DO DRONES SPY ON U.S. SOIL? FBI DIRECTOR SAYS ‘YES’ BUT IN A ‘VERY, VERY MINIMAL WAY’

Original Post: The Blaze

Liz Klimas

FBI Director Robert Mueller told the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday, yes, the government does use drones over U.S. soil for surveillance — but not too much.

When asked by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) about the use of unmanned aircraft, Mueller said “Our footprint is very small. We have very few,” according to Wired.

ederal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director Robert Mueller testifies during a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee June 19, 2013 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. Mueller confirmed that the FBI uses drones for domestic surveillance during the hearing on FBI oversight. Grassley pressed, asking about their purpose, to which Mueller said they were for surveillance. Surveillance on U.S. soil?

“Yes, in a very, very minimal way, and seldom,” Mueller said.

The Huffington Post reported Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) expressing privacy concerns over the use of drones and calling them “the greatest threat to the privacy of Americans.”

In terms of privacy protections built into the drone program at the moment, Mueller said the program itself “is very narrowly focused on particularized cases and particularized needs,” which he called “the principal privacy limitation we have.”

He did say the bureau was in the “initial stages” of developing privacy guidelines though.

In May of this year, Attorney General Eric Holder revealed that the Obama administration had killed four Americans using drones in Yemen and Pakistan. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) also showed letters sent by Holder that said “the President has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, and without trial.”

The FAA was charged with drafting new regulations that would open up the skies of America to more private, commercial and military drone use by 2015.

Obama administration targets Fox News reporter in 'chilling' echo of AP probe

Original Post: CS Monitor

By Husna Haq

Associated Press reporters are not alone. One week after news broke that the Justice Department secretly obtained phone records from AP, more news has emerged about the Obama administration’s campaign to silence leaks.

Gary Pruitt, CEO of the Associated press, told CBS's "Face the Nation" this weekend that the Justice Department’s investigation is already silencing AP sources. This time, it’s new details about a 2010 Justice Department investigation into a Fox News correspondent who reported government secrets on North Korea. The twist is that in the Fox News case, the government is suggesting that the reporter broke the law and criminal charges could result.

The news points to how the Obama administration is going to unprecedented lengths to defend secrets – prosecuting more government leakers under the 1917 Espionage Act than all prior administrations combined.

Anecdotal evidence suggests the crackdown is having an effect, with AP saying some of its sources are falling silent. But that success could come at the expense of the newsgathering and investigative-reporting process that the Founding Fathers saw as a crucial check on federal power.

The Fox News case, in particular, suggests the “criminalization of investigative journalism,” writes Glenn Greenwald in The Guardian, a British newspaper.

According to a Washington Post report Sunday, Fox News chief Washington correspondent James Rosen reported in June 2009 on a CIA analysis that suggested North Korea may respond to UN sanctions with more nuclear tests. The story was published online the same day that a confidential report on the matter was released to select officials in the intelligence community, including a State Department security adviser, Stephen Jin-Woo Kim.

Detecting a connection, FBI investigators built a case alleging Mr. Kim leaked information to Mr. Rosen. To do so, they used every tool in their arsenal: analyzing security badge access records to track Rosen’s comings and goings from the State Department, tracing the timing of his calls to Kim, even subpoenaing his personal e-mails. Ultimately, FBI agents concluded Kim did, in fact, leak information to Rosen using a complex, if clumsy, system of communication including aliases and coded signals.

In his report, FBI investigator Reginald Reyes said evidence suggested Rosen had broken the law, “at the very least, either as an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator.”

While details on the case are forthcoming, it is not a crime for journalists to report classified information, except in rare circumstances. Furthermore, government seizure of media records is tightly circumscribed under the government’s Code of Federal Regulations.

The AP and Fox News cases renew concerns about the potential stifling effect government investigations have on reporters and their sources.

“Search warrants like these have a severe chilling effect on the free flow of important information to the public,” said First Amendment lawyer Charles Tobin in the Washington Post report. “That’s a very dangerous road to go down.”

Jane Mayer of The New Yorker goes further: “It's a huge impediment to reporting, and so chilling isn't quite strong enough, it's more like freezing the whole process into a standstill,” she told the New Republic.

As a case in point, Gary Pruitt, CEO of the AP, told CBS’s "Face the Nation" this weekend that the Justice Department’s investigation is already silencing AP sources.

“Already, officials that would normally talk to us and people we talk to in the normal course of news gathering are already saying to us that they're a little reluctant to talk to us,” he said. “They fear that they – they will be monitored by the government.”

Perhaps the most serious implication, however, is that the investigations threaten to jeopardize the very practice of investigative journalism, already endangered by budget cuts and the 24/7 news cycle.

“Under US law, it is not illegal to publish classified information,” writes The Guardian's Mr. Greenwald. “That fact, along with the First Amendment's guarantee of press freedoms, is what has prevented the US government from ever prosecuting journalists for reporting on what the US government does in secret. This newfound theory of the Obama DOJ – that a journalist can be guilty of crimes for 'soliciting' the disclosure of classified information – is a means for circumventing those safeguards and criminalizing the act of investigative journalism itself.”

