Tag: Holder

Ferguson: A Murderous Mob Incited By Holder And Obama (Joel B. Pollak)

Ferguson: A Murderous Mob Incited By Holder And Obama – Joel B. Pollak

.

.
Two police officers in Ferguson, MO were shot at a protest early Thursday against alleged racism in the department and the city itself. It was not enough that the chief of police had just resigned. It was not enough that a local judge had quit. It was not enough that the Department of Justice had exonerated former officer Darren Wilson. No – the mob, told by President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder that Ferguson was still guilty of racism, wanted “justice.”

The violence is the direct result of incitement by the federal government on the basis of trumped-up accusations, based on the faulty notion that a city that enforces traffic tickets vigorously as a means of raising revenue is inherently racist. (By that standard, my own ultra-progressive town of Santa Monica, California would be akin to a Ku Klux Klan headquarters.)

Racist emails discovered from a few employees implicated those individuals alone–but Obama and Holder wanted more. They, and serial inciter Al Sharpton, wanted the humiliation of the town, wanted the division of America, wanted it to be clear that white public officials could never represent a black population, wanted middle America to know that the federal government could nullify self-government at a whim.

On the basis of the “hands up, don’t shoot” lie, they let black businesses in Ferguson be torched and sewed rage across the country that took the lives of two police officers in New York.

Now the campaign of terror against police has come back to where the great lie started. Obama and Holder will not finish until they have destroyed Ferguson – destroyed it, in the oft-mocked parlance of the Vietnam era, in order to save it, razed it to rebuild it in the stylized image of Selma 1965, razed it in order to fit the delusions of an Attorney General who thinks we have made no progress since the era of Malcolm X and a President who once promised – incredibly! – to unite America.

.

.

*VIDEO* Klavan & Whittle: Avoiding Illegalities Because He’s Black? Should Holder Be Prosecuted?


.

.

Holder’s DOJ Coordinated With Left-Wing Extremists At Media Matters To Attack Breitbart Reporter

Department Of Justice, Media Matters Coordinate To Attack Reporter – Daily Caller

.

.
Since when does the Department of Justice coordinate with an obviously liberal media organization to go after a conservative reporter? It’s official: At least since 2011.

In email exchanges obtained by The Daily Caller in two separate FOIA requests, a coordinated effort to slam Breitbart News reporter Matthew Boyle emerged. To be sure, Boyle is not a reporter who is beloved by other reporters and he’s been critiqued on any number of matters that include his youthful chipmunk cheeks, his previously questionable Twitter avatar and his TV skills. But his beat was DOJ and Eric Holder and shouldn’t a reporter be commended for going after an enterprising story or two on his beat?

Even Slate‘s Dave Weigel agreed with that sentiment. “I see Media Matters giving Holder a huzzah for calling the Caller out,” he wrote in November 2011. “But calling it out for what? Are news organizations not allowed to enterprise stories by asking people whether they think someone should resign? News organizations do this all the time. The Caller’s ‘sin’ seems to be doing it with no back-up from the rest of the press.”

And yet, all this media scheming from the Department of Justice.

As revealed in the FOIA docs, Media Matters Deputy Research Director Matt Gertz sent a post concerning the NRA’s growing contributions to Holder’s critics to DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler, Holder’s top press flack who resigned in March, 2013. She replied, “Thanks, you know boyle has been doing robo calls to top members right? This is campaign mounted by daily caller. He has called 60 offices and gotten to 8 last week.” Gertz replied, “Yeah, that was what my original piece on the story was about.”

At the time of the exchange, Boyle worked for The Daily Caller.

Years later in February, 2013, Boyle wrote a story for Breitbart News about Schmaler’s “colluding” with “far left wing” Media Matters to attack him, lawmakers and other members of the media. Funny enough, Boyle attempted to seek comment from Schmaler on why she resigned. He wrote, “Schmaler has not answered when asked by Breitbart News whether her resignation has anything to do with the coming hearings on DOJ collusion with groups like Media Matters.”

Weirdly, it takes two years (or longer) for DOJ to respond to FOIA requests.

