Where The Real Money In Politics Lives

Yesterday PJ Media posted an article explaining the role George Soros‘ money has played and is playing in America’s electoral process. The article lists the specifics in detail. I will only highlight a few.

The article reports:

Below are some highlights of this expansive Soros-funded campaign to alter the legal environment and rules of American elections.


  • Soros funded multiple attacks on state voter identification laws in places such as Wisconsin, North Carolina and Virginia. While not successful at the trial court in North Carolina and Virginia, the Soros litigation won a victory in the appeals courts resulting in North Carolina election integrity laws being suspended for the presidential election.  Worse, the litigation resulted in opinions by federal appeals courts which could potentially turn the Voting Rights Act of 1965 into a one-way political ratchet that helps Democrats, as long as Democrats can enforce racially polarized voting patterns.
  • Soros documents show funding for the League of Women Voters and their effort “to catalyze greater participation from Black and Latino youth in advocacy both before and after elections.” The LWV is currently in federal court trying to stop efforts by Kansas, Georgia, and Alabama to verify that only citizens are registering to vote. The same organization intervened in a lawsuit by the Public Interest Legal Foundation to clean voter rolls in a Virginia jurisdiction with more registered voters than eligible citizens.
  • Soros documents show funding of $250,000 for the North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP before the group then sued to stop the use of voter ID in North Carolina.  Other groups in North Carolina that were on the funding documents include: “Action Institute NC – $75,000 over one year . . . North Carolina Latino Coalition – $75,000  . . .  New World Foundation – $300,000 over one year . . . North Carolina Fair Share Education Fund – $75,000 . . . School for Creative Activism – $75,000.”
  • Soros documents show that it funded efforts to attack the efforts of Tea Party organizations such as True the Vote to promote election integrity and triggered Department of Justice action. One funding document states that the Campaign Legal Center, [former John McCain lawyer] Trevor Potter, and the Brennan Center worked on “voter registration reform” and efforts to attack Tea Party groups. “CLC is focusing most of its efforts on the threat posed by these private ‘challenger’ groups and, to that end, has been gathering information on the activities of such groups, including Houston-based True the Vote. Working in partnership with Transparency Fund grantee Project Vote, CLC has pieced together a narrative that strongly suggests a widespread effort by True the Vote to suppress minority voting. CLC made Open Records Requests to officials in Houston to obtain all communications between True the Vote and Houston election offices, obtained and analyzed these documents and presented their findings to the United States Department of Justice last month. Following this meeting, the Justice Department sent federal officials to Houston to monitor the May primary elections. One other aspect of CLC’s work in this area is its Executive Director, J. Gerald Hebert’s role as chief counsel to a group of intervenors in State of Texas v. Holder.”
  • The funding documents name groups which received in excess of $500,000 each year from Soros. They include: “Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Center for American Progress, Advancement Project, Center for Community Change, Brennan Center.” Three of the largest recipients are engaged in litigation and strategic communications denying voter fraud and seeking to transform the rules of elections.
  • Soros money is moving away from pressing for “campaign finance reform” and speech regulations, and instead into election process areas.  The funding documents state “We do recommend shifts in a significant area of previous strategy. Historically, OSI played a leading role in promoting campaign finance reform models at the national and state levels. In recent years, changed conditions caused us to re-examine our approach, and our analysis led us to begin discontinuing our support to campaign finance reform groups.”
  • Soros money fought voter ID, everywhere.  The leaked documents state: “The 2012 elections proved that momentum is with the voting rights and civil rights community rather than their detractors. Not only was this field successful at blocking restrictive laws from being implemented in Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio, Texas, Wisconsin and South Carolina, but a strong coalition in Minnesota came from behind to achieve the first victory against photo ID on the ballot.”
  • Soros money was directed at the Advancement Project and Brennan Center to influence media coverage on election integrity issues and provide voter fraud denial propaganda.  Leaked funding documents state: “In a specific grant update, the U.S. Programs board-funded communications and messaging project was successfully led by the Brennan Center and the Advancement Project, and played an important role in the spike in media attention on voting rights this year. The groups developed affirmative voting rights messages and shared them widely in and beyond the field. The messages were used verbatim hundreds of times in sources ranging from The New York Times to the Philadelphia Inquirer, quickly and fully working their way into the media, national and local, and across social networking sites.”  Verbatim.
  • Soros funding documents reveal that the Brennan Center and Advancement Project, two organizations regularly opposing election integrity measures in court, were among the largest Soros funding recipients for the entire Soros program.
  • ERIC, the program seeded by PEW to allow states to verify voter identity which many states now use, was started with Soros money and an “anonymous” donor.

Please follow the link above and read the entire article. It is chilling. George Soros made his money by destroying the currency of various countries and betting on that failure. We don’t need to give him an opportunity to do that in America. He does not have the interests of America in mind at all–he is a globalist with a one-world government agenda. America needs to find a way to keep him from meddling in our political affairs.

Who Will Vote In 2016?