IRS asked pro-life group about 'the content of their prayers'

Original Post:Washington Examiner

During a House Ways and Means Committee hearing today, Rep. Aaron Schock, R-Ill., grilled outgoing IRS commissioner Steven Miller about the IRS targeting a pro-life group in Iowa.

“Their question, specifically asked from the IRS to the Coalition for Life of Iowa: ‘Please detail the content of the members of your organization’s prayers,’" Schock declared.

“Would that be an inappropriate question to a 501 c3 applicant?” asked Schock. “The content of one’s prayers?”

“It pains me to say I can’t speak to that one either,” Miller replied.

After Schock pressed him further, Miller explained that although he couldn't comment on the specific case, it would "surprise him" if that question was asked.

The report comes from the Thomas More Society, a national public interest law firm for religious liberty.

Sign Up for the Politics Digest newsletter! From their report:

Coalition for Life of Iowa found itself in the IRS’s crosshairs when the group applied for tax exempt status in October 2008. Nearly ten months of interrogation about the group’s opposition to Planned Parenthood included a demand by a Ms. Richards from the IRS’ Cincinnati office unlawfully insisted that all board members sign a sworn declaration promising not to picket/protest Planned Parenthood. Further questioning by the IRS requested detailed information about the content of the group’s prayer meetings, educational seminars, and signs their members hold outside Planned Parenthood.

The IRS admits to targeting conservative groups but were they also leaking?

Original Post: Daily Caller

A little over a year ago, I reported that, ”It is likely that someone at the Internal Revenue Service illegally leaked confidential donor information showing a contribution from Mitt Romney’s political action committee to the National Organization for Marriage, says the group.”

Now — on the heels of news the IRS’s apology for having targeted conservative groups — NOM is renewing their demand that the Internal Revenue Service reveal the identity of the people responsible.

“There is little question that one or more employees at the IRS stole our confidential tax return and leaked it to our political enemies, in violation of federal law,” said NOM’s president Brian Brow, in a prepared statement. “The only questions are who did it, and whether there was any knowledge or coordination between people in the White House, the Obama reelection campaign and the Human Rights Campaign. We and the American people deserve answers.”

Recent reports indicate the IRS may have begun targeting conservative groups as early as 2010.

In a 2012 speech, Sen. Mitch McConnell noted, “The head of one national advocacy group has released documents which show that his group’s confidential IRS information found its way into the hands of a staunch critic on the Left who also happens to be a co-chairman of President Obama’s re-election committee. The only way this information could have been made public is if someone leaked it from inside the IRS.”

And so, the next question may be this: If the IRS was targeting conservative groups — as they now admit to doing — were they also leaking information?

UPDATE: In December of 2012, ProPublica wrote that they had obtained the application for recognition of tax-exempt status for Crossroads GPS, filed in September of 2010.

As the ProPublica story noted:

“‘As far as we know, the Crossroads application is still pending, in which case it seems that either you obtained whatever document you have illegally, or that it has been approved,’ Jonathan Collegio, the group’s spokesman, said in an email.

“The IRS sent Crossroads’ application to ProPublica in response to a public-records request. The document sent to ProPublica didn’t include an official IRS recognition letter, which is typically attached to applications of nonprofits that have been recognized. The IRS is only required to give out applications of groups recognized as tax-exempt.

“In an email Thursday, an IRS spokeswoman said the agency had no record of an approved application for Crossroads GPS, meaning that the group’s application was still in limbo.

After Benghazi, IRS tea party probe: Govt seized AP phone records

Original Post: Yahoo

By Olivier Knox

Exactly ten days ago, President Barack Obama was piously telling reporters who cover him that free speech and an independent press are “essential pillars of our democracy.” On Monday, the Associated Press accused his administration of undermining that very pillar by secretly obtaining two months’ worth of telephone records of AP reporters and editors.

“We regard this action by the Department of Justice as a serious interference with AP’s constitutional rights to gather and report the news,” AP President and Chief Executive Officer Gary Pruitt wrote in a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder.

The latest revelations are sure to pour fuel on the fire of Richard Nixon comparisons in the wake of revelations that the IRS may have improperly scrutinized the tax-exempt status of conservative, tea party-linked groups. This might, in order words, not be a great time to announce a groundbreaking trip to China.

And the news threatens to pile fresh political woes on a second term already burdened by a painful gun control defeat, a seemingly stalled economic agenda, and Republican rage at the botched response to the Sept. 12, 2012 terrorist attack that killed four Americans in Benghazi, Libya.

The revelations that the Justice Department may have sought AP phone records drew an angry response from Republican House Speaker John Boehner's office. “The First Amendment is first for a reason. If the Obama Administration is going after reporters’ phone records, they better have a damned good explanation," said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel.

And Laura Murphy, a top American Civil Liberties Union official in Washington, D.C., condemned "unwarranted surveillance" of the press and urged Holder to explain what transpired "so that we can make sure this kind of press intimidation does not happen again.”

Holder was expected to face questions on the issue when he appears Wednesday before the House Judiciary Committee.

A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia did not answer a question from Yahoo News on whether other news outlets had been targeted. The spokesman, Bill Miller, did not confirm the AP allegations, but insisted in a statement that "we take seriously our obligations to follow all applicable laws, federal regulations, and Department of Justice policies when issuing subpoenas for phone records of media organizations."