Further perplexing: TheDC FOIA’d the Justice Department for all mentions of Matthew Boyle in agency communications. The specific request was ”All records relating to and about Matthew Boyle.” Carmen Mallon, chief of staff for DOJ, replied in a formal letter saying that no such records existed despite the above exchange between Schmaler and Gertz.

“For your information, neither this Office nor any of these senior leadership offices of the Department typically maintain records on individuals,” she wrote. “As such, this office would not maintain the type of records you are seeking.

“However, in an effort to be of assistance, please be advised that a search has been conducted of the electronic database of the Departmental Executive Secretariat, which is the official records repository for the Offices of the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, and Associate Attorney General, and no records subject to FOIA were located. A search has also been conducted in the Office of Information Policy and no records subject to the FOIA were located.”

Gee, thanks Carmen. Except that the records concerning DOJ and Boyle were maintained, located and sent.

Please be advised. If you’re the DOJ and want to get some bad press out there on a reporter who may or may not be a thorn in your side, Media Matters is on speed dial.

DOJ-Media Matters Coordination

.

.

.

.

.

Holder’s DOJ Won’t Release Names Of Lawyers Responsible For More Than 650 Ethical Violations

Justice Department Won’t Release Names Of Lawyers Responsible For More Than 650 Ethical Violations – Daily Caller

The Department of Justice will not disclose the names of its lawyers responsible for more than 650 ethical violations found in internal agency watchdog reports.

.

.
DOJ’s Office of Professional Responsibility documented more than 650 examples of its lawyers violating department ethics rules, according to a review of internal documents and OPR reports compiled by the Project on Government Oversight.

The review, spanning fiscal year 2002 through fiscal year 2013, found more than 400 cases of recklessness or intentional misconduct, according to OPR’s own standards. The office investigated approximately 2,100 alleged abuses during this time.

DOJ upholds a practice of not disclosing the names of lawyers identified by OPR as having committed offenses.

“The result: the Department, its lawyers, and the internal watchdog office itself are insulated from meaningful public scrutiny and accountability,” concluded the Project on Government Oversight.

Federal attorneys misled courts at least 48 times, including 20 intentional violations, breached constitutional or civil rights 13 times, and did not provide exculpatory information to defendants 29 times, according to OPR.

OPR also found examples in fiscal year 2012 in which lawyers were given brief suspensions or letters of admonishment for severe instances of misconduct.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

*VIDEO* Lawyer For Targeted Conservative Groups Slams FBI, Holder DOJ For Bogus IRS Investigation


.
Related article:

.
Obama’s IRS Goon Squad Ramping Up Efforts To Target Conservative Groups In 2014 – Weasel Zippers

.
………….

Via WSJ:

President Obama and Democrats have been at great pains to insist they knew nothing about IRS targeting of conservative 501(c)(4) nonprofits before the 2012 election. They’ve been at even greater pains this week to ensure that the same conservative groups are silenced in the 2014 midterms.

That’s the big, dirty secret of the omnibus negotiations. As one of the only bills destined to pass this year, the omnibus was—behind the scenes—a flurry of horse trading. One of the biggest fights was over GOP efforts to include language to stop the IRS from instituting a new round of 501(c)(4) targeting. The White House is so counting on the tax agency to muzzle its political opponents that it willingly sacrificed any manner of its own priorities to keep the muzzle in place.

And now back to our previously scheduled outrage over the Chris Christie administration’s abuse of traffic cones on the George Washington Bridge.

Yet my sources say that throughout the negotiations Democrats went all in on keeping the IRS rule, even though it meant losing their own priorities. In the final hours before the omnibus was introduced Monday night, the administration made a last push for IMF money. Asked to negotiate that demand in the context of new IRS language, it refused.

That’s a lot to sacrifice for a rule that the administration has barely noted in public, and that then-acting IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel claimed last fall when it was introduced is simply about providing “clarity” to nonprofits. It only makes sense in a purely political context. The president’s approval ratings are in the toilet, the economy is in idle, the ObamaCare debate rages on, and the White House has a Senate majority to preserve. With one little IRS rule it can shut up hundreds of groups that pose a direct threat by restricting their ability to speak freely in an election season about spending or ObamaCare or jobs. And it gets away with it by positioning this new targeting as a fix for the first round.

