of four children whose father was an architect. He attended A.C. Flora High School in Columbia and played on its 1969 state title basketball team. It was also there that he met the woman who would become his wife, Lydia.
After graduation, Califf went to Duke University, in Durham, North Carolina, where he earned his bachelor’s degree in 1973 and medical degree in 1978. He did his residency in internal medicine and cardiology at the University of California San Francisco, but returned in 1982 to serve on the faculty of Duke, where he remained for more than 30 years.
At Duke, Califf became a world-renowned researcher, eventually churning out more than 1,200 papers during his time there. He was also a go-to source for journalists writing about new drugs or other topics relating to cardiac issues.
He was founding director of the Duke Clinical Research Institute and organization director of the Duke Translational Medicine Institute, which he founded in 2006, and professor of medicine in the Division of Cardiology at the Duke University Medical Center. 
But as is common in health research, Califf worked closely with drug companies in his lines of investigation. More than half the funding for his research came from such firms as MerckNovartis, and Eli Lilly. In his last full year at Duke, 2014, Califf listed six drug companies on his financial disclosure form from which he either got a part of his salary, drew a salary for consulting or in which he owned an equity stake. “In a sense, he’s the ultimate industry insider,” Daniel Carpenter, a Harvard political science professor who has written extensively about the FDA, told The New York Times. Califf raked in about $32,000 in consulting fees in 2014, according to the federal database Open Payments, putting him in the upper half of those doctors receiving payments. According to the Times, Califf has been donating his consulting fees to nonprofits since the mid-2000s.
But in 2014, Califf made news when he told a meeting of biomedical researchers, lawyers, and industry experts that regulation was a hurdle to be overcome.
Califf’s industry connections may have been what stood in the way of him being named commissioner earlier. He was considered for the job by President George W. Bush in 2001 and was considered a frontrunner for the post when Obama came into office in 2009. It was said at the time that he was passed over in 2009 because of his perceived closeness with the drug industry.
Those issues rose again in Califf’s confirmation hearing on Nov. 17, 2015, before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. Califf drew opposition from Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) on his ties to the drug industry. “At a time when millions of Americans cannot afford to purchase the prescription drugs they need, we need a new leader at the FDA who is prepared to stand up to the pharmaceutical companies and work to substantially lower drug prices,” Sanders said, according to the Times. “Unfortunately, I have come to the conclusion that Dr. Califf is not that person.”
The advocacy group Public Citizen has also urged that his nomination be voted down. “Califf’s appointment as FDA commissioner would accelerate a decades-long trend in which agency leadership too often makes decisions that are aligned more with the interests of industry, rather than those of public health and patients,” Michael Carome, MD, director of Public Citizen’s Health Research Group, said in a statement.
Nevertheless, most members of the Senate committee indicated that they would support Califf’s nomination when it came up for a vote.
Among the early issues facing Califf if he’s confirmed is the regulation of e-cigarettes and the challenge of getting drugs to market sooner. At the time of his appointment as deputy commissioner, Califf said he was in favor of streamlining the drug approval process. 
Califf is a golfer and a huge fan of Duke basketball. He and Lydia have three children: Sharon, Sam, and Tom.
-Steve Straehley
To Learn More:
FDA Nominee Califf’s Ties to Drug Makers Worry Some (by Sabrina Tavernise, New York Times)

Thank You Mr Straehley and AllGov.

And if you're sick of hunting for a 3rd job to Pay for the Emperor's Remaking of America, according to Reuters:
The FDA oversees products ranging from food and drugs to tobacco and cosmetics, which account for about 20 cents of every dollar spent by U.S. consumers.

So, yeah, this FDA machine and its owners are no small beer/chump change.

It's going to come out of your pockets and your great, great grandchildren's pockets. 

Saturday, November 28, 2015

ISIS Built Vast Network of Tunnels Under Iraqi Town Of Sinjar: Found Littered With U.S. Made Weapons, Copies Of The Koran