Pruitt, in his letter to Holder, fiercely disagreed. He said that the Justice Department had obtained telephone records for more than 20 separate phone lines assigned to the AP -- the world's largest wire service -- and its journalists. The records cover a two-month span in early 2012 and cover phones lines for AP in New York City, Washington D.C., Hartford, Conn., and one line at the AP workspace in the House of Representatives.

"This action was taken without advance notice to AP or to any of the affected journalists, and even after the fact no notice has been sent to individual journalists whose home phones and cell phone records were seized by the Department," Pruitt wrote. "There can be no possible justification for such an overbroad collection of the telephone communications of The Associated Press and its reporters," Pruitt wrote. "These records potentially reveal communications with confidential sources across all of the newsgathering activities undertaken by the AP during a two-month period, provide a road map to AP’s newsgathering operations, and disclose information about AP’s activities and operations that the government has no conceivable right to know." Pruitt called it "particularly troubling" that the Justice Department "undertook this unprecedented step without providing any notice to the AP, and without taking any steps to narrow the scope of its subpoenas to matters actually relevant to an ongoing investigation."

In his statement, Miller said DoJ regulations "require us to make every reasonable effort to obtain information through alternative means before even considering a subpoena for the phone records of a member of the media."

And "we must notify the media organization in advance unless doing so would pose a substantial threat to the integrity of the investigation," he said. "Because we value the freedom of the press, we are always careful and deliberative in seeking to strike the right balance between the public interest in the free flow of information and the public interest in the fair and effective administration of our criminal laws."

An Associated Press news story on the Justice Department's actions noted: The government would not say why it sought the records. U.S. officials have previously said in public testimony that the U.S. attorney in Washington is conducting a criminal investigation into who may have leaked information contained in a May 7, 2012, AP story about a foiled terror plot. The story disclosed details of a CIA operation in Yemen that stopped an al-Qaida plot in the spring of 2012 to detonate a bomb on an airplane bound for the United States.

Ever since the days of his history-making 2008 presidential campaign, Obama has repeatedly cast himself as a champion of open government and reform. Aides are fond of praising "the most transparent administration in history" -- a moniker that might be accurate, but mostly because of poor standards set by his predecessors. It's like being the most powerful cricket team in Alaska.

And the Obama administration has not been shy about taking steps to deny Freedom of Information Act requests on national security grounds.

Just ten days ago, on May 3, Obama noted during a visit to Costa Rica that it was "World Press Freedom Day."

"So everybody from the American press corps, you should thank the people of Costa Rica for celebrating free speech and an independent press as essential pillars of our democracy," he said.

On Monday, Obama was scooping up cash for Democrats in New York City. His spokesman, Jay Carney, referred questions about the AP letter to the Justice Department.

N.Y. Times Op-Ed bashes Obama on drone strikes for assassination

Original Post:Yahoo

By Rachel Rose Hartman

"Who Says You Can Kill Americans, Mr. President?" a scathing New York Times op-ed asked Thursday.

The opinion piece, written by Vicki Divoll, former general counsel to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and former deputy legal adviser to the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center, heaps criticism on the administration for the practice of using drone strikes for assassination and calls for greater transparency. Divoll writes:

Mr. Obama should declassify and release, to Congress, the press and the public, documents that set forth the detailed constitutional and statutory analysis he relies on for targeting and killing American citizens. Perhaps Mr. Obama still believes that, in a democracy, the people have a right to know the legal theories upon which the president executes his great powers. Certainly, we can hope so. After all, his interpretation might be wrong.

Divoll notes the known killings of three American citizens who were suspected terrorists: Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical American-born Muslim cleric; Samir Khan, a naturalized American citizen who edited an English-language magazine and was with Awlaki at the time of his death; and Awlaki’s 16-year-old son, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, who were all killed overseas.

IPAB Is Even Worse than Romney Says

Original Post: Cato

Posted by Michael F. Cannon

In Wednesday night’s presidential debate, Mitt Romney claimed that ObamaCare’s Independent Payment Advisory Board is “an unelected board that’s going to tell people ultimately what kind of treatments they can have.”

President Obama officially denies it, yet he confirmed Romney’s claim when he said, “what this board does is basically identifies best practices and says, let’s use the purchasing power of Medicare and Medicaid to help to institutionalize all these good things that we do.”

In this excerpt from his column in today’s The Washington Post, George F. Will quotes my coauthor Diane Cohen and me to show that IPAB is even worse than Romney claimed:

The Independent Payment Advisory Board perfectly illustrates liberalism’s itch to remove choices from individuals, and from their elected representatives, and to repose the power to choose in supposed experts liberated from democratic accountability.Beginning in 2014, IPAB would consist of 15 unelected technocrats whose recommendations for reducing Medicare costs must be enacted by Congress by Aug. 15 of each year. If Congress does not enact them, or other measures achieving the same level of cost containment, IPAB’s proposals automatically are transformed from recommendations into law. Without being approved by Congress. Without being signed by the president.

These facts refute Obama’s Denver assurance that IPAB “can’t make decisions about what treatments are given.” It can and will by controlling payments to doctors and hospitals. Hence the emptiness of Obamacare’s language that IPAB’s proposals “shall not include any recommendation to ration health care.”