This week’s Democratic rally-round further highlights the intensely political nature of their IRS rule. It was quietly dropped in the runup to the holiday season, to minimize the likelihood of an organized protest during its comment period. That 90-day comment period meantime ends on Feb. 27, positioning the administration to shut down conservative groups early in this election cycle.

Keep reading

.

Holder Appoints Obama Donor To “Investigate” IRS

Covert Cronies? Obama’s Attorney General Appoints Obama Donor To Investigate Obama’s IRS – Daily Caller

President Barack Obama’s deputies have picked one of his political donors to investigate the IRS’ attack on independent political groups during the 2012 election, according to California Republican Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House investigations committee.

.

.
“We request you immediately remove Ms. [Barbara] Bosserman from the ongoing investigation,” said a Jan. 8 letter from Issa to Attorney General Eric Holder.

The secret selection of Barbara Bosserman, a lawyer in the Department of Justice’s civil rights division, was revealed by a committee investigation after the DOJ stonewalled the legislators.

Bosserman contributed $6,100 to Obama’s political campaigns from 2008 to 2012.

“By selecting a significant donor to President Obama to lead an investigation into inappropriate targeting of conservative groups, the Department has created a startling conflict of interest,” said Issa’s letter.

“It is unbelievable that the Department would choose such an individual to examine the federal government’s systematic targeting and harassment of organizations oppose to the President’s policies… Please provide a comprehensive explanation of the decision to assign Ms. Bosserman to the DoJ/FBI investigation of the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups,” the letter continued.

The IRS’s enemies list was exposed in May 2013, and caused a brief scandal in the establishment media.

The IRS damaged the civic groups because of their affiliation with the small-government tea party movement. Many groups were hit by burdensome requests for information, unprecedented requests for private information and the denial of full non-profit status.

The denial of the non-profit status to the groups hindered their fundraising and curbed their advocacy for small-government policies during the 2012 campaign, which Obama won.

Since the 1960s, many left-of-center progressive groups have portrayed themselves as victims of inappropriate government investigations. However, few progressive groups, including those oppose to government overreach, have denounced the IRS investigation.

The Daily Caller has reported extensive links between top IRS officials and senior White House officials during the period 2012 campaign.

Other media groups have continued to investigate the IRS’ role in the 2012 election campaign.

However, administration officials have managed to minimize media coverage of the scandal by suppressing news about subsequent investigations.

In May, Obama fired the IRS’ acting chief, but since has worked to downplay the existence of his enemies list. For example, in a December interview on MSNBC, Obama minimized the IRS’ political suppression and then rebuked one of his supporters, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews for covering the scandal in an TV interview last month.

“You’ve got an office in Cincinnati in the IRS office that, I think, for bureaucratic reasons is trying to streamline what is a difficult law to interpret about whether [a] nonprofit is actually a political organization,” Obama said. “And they’ve got a list. And suddenly, everybody’s outraged.”

Obama then criticized coverage of the scandal by Matthews and other progressives.

“There are some so-called progressives and… perceived-to-be-liberal commentators, who during that week, just were outraged at the possibility that these folks… had been, you know, at the direction of the Democratic Party in some way, discriminated against tea party folks,” he said, while looking at Matthews. “That is what gets news. That’s what gets attention.”

Amid administration pressure, FBI officials cancelled an offer to meet with Issa’s deputies, according to Issa.

Issa’s letter protested the FBI’s refusal to speak with legislators. “The FBI’s blatant lack of cooperation with the Committee may rise to the level of criminal obstruction of a congressional investigation,” said the letter.

FBI director James Comey was appointed by Obama to head the FBI, and was sworn in last October.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Holder Justice Department Spending Over Half A Million Taxpayer Dollars On LinkedIn Profile

Justice Dept To Spend $544,000 On A… What!? You Won’t Believe This – Independent Journal Review

.

.
According to the government website FedBizOpps.gov, the U.S. Department of Justice’s Criminal Division is spending $544,000 on a new LinkedIn profile:

The U.S. Department of Justice’s Criminal Division is paying $544,000 for a shiny new LinkedIn profile, in the wake of a partial government shutdown that followed a top Democrat’s assurance that ‘the cupboard is bare, there’s no more cuts to make.’