Which leaves us with the question, "How did ISIS get those American made weapons?"
Taking a page from the Vietcong.
Under the Iraqi town of Sinjar, Islamic State militants built a network of tunnels, complete with sleeping quarters, wired with electricity, and fortified with sandbags. There they had boxes of US-made ammunition, medicines, and copies of the Quran stashed on shelves.
The Associated Press obtained extensive video footage of the tunnels, which were uncovered by Kurdish forces that took the city in northwestern Iraq earlier this month after more than a year of Islamic State rule.
“We found between 30 and 40 tunnels inside Sinjar,” said Shamo Eado, a commander from Sinjar from the Iraqi Kurdish fighters known as peshmerga. “It was like a network inside the city.”
“Daesh dug these trenches in order to hide from airstrikes and have free movement underground as well as to store weapons and explosives,” Eado said, using an Arabic acronym for the Islamic State, which is also known as ISIS or ISIL. “This was their military arsenal.”
The video, shot by a freelancer touring the town with Kurdish fighters, showed two tunnels running several hundred yards, each starting and ending from houses, through holes knocked in walls or floors.
The narrow tunnels, carved in the rock apparently with jackhammers or other handheld equipment, are just tall enough for a man to stand in. Rows of sandbags line sections of the walls, electrical wires power fans and lights, and metal braces reinforce the ceilings. One section of the tunnel resembled a bunker. Dusty copies of the Quran sit above piles of blankets and pillows. Prescription drugs — painkillers and antibiotics — lie scattered along the floor.
In another section of the tunnel, the footage shows stocks of ammunition, including American-made cartridges and bomb-making tools.
Thank You Dapandico and Business Insider.

Colorado Springs Shooter Identified, Obama Pushes For More Gun Control

Like Clockwork Obama Uses Colorado Springs Shooting To Push For More Gun Control

2703 Shootings, 440 Deaths So Far This Year In Heavily Gun Controlled Chicago

1,777 Miles From Colorado Springs NYPD Deploys Cops To Planned Parenthood Clinics Across City

[Ed; Gee, sounds like PP is a Made Organization, or something.]

National Abortion Federation President Vicki Saporta Blames Planned Parenthood Videos For Colorado Springs Shooting


The shooter’s motivation has not yet been reported but they’re already off to the races, with a side of trying to defend Planned Parenthood selling baby parts thrown in…
A series of videos attempting to discredit Planned Parenthood ignited a wave of threats, arson and protests against the medical clinics and culminated in a deadly shooting in Colorado, pro-choice activists believe.
The two manipulated videos released by the Center for Medical Progress show what appears to be Planned Parenthood employees with its Denver facility discussing the harvesting of fetal tissue for science — and being reimbursed for it — increased threats against clinics that both offer abortions and those that do not.
The covert videos captured by undercover pro-life activists accused Planned Parenthood of profiting from abortions. The group stopped accepting reimbursement funds for fetal tissue as a result.
“There has been a direct correlation in the release of these videos and these threats,” National Abortion Federation president Vicki Saporta told the Daily News hours after a deadly attack killed two civilians and a police officer at a Planned Parenthood in Colorado Springs.

Thank You NYDN and Dapandico. 
"“I would expect he was inspired by the magnitude of hate speech on the Internet,” Saporta added."
Well, if it was Our child (and for that matter everyone's Else's children too) we'd have to go with the Hate Speech over the Scissors jammed into the spinal cord through the back of the neck. 

When you DO see the shooter reported as having a 'History of Mental Illness' or 'Mental Health Issues' you need to know what they're really reporting.

Which is that the Shooter has already been through the Suicide/Homicide/Aggression producing Mental Health System or the Shooter wouldn't have that History for the media parrots to dig up and squawk about. 

ISIS Training Video Has Them Kicking Recruits In The Crotch: So WHAT Will They Do With Those 72 Virgins?

Serves Them Right.

Daily Mail
There's more stills at DM of them playing Leapfrog, etc. 

The next one's even funnier.

Jihad Me At Boom: Islamist Talking On Camera Has Shell Dropped On His Head

Wednesday, November 25, 2015

California Creates $1.1 Billion Deficit With Failed Healthcare Tax

The state's managed care organization tax has faltered, creating an urgent need for reform

Tuesday, November 24, 2015

Obama's New Counter-Terrorism Guru

Since the Islamic State attacks in Paris on November 13, we have seen the development of a new, and strange justification for the Obama administration’s insistent refusal to jettison its manifestly failed strategy of contending with IS specifically and with Islamic terrorism generally.

In broad terms, Obama’s strategy for dealing with radical Islamic terrorism and jihadist movements is to ignore their motivating ideologies, take minimal action to combat them, criticize other governments for failing to destroy IS and its jihadist brethren on their own, and attack Republicans for criticizing Obama’s strategy for defeating radical Islamic terrorism.

The new justification for Obama’s refusal to revise his strategy was first uttered by former secretary of state Hillary Clinton at the Democratic presidential debate on November 14. Five days later, the Democratic National Committee produced an ad attacking Republican presidential candidates based on this new rhetorical theme.

Obama himself resonated the new message during his press conference in Malaysia on Sunday.