By Obamacare’s terms, Congress can repeal IPAB only during a seven-month window in 2017, and then only by three-fifths majorities in both chambers. After that, the law precludes Congress from ever altering IPAB proposals.

Because IPAB effectively makes law, thereby traducing the separation of powers, and entrenches IPAB in a manner that derogates the powers of future Congresses, it has been well described by a Cato Institute study as “the most anti-constitutional measure ever to pass Congress.”

NY to ban more food you like

Health panel talks about wider food ban

Original Post: Fox NY

By LUKE FUNK,

The board hand-picked by Mayor Michael Bloomberg that must approve his ban of selling large sugar-filled drinks at restaurants might be looking at other targets.

The New York City Board of Health showed support for limiting sizes of sugary drinks at a Tuesday meeting in Queens. They agreed to start the process to formalize the large-drink ban by agreeing to start a six-week public comment period.

At the meeting, some of the members of board said they should be considering other limits on high-calorie foods.

One member, Bruce Vladeck, thinks limiting the sizes for movie theater popcorn should be considered.

"The popcorn isn't a whole lot better than the soda," Vladeck said.

Another board member thinks milk drinks should fall under the size limits.

"There are certainly milkshakes and milk-coffee beverages that have monstrous amounts of calories," said board member Dr. Joel Forman.

Mayor Bloomberg says the drink rules are an attempt to fight obesity in the city. It would limit food service establishments in the city from serving drinks bigger than 16 ounces but would allow refills.

The New York City Restaurant Association is fighting the proposal and is considering legal action of it goes into effect.

New York City voters oppose 51 - 46 percent Mayor Michael Bloomberg's proposed ban on the sale of over-sized sugary soft drinks, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday.

Liberal L.A. City Council literally mandating use of condom

Should condom use in pornography be regulated by the city or the state?

Original Post:SCPR

Everybody knows that using condoms during sexual intercourse is safer than not using them, but what the City of Los Angeles appears to be uncertain about is who is responsible for regulating this safety precaution within the adult film industry. A proposed ballot measure that would require porn actors to wear condoms while filming in the city of Los Angeles has qualified for the June ballot. However, City Attorney Carmen Trutanich has filed court papers earlier this month arguing that Los Angeles voters would have no legal authority to adopt the proposed measure even if it were listed on a ballot.

Trutanich asserted that only the state — not the city — could legally implement rules requiring the use of condoms on porn sets and charge inspection fees. However, Ellen Widess, the head of the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health that regulates workplace safety, claims the city could legally impose the actions necessary to uphold the proposed ballot measure. "We believe the city can use its authority to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS among people involved in the adult film industry" said Widess in a recent interview. County health officials have repeatedly stated it would be difficult to regulate the porn industry through the Department of Public Health and the county’s public health chief has said that the issue is a matter for the California Legislature.

I call the city council liberals because, they are. It's not evident from this piece but, c'mon.

Reporter threatened with credential removal for daring to question Joe Biden

Original Post: Daily Caller

Reporter who bugged Biden: ‘They’re suggesting that my credentials get yanked’ for ‘rape’ question

Vice President Joe Biden’s office has asked the U.S. Senate Press Gallery to investigate conservative journalist Jason Mattera’s tactics during a recent interview, a process that could result in his press credentials being revoked, The Daily Caller has learned.

Mattera, the editor of Human Events and a widely known video ambush interviewer, caught Biden by surprise after asking if he would pose together for a joint picture. While embracing the vice president for the photo, Mattera asked Biden if he “regret[s] using a rape reference to describe Republican opposition to the president’s bill.”

After pausing for a moment during which he appears shocked, Biden attempted to defend his comments.

“I didn’t use — no, no, no,” Biden told Mattera amid a crowd of onlookers on Capitol Hill. “What I said — let’s get it straight, guy, don’t screw around with me. Let’s get it straight.”

“I said rape was up three times in Flint, [Mich.],” Biden continued. “There are the numbers. Go look at the numbers. Murder’s up, rape is up and burglary’s up. That’s exactly what I said.”

Biden, it turns out, was incorrect. The Washington Post’s fact-checker blog gave him “four Pinocchios,” the worst possible rating it can give to politicians for incorrect statements. FactCheck.org also debunked Biden’s assertions. Those fact checkers used statistics different from the ones Biden was provided.

Biden apparently got his statistics from the City of Flint, and the city stands by its statistics according to Public Safety Director Chief Alvern Lock. In an October 20 statement, Lock said there are discrepancies between different law enforcement agencies’ statistics and crime definitions — something that he said should account for the inconsistencies. “The discrepancies with the FBI and other sources reveal the differences in how crimes can be counted and categorized, based on different criteria,” Lock said.

Even so, Mattera caught Biden playing politics with sketchy numbers. And now the Vice President’s staff is looking for a fight with Mattera instead of correcting the widespread misunderstandings Biden created.

Mattera told The Daily Caller that team Biden’s attempt to discredit him this week is just an effort to distract from how the Vice President’s incorrect. “They’re suggesting that my credentials get yanked and I be investigated for asking a completely legitimate question,” Mattera said in a phone interview. “The administration is just whining and complaining like little toddlers because they’ve gotten their wrists slapped now on multiple occasions for making the suggestion that Republicans are enabling rape and violent crimes because they won’t pass another stimulus package.”