On Thursday, the DC Clothesline posted a story quoting J. Christian Adams, a former United States Department of Justice official in the Civil Rights Division on what is happening in states that are issuing driver’s licenses to illegal aliens.

The article quotes Mr. Adams:

“The bigger problem is that when they get those drivers licenses, there’s a government social services agency that is compelled under motor voter to offer voter registration.  For example, I’m representing a client — the American Civil Rights Union. We’re about to file a brief to the Supreme Court that shows actual voter registrations of people who on their voter registration forms that they’re not citizens, but they’re still getting registered to vote.

…“[These will be] the actual voter registrations forms through motor voter.  The point is, because of motor voter in issuing these alien document cards, you’re going to have non-citizens moving on to the voter rolls. It’s inevitable,” said Adams noting, “The Justice Department protects the lawless, because there’s a political benefit to this administration to allow lawlessness to occur. Because if those people who lawlessly are on the voter rolls go to vote, there’s probably a 9 in 10 chance they’re voting for Democrats.”

Unless someone somewhere in government decides to defend the integrity of the American electoral process, this is where we are.

I Am Sure This Is Logical Somehow

Breitbart.com is reporting today that in Colorado a baker can refuse to bake a cake decorated with a Bible verse for Christians and face no consequences, but will face discrimination charges for refusing to bake a cake for a gay wedding. Amazing.

The article reports:

Christian activist Bill Jack has denounced a decision by the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Regulatory Agencies, which found Azucar Bakery in Denver not guilty of discrimination for refusing to bake a cake adorned with Bible quotes condemning sodomy.

Last March, Jack went to Azucar Bakery and requested two cakes to be decorated with biblical messages.

“I requested two cakes, each in the shape of an open Bible. On the first cake I requested on one page, ‘God hates sin — Psalm 45:7,’ and on the facing page, ‘Homosexuality is a detestable sin — Leviticus 18:22,’” Jack said.

Jack also said:

On the second cake I requested on one page, “God loves sinners,” and on the facing page, “While we were yet sinners Christ died for us – Romans 5:8.” I also requested a decoration of two groomsmen holding hands with a cross in the background with a ghostbusters symbol over it to illustrate that such a union is unacceptable biblically.

On Good Friday, the Department of Regulatory Agencies handed down its decision that refusing such a request did not constitute discrimination.

I suppose we could debate that the Bible verse cake was offensive to the baker, but wasn’t the gay wedding cake offensive to the Christian baker? If the man requested to bake the Bible cake has the right to refuse to bake that cake, then the man who is requested to bake a cake for a gay wedding also has the right to refuse. The law either applies to everyone, or it is not a just law.

At some point people need to realize that when one person’s right is taken away, it gives the government permission to take away all of our rights.

When What Goes Around Comes Around

Last year the Senate Democrats voted to change their rules (when Republicans discussed this, it was called the nuclear option) and allow the President’s nominees to be confirmed with a simple majority vote rather than the 60-vote threshold previously required to end the debate and actually vote. It seemed like a good idea at the time, but didn’t quite work out as planned.

Today’s Washington Examiner posted a story about the possible unintended consequences of exercising the nuclear option.

The article reports:

But Democrats overlooked a fatal flaw in the strategy: In a tough election year when Obama’s approval ratings are low, Democrats in tough races could defect on key nominees.

In March, that has already happened with two of the president’s choices for influential administration posts.

Earlier this month, several Senate Democrats joined Republicans in voting down Debo Adegbile, Obama’s choice to head the Justice Department‘s Civil Rights Division.

Conservatives aggressively opposed Adegbile’s nomination because of his legal work in defense of Mumia Abu-Jamal, who was convicted of the 1981 murder of a Philadelphia police officer.

Eight Democrats ended up voting against confirmation — with Reid initially voting in favor and then switching his vote to no, to allow him to bring up the nomination again.

This did not go as planned. The next nominee to run into a problem was Dr. Vivek Hallegere Murthy, a Harvard and Yale-educated former emergency room doctor, nominated for surgeon general. Conservative Democrats opposed the nomination because of Dr. Murthy’s stand on gun control (which he considers a health issue).

So it now makes no sense to blame the Republicans for blocking nominees (although the Democrats will probably continue to do that regardless of the facts). The fact that the Democrat Congressional support of President Obama is no longer reliable is due to two factors–President Obama’s approval ratings are in the 30’s and this is an election year. As more Americans wake up to the disaster that is President Obama’s Presidency, more Democrats will begin to distance themselves from the President and make decisions based on their own future well being. Get out the popcorn, it is going to be an interesting year.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Things That Happen In An Election Year

Yesterday’s Washington Post reported that seven Senate Democrats voted with the Republicans to block the nomination of Debo P. Adegbile as chief of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division.

Adegbile voluntarily took up the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal, after Black Panther member Abu-Jamal was convicted of the murder of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner.

The article reminds us that these votes were not about principle, they are about politics:

A senior aide to one of the senators who voted against the nominee said several senators’ offices were “very angry” at the White House for moving ahead with the nomination even though it could leave Democrats who are facing tough reelection races vulnerable to attack ads.