The LinkedIn contract, first reported in the Washington Free Beacon, includes ‘Work With Us’ banner ads and ‘gold’-level user pages commonly purchased by private companies, all designed to drive job-seekers to Attorney General Eric Holder’s law enforcement agency.

The DOJ provided its contractor, the Reston, Virginia-based Carahsoft Technology Corporation, with a not-so-helpful table of prices for LinkedIn’s services, in which all the costs were listed as $0. The agency contracting officer responsible for the award did not respond to a request for an explanation.

While LinkedIn is free to use, it also offers paid plans that give organizations the opportunity to spice up their page and access several bells and whistles. However, it’s not incredibly extensive or complicated. To justify paying someone $544,000 for this is preposterous.

Suppose it takes Brogan & Partners, the consulting firm the DOJ has hired, 150 hours (and that’s a generous estimate) to redesign the profile, create some banner ads and write up some redirect pages. That comes out to $3,626 per hour!

Does it look like our government’s priorities are way off, or is it just me?

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Holder’s Injustice Department Suing North Carolina Over Voter Law

Justice Department To Sue North Carolina Over Voter Law – Fox News

The Justice Department will announce Monday that it is suing the state of North Carolina for alleged racial discrimination over tough new voting rules.

.

A person briefed on the department’s plans told Fox News that the suit would claim that the North Carolina statute violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and would seek to have the state subject to federal pre-clearance before making “future voting-related changes.” The person also said the suit would be filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Nashville, Tenn.

In asking for pre-clearance, the Justice Department will ask a federal judge to place the four provisions in North Carolina’s new law under federal scrutiny for an indeterminate period.

The suit is the latest effort by the Obama administration to fight back against a Supreme Court decision that struck down the most powerful part of the landmark Voting Rights Act and freed southern states from strict federal oversight of their elections.

North Carolina’s new law scales back the period for early voting and imposes stringent voter identification requirements. It is among at least five Southern states adopting stricter voter ID and other election laws. The Justice Department on Aug. 22 sued Texas over the state’s voter ID law and is seeking to intervene in a lawsuit over redistricting laws in Texas that minority groups consider to be discriminatory.

Republican lawmakers in southern states insist the new measures are needed to prevent voter fraud, though such crimes are infrequent. Democrats and civil rights groups argue the tough new laws are intended to make voting more difficult for minorities and students, voting groups that lean toward Democrats, in states with legacies of poll taxes and literacy tests.

Attorney General Eric Holder will be joined at a news conference Monday by the acting assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s civil rights division, Joceyln Samuels, and the three U.S. attorneys from North Carolina, the Associated Press reported.

In the North Carolina lawsuit, the person said, the government will challenge requirements in state law that eliminate the first seven days of early voting opportunities and eliminate same-day voter registration during the early voting period. Same-day registration allows voters to cast a ballot immediately after presenting elections officials with proof of their name and home address.

The Justice Department challenge also is aimed at a provision eliminating the counting of certain types of provisional ballots by voters who cast ballots in their home counties but do not vote in the correct precincts.

Finally, the federal government will challenge a provision in the new law that requires voters to present government-issued identification at the polls in order to cast ballots. In North Carolina, a recent state board of elections survey found that hundreds of thousands of registered voters did not have a state-issued ID. Many of those voters are young, black, poor or elderly.

In remarks Sept. 20 to the Congressional Black Caucus, Holder said the Justice Department will not allow the Supreme Court’s action to be interpreted as “open season” for states to pursue measures that suppress voting rights.

However, the provision of the Voting Rights Act that the Justice Department is invoking may be a difficult tool for the Obama administration to use.

A handful of jurisdictions have been subjected to pre-clearance, or advance approval, of election changes through the Civil Rights Act provision it is relying on, but a court first must find that a state or local government engaged in intentional discrimination under the Constitution’s 14th or 15th amendments, or the jurisdiction has to admit to discrimination. Unlike other parts of the voting law, the discriminatory effect of an action is not enough to trigger court review.

Nowhere is the debate over voting rights is more heated than in Florida, where the chaotic recount in the disputed 2000 presidential race took place.