“This is a thug administration in action,” Mattera added. “This is the Chicago way and they can bring it on. Bring it on. I’m a credentialed member of the media and I have a little something-something called the First Amendment on my side.”

According to The Hill newspaper, Biden aides are asking whether any Senate rules were broken during the exchange. The chairwoman of the Gallery’s standing committee of correspondents, a group of five journalists who oversee press accreditation on Capitol Hill, told the newspaper that the group is considering the issue and that it is under review.

“We’re aware of the concerns,” standing committee chairwoman Heather Rothman said, according to The Hill. “It’s being discussed. We’re aware this occurred and the vice president’s office [has made] contact.”

Rothman hasn’t returned TheDC’s requests for more details or information. Biden wouldn’t comment on the record. The Senate Press Gallery wouldn’t comment for The Hill’s story and hasn’t returned TheDC’s requests for comment.

Because none of those parties are answering any questions, it’s unclear what specific rules Biden’s office is alleging Mattera broke. Mattera said these allegations are nothing more than a deflection tactic.

“The Obama administration got caught in a major lie,” he said. “They’re now being called out on it and they’re going after the journalist who got the ball rolling. This is another attempt to destroy their opponents, instead of correcting their facts in their previous statements.”

Proving that Mattera’s “tactics” while interviewing Biden were unethical will be difficult. Mattera never misrepresented himself, was wearing his press credential badge the entire time, and told Biden’s staffers who he was and where he worked.

Mattera adds that it’s not abnormal for journalists to pose for photos with politicians, and that asking a tough question that would normally go unanswered is par for the course.

“Journalists have always used creative ways to get politicians to answer honestly,” Mattera said. “and that’s what I do. I look for ways to get politicians to give me candid answers. I don’t want the spin, I don’t them to go and consult with their messaging team and have the talking points – I get the gut reaction. And, here, Biden’s gut reaction was undignified for the Vice President of the United States.”

As of Tuesday morning, Mattera said no one from the Senate Press Gallery has contacted him about Biden’s allegations. He predicted that the agency will promptly dismiss the accusations against him.

“I’m not worried,” Mattera said. “They’re not going to give this any type of legitimacy.”

White House tries to intimidate reporter

Original Post: Weekly Standard

CBS News Reporter Says White House Screamed, Swore at Her Over Fast and Furious

By MARK HEMINGWAY Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts

The Fast and Furious scandal, in which the Justice Department knowingly gave Mexican criminal gangs thousands of guns, just keeps escalating. The latest development centers around whether or not Attorney General Eric Holder lied to Congress about having knowledge of the controversial gun trafficking operation. Recently released documents say Holder was briefed about the operation long before he told the Judiciary Committee he was first aware of what was going on. (Holder now claims he misunderstood the question was being asked.) Then I would like him to tell us what question he was being asked, and why his answer is then acceptable

What's more, CBS News investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson -- who's been covering the scandal from the beginning -- says in an interview on the Laura Ingraham Show today that the White House and Justice Department have taken to screaming at her for reporting on the story. You can listen to the full interview below, but here are the key excerpts from Attkisson:

In between the yelling that I received from Justice Department yesterday, the spokeswoman--who would not put anything in writing, I was asking for her explanation so there would be clarity and no confusion later over what had been said, she wouldn't put anything in writing--so we talked on the phone and she said things such as the question Holder answered was different than the one he asked. But he phrased it, he said very explicitly, 'I probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks.'

Ingraham: So they were literally screaming at you? Attkisson: Yes. Well the DOJ woman was just yelling at me. The guy from the White House on Friday night literally screamed at me and cussed at me. [Laura: Who was the person? Who was the person at Justice screaming?] Eric Schultz. Oh, the person screaming was [DOJ spokeswoman] Tracy Schmaler, she was yelling not screaming. And the person who screamed at me was Eric Schultz at the White House."

Finally, Attkisson notes that the White House is claiming that a thorough investigation of the scandal is unwarranted:

[The White House and Justice Department] will tell you that I'm the only reporter--as they told me--that is not reasonable. They say the Washington Post is reasonable, the LA Times is reasonable, the New York Times is reasonable, I'm the only one who thinks this is a story, and they think I'm unfair and biased by pursuing it.

Here's the audio from the interview:

Former Obama budget manager calls for less Democracy

Too Much of a Good Thing. Why we need less democracy.

Peter Orszag

In an 1814 letter to John Taylor, John Adams wrote that “there never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” That may read today like an overstatement, but it is certainly true that our democracy finds itself facing a deep challenge: During my recent stint in the Obama administration as director of the Office of Management and Budget, it was clear to me that the country’s political polarization was growing worse—harming Washington’s ability to do the basic, necessary work of governing. If you need confirmation of this, look no further than the recent debt-limit debacle, which clearly showed that we are becoming two nations governed by a single Congress—and that paralyzing gridlock is the result.

So what to do? To solve the serious problems facing our country, we need to minimize the harm from legislative inertia by relying more on automatic policies and depoliticized commissions for certain policy decisions. In other words, radical as it sounds, we need to counter the gridlock of our political institutions by making them a bit less democratic.