According to the new taking points, Republicans have no right to criticize Obama, or Clinton, for their failure to contend with the nature of the enemy because in ignoring the enemy’s doctrine, ideology and strategic goals, they are merely following in president George W. Bush’s footsteps.

During the Democratic presidential debate, Clinton argued that refusing to identify the radical Islamic nature of the enemy that attacked the US on September 11 and in the months and years that followed “was one of the real contributions – despite all the other problems – that George W. Bush made after 9/11, when he basically said – after going to a mosque in Washington – we are not at war with Islam or Muslims.”

In its new ad, the DNC attacks five Republican presidential candidates that have stated in recent days that radical Islam is the force that is warring against the US and its allies.

To prove that the candidates are “unpresidential,” for naming the enemy, the DNC ad includes a clip of Bush’s speeches in praise of Islam as “a religion of peace,” which he delivered in the days immediately following the September 11 attacks.

The Democrats’ invocation of Bush as their counterterrorism authority and as a means to justify their refusal to use the term “radical Islam” is more than a bit ironic, of course, since they have spent the past 14 years pillorying Bush’s counterterrorism policies.

But it is also extremely helpful. By aligning with Bush to justify their refusal to discuss the radical Islamic foundations of the terrorist scourge facing the free world and devouring large swaths of the Middle East, the Democrats have given us the opportunity to consider what that refusal has meant for the US’s ability to lead the free world in its war against the forces of radical Islam.

At the time of the September 11 attacks, and for the first five years of Bush’s war on terrorism that followed them, Michael Gerson served as Bush’s chief speechwriter.

Gerson authored Bush’s statements about Islam being a religion of peace.

In November 2014, Gerson participated in a debate vabout the nature of Islam and the war on terror. Gerson explained that Bush’s decision to ignore the nature of the enemy emanated from a strategic calculation.

Bush believed that radical Islam was but a marginal force in the Muslim world. By embracing Islam as a whole, and insisting that the terrorists from al-Qaida and other groups did not reflect the authentic nature of Islam, Bush hoped to draw the non-radical Muslims to America’s side against the jihadists.

In Gerson’s words, “Every religious tradition has forces of tribalism and violence in its history, background and theology; and, every religious tradition has sources of respect for the other. And you emphasize, as a political leader, one at the expense of the other in the cause of democracy.”

Gerson continued, “That is a great American tradition that we have done with every religious tradition that comes to the United States – include them as part of a natural enterprise and praise them for their strongly held religious views, and emphasize those portions that are most compatible with those ideals.”

The flaws in this reasoning began surfacing immediately.

When Bush made his remarks about Islam after the September 11 attacks, he was flanked by Muslim leaders who were in short order exposed as terrorism apologists and financiers.

On the battlefield, by failing to acknowledge, let alone discredit the enemy’s world view, Bush made it all but impossible for Muslims who oppose radical Islam to stand up against it. After all, if the Americans didn’t think it was a problem, why would they? Since the Americans refused to admit the existence of radical Islam, the US refused to favor non-radical forces over radical ones. And so, in the 2005 Iraqi elections, while Iran spent a fortune financing the campaigns of its supporters, the US did nothing to support the Iraqi forces that shared the US’s goal of transforming Iraq into a multi-denominational, pluralistic democracy.

The results were preordained. The elected government took its cues from Iran, and as soon as US forces withdrew from Iraq, all of America’s hard won gains were squandered. The Iraqi government became an Iranian puppet. And in areas where Iran didn’t care to assert its control, al-Qaida-aligned forces that now comprise Islamic State rose once again.

Obama’s refusal to discuss radical Islam stems from a different source than Bush’s refusal to do so. Unlike Bush’s position, Obama’s insistence that IS, al-Qaida, Hamas, Boko Haram and their brethren have nothing to do with Islam does not owe to a strategic calculation on how to win a war. Rather, it stems from an ideological conviction that the US and the rest of the Western world have no right to cast aspersions on jihadists.

As Obama sees things, the problems in the Middle East, and the Middle Eastern terrorism plaguing the rest of the world, are the result of past Western imperialism and chauvinism. All anti-Western movements – including jihadist movements – are legitimate responses to what Obama perceives as the crime of Western power.

Obama’s peevish response to the massacre in Paris and his assaults on Republicans who argue that the religious convictions of Syrians requesting asylum in the US are relevant for determining whether or not to let them in have brought his refusal to identify the enemy to the forefront of the US debate on how to defeat IS.

This debate is clearly uncomfortable for liberal US media outlets. So they have sought to change the subject.