Florida election officials are set to resume an effort to remove noncitizens from the state’s voting rolls. A purge last year ended in embarrassment after hundreds of American citizens, most of whom were black or Hispanic, were asked to prove their citizenship or risk losing their right to vote.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Obama Regime Run Amok: DOJ, Holder Being Sued Over Fast And Furious Stonewalling

Obama Administration Run Amok: DOJ And Holder Being Sued – Downtrend

Do you remember all the talk about the Obama Administration’s Fast and Furious operation? This was a two-year operation where agents in Obama’s ATF in Arizona actually allowed the sale of more than 2,000 guns to suspected criminals linked to Mexican drug gangs. The idea, of course, was to actually trace the movements of these guns as they crossed the Mexican border. It was part of an investigation into these cartels. Unfortunately, Obama’s ATF screwed it all up and the agents failed to actually track these weapons.

.

Guess how the entire operation came to light? There was a shootout where a US Border Patrol agent died. Several of the guns which were left at the scene were those involved in this operation. As if all of this was not bad enough, we then saw the entire Obama Administration circling its wagons and closing ranks in an effort to NOT disclose any documents about the Department of Justice’s response to this operation. Chief among the people involved in attempting to thwart and delay investigations into all of this has been none other than Obama’s chief prosecutor, Attorney General Eric Holder.

There is more news out about this Obama Administration debacle. It seems that Judicial Watch, which is a legal watchdog group based out of Washington, DC has actually sued the DOJ over their continual stalling in regards to releasing documents related to the Fast and Furious scandal. Not to mention that they are also very concerned about obtaining any documents related to AG Holder’s contempt citation. Yes, amazingly enough, in the wake of all of this a sitting AG actually received a contempt citation.

The immediate justification or provocation for this suit was cited by Judicial Watch as being a Freedom of Information (FOIA) request that was submitted back in March of this year. This request still has not been answered, or even acknowledged. In the suit, Judicial Watch is demanding that the DOJ comply with their FOIA requests as required by law. They are seeking all records of communication between the House Oversight Committee and the DOJ in relation to the settlement discussions that surrounded Holder’s contempt of Congress charge from June 2012. It has been reported that the Committee is working on a ‘deal’ of some kind with Holder and the DOJ…and that progress is being made.

These settlement talks are also apparently being dragged out by Holder. In fact, they have even been called by Congress as a waste of everyone’s time. Plus the DOJ is also being sued by the Oversight Committee. Perhaps somewhat brazenly, the DOJ has asked for everything to be dismissed including Holder’s contempt charge and even Obama’s executive privilege assertion.

This certainly seems to indicate that something funny is going on here. If there was nothing to hide, then why not just come out and face the music? Perhaps there is more happening here than just something which will embarrass the Regime. Whenever Obama and his boys seem to be more inclined to drag there feet and stall for time rather than defend their case on its merits, there is something ging on.

Instead of getting answers and getting closer to the truth, the American people are getting fed more lies and a rehashing of some secretive claims of executive privilege. What is even more sad than this is the fact that this is a pattern which seems to have repeated itself over and over in the Obama White House. We need only point out how things like Banghazzi, the IRS scandal, and the NSA spying incidents have been handled. Lots of lies, secrets, and obfuscation of the facts. Just another day in the Obama Regime.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Holder, IRS Lackeys Spoke At Political Training Session For Black Ministers That Detailed ‘Right-Wing Conspiracy’

Holder, IRS Officials Spoke At Political Training Session For Black Ministers That Detailed ‘Right-Wing Conspiracy’ – Daily Caller

A Democratic congressman railed against a “right-wing conspiracy” of outside campaign spending and said that voter ID laws could have prevented Barack Obama’s presidency during a 2012 event in which the IRS coached black ministers in how to engage in campaign activity.

.

The Daily Caller reported Friday on a May 30, 2012 meeting at the U.S. Capitol between the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) and the Conference of National Black Churches. The meeting was attended by Attorney General Eric Holder, then-IRS commissioner Douglas Shulman, and IRS official Peter Lorenzetti, all of whom spoke at the event. The meeting, which was held during the presidential campaign and at a time when the IRS was targeting conservative non-profits for abusive audits, aimed to coach black ministers in how to engage in political activity without violating the law.

“We’re going to, first of all, equip them with the information they need to know about what they can say and what they cannot say in the church that would violate their 501(c)(3) status with the IRS,” said CBC chairman Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, a Missouri Democrat.