Obama Administration Set to Ban Asthma Inhalers

Original Post: Weekly Standard

Remember how Obama recently waived new ozone regulations at the EPA because they were too costly? Well, it seems that the Obama administration would rather make people with Asthma cough up money than let them make a surely inconsequential contribution to depleting the ozone layer:

Asthma patients who rely on over-the-counter inhalers will need to switch to prescription-only alternatives as part of the federal government's latest attempt to protect the Earth's atmosphere.

The Food and Drug Administration said Thursday patients who use the epinephrine inhalers to treat mild asthma will need to switch by Dec. 31 to other types that do not contain chlorofluorocarbons, an aerosol substance once found in a variety of spray products.

The action is part of an agreement signed by the U.S. and other nations to stop using substances that deplete the ozone layer, a region in the atmosphere that helps block harmful ultraviolet rays from the Sun.

But the switch to a greener inhaler will cost consumers more. Epinephrine inhalers are available via online retailers for around $20, whereas the alternatives, which contain the drug albuterol, range from $30 to $60.

The Atlantic's Megan McArdle, an asthma sufferer, noted a while back that when consumers are forced to use environmentally friendly products they are almost always worse:

Er, industry also knew how to make low-flow toilets, which is why every toilet in my recently renovated rental house clogs at least once a week. They knew how to make more energy efficient dryers, which is why even on high, I have to run every load through the dryer in said house twice. And they knew how to make inexpensive compact flourescent bulbs, which is why my head hurts from the glare emitting from my bedroom lamp. They also knew how to make asthma inhalers without CFCs, which is why I am hoarding old albuterol inhalers that, unlike the new ones, a) significantly improve my breathing and b) do not make me gag. Etc.

Well, tough cookies asthma sufferers! You should have written bigger checks to the Democratic party while you had the chance.

USDA Secretary: We Must ‘Create Appropriate Transition’ for What Americans Eat

(CNSNews.com) - U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack told members of the National Restaurant Association on Monday that Americans need to “adjust” their tastes so that they like the kind of food the government believes they should eat—and “we have to make sure that what we do is create the appropriate transition.”

“You know, as we deal with this issue of reducing sodium and sugar, it sounds simple to do, but you all know better than I do, it’s not as simple as it sounds,” said Vilsack.

“It’s going to take time for people’s taste to adjust and they will adjust over time, but it will take some time,” he said. “So, we have to make sure that what we do is create the appropriate transition.

"At the end of the day, though, we've got to deal with this," said Vilsack.

Vilsack’s remarks about Americans’ taste buds came in response to a question about the best way to deal with food waste. He said the Agriculture Department has ongoing research projects to determine how to make nutritious food more appealing so that less of it is wasted.

Vilsack mentioned visiting a Colorado school that was serving children brownies made with black beans. “The kids didn’t even know they were eating a healthier snack,” Vilsack said. I'm sure it's perfectly fine for the government to change the food products that children are eating with out informing anyone. After all, it's not like anyone has food allergies or anything.

The restaurant trade group is working with the USDA to promote the government’s revised dietary guidelines for Americans.

Restaurants that participate in the voluntary Kids LiveWell program commit to offering healthful meal items for children, with a particular focus on increasing consumption of fruit and vegetables, lean protein, whole grains and low-fat dairy, and limiting unhealthy fats, sugars and sodium.

First Lady Michelle Obama has made childhood obesity her signature issue, launching the administration’s “Let’s Move” program which is dedicated to “solving the challenge of childhood obesity within a generation.”

On its website, the “Let’s Move” program says that: “Everyone has a role to play in reducing childhood obesity, including parents, elected officials from all levels of government, schools, health care professionals, faith-based and community-based organizations, and private sector companies.”

Is America doing poor Orwell?

I just finished reading a couple of rather well known George Orwell books. Wow. Just wow. They are timeless and could have easily be written today. So, in that vein I decided to help prove him right by taking some of my favorite quotes of his and placing them into a modern day context by putting them up against actual events or phrases spoken by American "leaders".

Animal Farm

Squealer, with very round cheeks, twinkling eyes, nimble movements, and a shrill voice. He was a brilliant talker, and when he was arguing some difficult point he had a way of skipping from side to side and whisking his tail which was somehow very persuasive. The others said of Squealer that he could turn black into white.
Women faint at Obama rally
Obama head swings from side to side to two teleprompters

The pigs did not actual work, but directed and supervised the others. With their superior knowledge it was natural that they should assume the leadership.
Obama goes golfing after America's downgrade

It is for YOUR sake that we drink that milk and eat those apples.
$30,000 to go to Obama's birthday party

This work was strictly voluntary, but any animal who absented himself from it would have his rations reduced by half.
Obamacare end of life counseling not voluntary

It had become usual to give Napoleon the credit for every successful achievement and every stroke of good fortune.
Obama gets Osama

...Squealer was soon able to convince them that their memories had been at fault.
I inherited this mess
Bush's unemployment rate

The truest happiness, he said, lay in working hard and living frugally.
We can't keep our thermos at 72.