As the Democratic Party adopted Bush as its new counterterrorism guru, the liberal media sought to end discussion of radical Islam by castigating as bigots Republicans who speak of it. The media attempt over the weekend to claim falsely that Republican frontrunner Donald Trump called for requiring American Muslims to be registered in a national Muslim database marked such an attempt to change the subject.

The common denominator between Bush’s strategic decision to lie about the nature of the enemy, Obama’s apologetics for IS and the media’s attempt to claim that Republicans are anti-Islamic racists is that in all cases, an attempt is being made to assert that there is no pluralism in Islam – it’s either entirely good or entirely evil.

This absolutist position is counterproductive for two reasons. First, it gets you nowhere good in the war against radical Islam. The fact is that Islam per se is none of the US president’s business. His business is to defeat those who attack the US and to stand with America’s allies against their common foes.

Radical Islam may be a small component of Islam or a large one. But it certainly is a component of Islam. Its adherents believe they are good Muslims and they base their actions on their Islamic beliefs.

American politicians, warfighters and policymakers need to identify that form of Islam, study it and base their strategies for fighting the radical Islamic forces on its teachings.

Bush was wrong to lie about the Islamic roots of radical Islam. And his mistake had devastating strategic consequences for the world as a whole. It is fortuitous that the Clinton and the Democratic Party have embraced Bush’s failed strategy of ignoring the enemy for justifying their even more extreme position. Now that they have, they have given a green light to Republicans as well as Democrats who are appalled by Obama’s apologetics for radical Islam to learn from Bush’s mistakes and craft an honest and effective strategic approach to the challenge of radical Islam.

Thank You Ms Glick and Jerusalem Post.

HT to

A Conservative News and Opinion Resource
A continuous record of the White House and its administration
 The Obama Administration: Year Seven
President Obama's Three Hundred and Fifty-Seventh Week in Office
News and Notes:   Joseph Goebbels, wrote in his diary, “the joke cannot last much longer, but it shows what the Jews are capable of when they have arms in their hands." (Warsaw Ghetto Uprising)
 Video/Audio of the moment:   Muslim World Reacts to Obama's Speech
It's 3am and nobody's there
Obama Ethics, Year 7
Obama and Syria
Obama and Israel, Year 7
VA Death Panel

Thank You nachumlist.

NOS: 'Not Otherwise Specified' Diagnoses Rose To 50% From 2007-2010

In English? "Duh, We Don't Know", but the consumer gets screwed with their disgusting stench for Life anyway.


National Trends in Psychiatric Not Otherwise Specified (NOS) Diagnosis and Medication Use Among Adults in Outpatient Treatment.
·         1Dr. Rajakannan, Mr. Burcu, and Dr. Zito are with the Department of Pharmaceutical Health Services Research, University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore. Dr. Zito is also with the Department of Psychiatry, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore. Dr. Safer is with the Department of Psychiatry and Pediatrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore. Send correspondence to Dr. Safer (e-mail: ).
This study examined national trends between 1999 and 2010 in not otherwise specified (NOS) DSM-IV psychiatric diagnoses and in related medication treatment patterns reported for adults during outpatient physician office visits.
Data on physician office visits by adults (ages 18-64) with a psychiatric diagnosis were from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (1999-2010) (N=52,026). Trends for visits with full-criteria diagnoses compared with visits with NOS diagnoses were analyzed for major psychiatric diagnostic groups, physician specialty, and prescribed medications. Population weighted chi square and logistic regression analyses were utilized.
Between 1999-2002 and 2007-2010, the proportion of all mental health visits by adults to office-based physicians that involved an NOS diagnosis increased significantly, from 42% to 50% (p<.001). Significant proportional increases in NOS diagnoses included bipolar disorders NOS (5% to 55%), anxiety disorders NOS (50% to 62%), and mood disorders NOS (.4% to 1.8%). In 2007-2010, NOS visits accounted for a greater proportion of visits to nonpsychiatrists than to psychiatrists (61% and 35%, respectively). Psychotropic medications prescribed during visits increased over time for both full-criteria and NOS diagnoses, but the increase was greater for NOS visits, specifically for antipsychotics, anticonvulsants-mood stabilizers, and lithium. By 2007-2010, psychotropic monotherapy and multidrug regimens were comparable for full-criteria and NOS diagnoses.

The proportion of U.S. physician visits with an NOS psychiatric diagnosis increased to nearly 50% in 2007-2010. The increase raises concerns about the precision of psychiatric diagnoses in community care and about the impact on concomitant medication regimens.

"The increase raises concerns about the precision of psychiatric diagnoses"

But 50% is still not enough to Do anything about Stopping it.

At what point does the maggot gag?