This helpful training session for black ministers was convened while Shulman’s IRS was improperly scrutinizing the tax-exempt status of conservative and tea party groups and delaying conservative groups’ tax-exempt applications with costly investigations.

Rep. G.K. Butterfield, a Democrat from North Carolina and member of the CBC, used openly partisan rhetoric in his remarks before the convened black ministers, discussing a “right-wing conspiracy” and condemning voter ID laws that he claimed could have jeopardized Obama’s election to the White House.

“But now, all of this progress that we’ve made is under assault. There is a right-wing conspiracy that is alive and well in this country that is trying to take us back to 1900 and even before,” Butterfield said in his remarks.

“They are coming in very discreet ways. Uh, the Citizens United case for example that now allows corporations to give unlimited amounts of money, anonymous unlimited amounts of money, in support or opposition to political candidates, and it’s working. And there are other devices at play and our panelists today are going to talk with you about that and to alert you and to inform you and to empower you to go back to your communities and to be vocal on this subject and to make a difference,” Butterfield said, referring to panelists including Holder and Shulman.

“What they want to do is not take away the right to vote, but if black voter participation can be diminished even by ten percent it will make that critical difference all across the country. President Obama won my state in the last election by 14,000 votes. Had we had a voter ID law in North Carolina he would not have won the state of North Carolina and probably could not have won the presidency,” Butterfield said.

Butterfield had lots of helpful advice for black ministers looking to get politically involved.

“You are permitted to endorse a candidate in your individual capacity as a citizen. You can appear on a program away from the church and be presented as the pastor of Zion Baptist Church or Richard Allen AME church. You can do that, and without violating IRS regulations,” Butterfield said, later encouraging ministers to get involved in “non-partisan voter registration” by sending people to knock on doors and stand on street corners.

Obama won 93 percent of the black vote in the 2012 election, according to exit polling.

“Let me just thank the Internal Revenue Service for their willingness to come today to have this conversation with us. They didn’t have to come today,” Butterfield said.

Holder’s keynote speech, meanwhile, was sharply critical of recent state-level voting law changes, saying there’s reason to believe that “some of the achievements that defined the civil rights movement now hang again in the balance.”

“[The CBC] had the IRS members there specifically to advise them on how far to go campaigning without violating their tax-exempt status,” George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley told TheDC. “I viewed the meeting as highly problematic.”

“Any questions you have regarding Attorney General Holder’s and Commissioner Shulman’s participation should be directed to their respective offices,” a spokesperson for Rep. Butterfield told TheDC.

The IRS and DOJ did not return repeated requests for comment.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Feds Admit IRS Improperly Scrutinized Tax Records Of Candidates, Donors, Yet Holder Refused To Prosecute

Feds Admit Improper Scrutiny Of Candidate, Donor Tax Records – Washington Times

A government watchdog has found for the first time that confidential tax records of several political candidates and campaign donors were improperly scrutinized by government officials, but the Justice Department has declined to prosecute any of the cases.

.

Its investigators also are probing two allegations that the Internal Revenue Service “targeted for audit candidates for public office,” the Treasury’s inspector general for tax administration, J. Russell George, has privately told Sen. Chuck Grassley.

In a written response to a request by Mr. Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, Mr. George said a review turned up four cases since 2006 in which unidentified government officials took part in “unauthorized access or disclosure of tax records of political donors or candidates,” including one case he described as “willful.” In four additional cases, Mr. George said, allegations of improper access of IRS records were not substantiated by the evidence.

Mr. Grassley has asked Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to explain why the Justice Department chose not to prosecute any of the cases. The Iowa Republican told The Washington Times that the IRS “is required to act with neutrality and professionalism, not political bias.”

The investigation did not name the government officials who obtained the IRS records improperly, nor did it reveal the identities or political parties of the people whose tax records were compromised. By law, taxpayer records at the IRS are supposed to be confidential.

The disclosures deal another blow to the IRS and the Obama administration, which are still grappling with revelations that IRS agents inappropriately targeted conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status for extraordinarily burdensome scrutiny during President Obama’s first term. Amid that furor over the abuse of the agency’s powers, the IRS has denied that the tax records of political candidates or donors were improperly accessed.