1984

'Who controls the past,' ran the Party Slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.;
Tea Party shouldn't be given equal time

It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grammes.
Obamacare rations healthcare for elderly

Nor was it a satisfactory solution to keep the masses in poverty by restricting the output of goods.
Cap and Trade

If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-for ever.
"My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join me as we try to change it." - President Obama

Education Department says it doesn’t send SWAT teams after loan defaulters

Original Post: Yahoo

By Liz Goodwin

A Stockton, Calif., man says a SWAT team broke his door and dragged him out of his house during an unexpected 6 a.m. raid targeting his estranged ex-wife.

Kenneth Wright, who has no criminal record, told ABC News 10 he complained to the local cops about the raid. But according to Wright, the Stockton police denied ordering the raid, saying instead it was the handiwork of the federal Department of Education.

Wright told the station that the Education Department was after unpaid federal loans owed by his ex-wife. "They busted my door for this," Wright says. The claim has been repeated by numerous news outlets who picked up the story, including Fox News, The Huffington Post, and Gawker. (UPDATE: The station has replaced the story with a newer version that does not make the claim the raid was for late loan payments.)

But Education Department Press Secretary Justin Hamilton said in a statement to The Lookout that the department "does not execute search warrants for late loan payments." He said the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) "conducts about 30-35 search warrants a year on issues such as bribery, fraud, and embezzlement of federal student aid funds." Hamilton said the department cannot comment on this particular case until the investigation is over, but did add that the claim the warrant was executed for late loan payment is untrue. The raid was related to a criminal investigation of Wright's wife.

The OIG lists some of its recent investigations on its website, including the case of a Boston man who was sent to prison last month for lying on a federal student aid form.

About 8.9 percent of all federal loan recipients (about 330,000 people) defaulted between 2008 and 2010, the highest percentage in more than a decade. Unlike students who have some types of private student loans, borrowers with federal loans can't declare bankruptcy as a way to get out of repayment, no matter how dire their financial situation.

Still, Wright was not the subject of the agency's investigation, and he is demanding an apology for being treated like a criminal in his own home. He animatedly explains in this video that he was handcuffed while still in his underwear and was made to wait in a police car for several hours with his three young children while the 15 law enforcement officers searched his house.

Wright says he wants an apology and for the Department of Education to fix his door. "Please pay your bills, take care of your credit," he says. "If you don't believe me, this could be you one morning, 6 o'clock in the morning."

White House to monitor children's conversations under guise of anti-bully policy

Original Post: Daily Caller
White House seeks child-speech oversight

By Neil Munro

President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama speak at a conference on bullying prevention in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Thursday, March 10, 2011.

Roughly 150 various advocates — lobbyists for gays and lesbians, legislators, White House officials, at least one cabinet secretary and the first lady — gathered around President’s Obama’s bully pulpit in the White House Thursday to cheer for increased government monitoring and intervention in Facebook conversations, in playgrounds and in schoolrooms around the country.

No officials at the televised East Room roll-out of the White House’s anti-bullying initiative suggested any limits to government intervention against juvenile physical violence, social exclusion or unwanted speech. None mentioned the usefulness to children of unsupervised play. None suggested there were any risks created by a government program to enforce children’s approval of other children who are unpopular, overweight, or who declare themselves to be gay, lesbians or transgender.

“It breaks our hearts to think that any child feels afraid every day in the classroom, on the playground, or even online,” first lady Michelle Obama said.

“We’re going to prevent bullying and create an environment where every single one of our children can thrive,” the president said, as he announced a series of government actions intended to fund, guide and pressure state and local officials to adopt regulations and programs that would shield children from insults or social-exclusion as well as from physical harm.

But the lethal risks of additional federal school-yard regulation will be underlined May 2 in a California courtroom. Brandon McInerney was 19 days past his 14th birthday, and living with his divorced father, when he murdered Larry King, by shooting him dead in a classroom, said McInerney’s lawyer, Scott Wippert.

In the pending trial, “the evidence we will introduce is that [King] was bullying and sexually-harassing” McInerney, with the tacit approval of school officials who excused the harassment as legitimate expression of a female “gender identity,” Wippert said. The approved sexual-harassment took place on the schoolyard, in front of other kids, and it included offers of sexual favors and precipitated taunts from other boys. “It was outrageous,” said Wippert. When school officials refused to discipline King, McInerney shot him in front of a teacher who had given him the dress he was wearing, he said.

If the situation turned out differently and McInerney had killed himself, the “focus would have been on the school [officials] for allowing the [sexually themed] bullying,” Wippert argued. But that’s not what happened, and the local district attorney is now trying McInerney as an adult and charging him with first-degree murder for shooting and killing King, which could put him away for the rest of his life, Wippert said.

Gay advocacy groups, principally the New York-based Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, argue that kids who may be gay or lesbian need protection from taunts and insults, as well as from already-illegal violence, and that schools should promote acceptance of homosexuality. “GLSEN envisions a world in which every child learns to respect and accept all people, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity/expression [and it] seeks to develop school climates where difference is valued for the positive contribution it makes to creating a more vibrant and diverse community,” according to a statement from GLSEN, whose founder, Kevin Jennings, now heads the anti-bullying program at the Department of Education.

GLSEN and Jennings are anathema to D.C.-based Family Research Council, which argues that children, parents, local governments and clerics are best able to counter episodes of bullying. “Bullying violates the Christian’s obligation to love our neighbor as we love ourselves [but] some homosexual activists are using this issue as a way to silence legitimate and respectful moral disagreement with homosexual conduct,” according to a statement from the Family Research Council. “Using the bureaucratic machinery of the federal government to promote homosexuality in the schools is precisely what Family Research Council and many others warned about when GLSEN founder Kevin Jennings was appointed to the Department of Education,” continued the statement.

Congressional opposition from social-conservatives and libertarians will likely bottle up several GLSEN-backed bills pending in Congress. To promote their cases, both factions showcase speakers, as well as dead children, including those who committed suicide after bullying, or after expulsion from school for minor offenses.

But federal officials can push the initiative forward with many other tools, including agency employees, federal grants to advocacy groups, agency regulations, cooperation from companies such as Facebook, and the White House’s bully pulpit. In the next few weeks, Facebook is set to announce new steps that could allow kids to highlight online conversations and insults for subsequent inspection by adults, school officials and regulators.

This expanded adult oversight of juvenile interactions was welcomed by invited speakers at the White House event.

A “greater effort to monitor [kids’ interactions] is a good thing,” said George Sugai, at the University of Connecticut’s Neag School of Education in 2005. “We have to encourage the children not to fight back” against insults and online harassment, but instead to call for help from adults, said Catherine Bradshaw, a professor at the Johns Hopkins Center for the Prevention of Youth Violence.

Joel Burns, councilman in a Fort Worth, Texas, applauded the president’s focus on kids who say they are gay or lesbian. “The president did not shy away from LGBT as a topic,” he said. Also, the president endorsed “enumeration,” which is especially important, he said. Enumeration is the specific inclusion of gay, lesbian and transgender categories as deserving of regulatory protection.

GLSEN’s spokesman Ryan Schwarz declined to comment about the initiative, saying “the sensitivities abut lobbying on this issue are deep.” However, he added, White House officials “have been really great on taking full leadership.”

The White House’s East Room meeting did not include any children who spoke out for or against federal oversight. Two grade-school kids who attended, however, were Ryan Thompson and Eric Kanchuger, who have established Channel 6 News. Federal policies intended to help parents tracks their kids’ Facebook conversations is “a bit too much,” said Kanchuger. “It would intrude on our privacy.”

It appears that at least one of the president’s daughters may agree with this criticism. “Barack and I also know that sometimes, maybe even a lot of the time, it’s really hard for parents to know what’s going on in our kids’ lives,” the first lady told the East Room audience. “We don’t always know, because they don’t always tell us every little detail. We know that from Sasha. Sasha’s response [to our question] ‘What happened at school today?’ [is] ‘Nothing.’ That’s it.”

Janet Napolitano Places Cameras in Wal-Mart

Original Post: Vision to America

More than 230 Walmart stores nationwide launched the “If You See Something, Say Something” campaign today, with a total of 588 Walmart stores in 27 states joining in the coming weeks. A short video message, available here, will play at select checkout locations to remind shoppers to contact local law enforcement to report suspicious activity.

The “If You See Something, Say Something” campaign—originally implemented by New York City’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority and funded, in part, by $13 million from DHS’ Transit Security Grant Program—is a simple and effective program to engage the public and key frontline employees to identify and report indicators of terrorism, crime and other threats to the proper transportation and law enforcement authorities.

So while standing in line with your inflatable lawn Santa, tampons, dog food, and waiting for your tires to be rotated, you’ll be treated to a freakish video of Napolitano doing anything but actually stoppingterrorism, like securing the borders (9/11 began as an immigration issue with the hijackers here on expired visas), paying closer attention to the FBI watch list, and implementing effective security protocols at airports instead of get-lucky random searching.

It's too much to ask for people to immigrate legally or show voter id but not too much to molest a little girl

The left tells us strang things.

They tell us that voter id is racist. Gosanangelo "..."

Why, then, do Texas Republicans now want to erect a new barrier that almost certainly would disenfranchise thousands, maybe tens of thousands, of voters?

GOP lawmakers, who are in the majority in both houses, are pushing voter identification legislation that would require Texans to show a photo ID in order to vote..." By the way, when I voted last time they didn't even ask my name.

They tell us is too much to ask felons not to vote. Eugine Kane "..."Sure, some will deny it's an attempt to discourage some people from voting.

But when a threatening billboard is put up by an anonymous group in many low-income neighborhoods , it's clear what's happening here..."

They tell us that it's too much to ask people to immigrate here legally. ABC News "ABC News’ Sunlen Miller and Devin Dwyer report: President Obama today joined top Congressional Democrats in urging Congress to pass a small piece of immigration legislation known as the DREAM Act before it adjourns for the year. The measure would give hundreds of thousands of young, undocumented immigrants a conditional path to legal residency..."

But for some reason it's not too much for the left to have TSA molest little girls. If this was anyone else they'd be in jail (and rightly so) for molestation and pedophilia.

The FCC wants jurisdiction over everything

Notice the laughter in the background to make it try to sound like a joke. The laughter didn't come from the speaker. When I say things like that, with the expression she had I'm serious, and she is too.