“The Justice Department should answer completely and not hide behind taxpayer confidentiality laws to avoid accountability for its decision not to prosecute a violation of taxpayer confidentiality laws,” Mr. Grassley told The Times. “With the IRS on the hot seat over targeting certain political groups, it’s particularly troubling to learn about ‘willful unauthorized access’ of tax records involving individuals who were candidates for office or political donors. The public needs to know whether the decision not to prosecute these violations was politically motivated and whether the individuals responsible were held accountable in any other way.”

A spokesman for the Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment Monday. Mr. Grassley has given Mr. Holder until July 26 to answer his questions.

In a letter July 3, Mr. George told Mr. Grassley that, of the four instances in which tax records were improperly accessed, three cases were determined to be “inadvertent.”

“In the fourth case, we presented evidence of a willful unauthorized access to the Department of Justice, but the case was declined for prosecution,” Mr. George wrote.

Of the three cases that the inspector general called “inadvertent” disclosures, Mr. George said his office referred one to Justice with a recommendation that no prosecution be brought. He said Justice officials agreed with his office’s assessment.

No reason was given for Justice’s rejections of prosecutions in the examples cited by Mr. George. In a July 12 letter to Mr. Holder, Mr. Grassley asked whether the attorney general knew about the cases, who in the Justice Department decided against prosecution, and with which parties the “victims” in the cases were affiliated.

“Although this may not be indicative of wide spread targeting, any instance is cause for concern,” Mr. Grassley wrote. “Even more alarming, in at least one instance TIGTA referred evidence of ‘willful unauthorized access’ to the United States Attorney’s Office, but criminal prosecution was declined. Decisions such as these directly impact the political process and should be subject to the scrutiny of the American public.”

The IRS did not respond to a request for comment on Mr. George’s findings.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Louie Gohmert: If Holder Ignores Another Congressional Subpoena, It’s Time To Defund The DOJ (Video)

Louie Gohmert: If Holder Ignores Another Congressional Subpoena, It’s Time To Defund The DOJ – Right Scoop

Congress hasn’t subpoenaed Holder yet, but Gohmert says if Holder refuses to come before Congress voluntarily and explain why he lied about investigating journalists, and then ignores a subpoena to do the same, then Gohmert says Congress should defund the DOJ until it gets justice. And by ‘justice’ he means a DOJ that cares as much about radical Islamic terrorists as they do about going after journalists like James Rosen.

Watch:

.

.
Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Holder Justice Department Recruits Dwarfs, Schizophrenics, And The ‘Intellectually Disabled’

Holder Justice Department Recruits Dwarfs, Schizophrenics, And The ‘Intellectually Disabled’ – PJ Tatler

The PJ Tatler has obtained documents from the Justice Department detailing efforts to recruit attorneys and staff who are dwarfs or who have “psychiatric disabilities” or “severe intellectual disabilities.” On May 31, 2012, Assistant Attorney General Tom Perez issued a directive to affirmatively recruit people with these “targeted disabilities.”

This DOJ policy does not merely involve prohibitions against discrimination, but rather the documents reveal deliberate recruitment efforts to hire as attorneys and staff for the Department of Justice people suffering from psychiatric disorders and intellectual disabilities. Moreover, applicants can “self-identify” their disability by means of the “Standard Form 256, Self Identification Disability.”

Those with “targeted disabilities” may be hired through a “non-competitive” appointment. That means they don’t have to endure the regular civil service competition among applicants, but can be plucked from the stack of resumes and hired immediately instead.

According to the documents, those with these “targeted disabilities” may be hired “before the position is advertised” and even “before the position’s closing date.” Moreover, lawyers with psychiatric disabilities and “severe intellectual” disabilities receive a waiver from the requirement that a new DOJ employee have practiced law for one year before being hired.

You can read the detailed Civil Rights Division “Hiring of Persons With Targeted Disabilities Policy” memo here.

You can also read PJ Media’s full report on the attorneys hired for the Justice Department Civil Rights Division from 2009-2010 here in the Every Single One series.

Speaking of preferences, here is another document, the entire “Operational Diversity Management Plan,” obtained by PJ Media. It should be fascinating to those interested in racial preferences in government policy.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story