…Reid had spoken in defense of Adegbile and initially voted in favor but later switched his vote to no, making him the eighth Democrat to vote against the nominee. But Reid did so only to reserve his right as Senate leader to bring up the nomination again. Later Wednesday, aides couldn’t say whether that will happen.

Under President Obama, the Justice Department has become very politicized. Had the nomination of Debo P. Adegbile been allowed to proceed, the Justice Department would have become even more political. In the beginning of the Obama Administration, the direction of the Justice Department became clear when the New Black Panthers were not prosecuted for voter intimidation. In the past, the Justice Department has not been a political arm of the President’s political party. Hopefully, when we are free of the Obama Administration in 2016, the Justice Department will go back to being an impartial judge of the laws of America. We can probably expect the nomination of Debo P. Adegbile to appear again after the 2014 mid-term elections.



Enhanced by Zemanta

A Short Summary Of The Internal Revenue Service Scandal

Robert Stacy McCain posted an article in the March issue of the American Spectator that summarizes the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) scandal and sums up where we are today. The article reminds us that Tom Perez, now Secretary of Labor,  was head of the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division where his key aide Barbara K. Bosserman was chosen to head up the investigation of the IRS’s targeting of Tea Party groups. The first question regarding the investigation of the IRS is, “Why was Barbara K. Bosserman chosen?” Ms. Bosserman’s background is as a civil rights attorney–she does not have a background in tax law. It is also an incredible coincidence that Ms. Bosserman has historically been a major donor to Democrat party coffers.

The article reports:

During a January hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep. Jim Jordan raised that question with the Justice Department’s Inspector General, Michael Horowitz. In his 12 years of DOJ experience under three different administrations, did Horowitz “ever recall the civil rights division investigating tax law matters?” Jordan asked.

“I don’t recall that during my time,” Horowitz answered.

The article reminds us that conservative political groups who applied for tax exempt status had their applications held up for a year or more. In some cases, organizations were asked for lists of donors and those donors were harassed.

The article points out the media’s role in downplaying the IRS scandal:

The media has been complacent,” said Becky Gerritson of the Wetumpka (Alabama) Tea Party, whose group was one of those the IRS targeted. In a telephone interview, Gerritson mentioned that the traffic-related “scandal” involving New Jersey Republican Gov. Chris Christie had gotten 17 times as much major network news coverage in a single 24-hour period as the IRS scandal had received in the previous six months. From July 2013 through early January 2014, ABC, CBS, and NBC had barely two minutes of coverage to IRS scandal, according to the Media Research Center’s Scott Whitlock.

Even a basic investigation shows that some very fundamental laws were broken by the IRS:

Perhaps the most egregious example of that “climate of hostility” was the illegal release of donor information from the National Organization for Marriage (NOM). Congressional investigators say the source of that leak was an IRS staffer in Lerner’s Exempt Organizations Division. NOM opposes the legalization of same-sex marriage and the IRS leaker, who cannot be named because of confidentiality laws, provided NOM’s donor information to a gay activist, who then gave it to NOM’s arch-enemy, the pro-gay Human Rights Campaign. The illegal IRS leak led to news stories in 2012 identifying GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney as a donor to the conservative group. NOM filed its own lawsuit against the IRS in October, and pointed out that former HRC president Joe Solmonese served as co-chairman of Obama’s re-election campaign. “This is a federal crime,” NOM president Brian Brown said. “Worse, the confidential information contained in the illegally leaked documents included the identity of dozens of our major donors and the HRC used this confidential donor information to harass our donors. This is a chilling set of circumstances that should ring alarm bells across the nation.”

The straw that broke the camel’s back for the conservative organizations targeted by the IRS is the fact that the investigators have only actually interviewed one of two of the organizations that have registered complaints.

The only way the IRS’s abuses of power will be dealt with is if those people impacted by the crimes of the IRS continue to speak out. If the sort of abuse of power is allowed to continue, all of our freedom of speech is in danger.


Enhanced by Zemanta

Sending An Awful Message To Policemen Everywhere

Judicial Watch posted an article today about President Obama’s nomination of Debo Adegbile to be Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division.

Paul Mirengoff at Power Line reminds us:

Adegbile is best known for heading up the NAACP Legal Defense Fund’s race-based assault on the integrity of a dead Philadelphia police office in a quest to get his murderer, Mumia Abu-Jamal, off of death row.

Judicial Watch posted the letter written to President Obama by the Fraternal Order of Police regarding the nomination:

FOPLetterThis nomination is an insult to every policeman who has ever served. Hopefully it will not stand.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Now That We Know This, What Should We Do ?

Yesterday PJMedia posted an article by J. Christian Adams about the newly released Inspector General‘s report on Tom Perez’s DOJ Civil Rights Division. Tom Perez is President Obama’s potential Labor secretary nominee.

The report exposes serious racial bias in the law enforcement practices of the Obama Justice Department.

The article reports:

The report was prepared in response to Representative Frank Wolf’s (R-VA) outrage over the New Black Panther voter intimidation dismissal.  In response to the report, Rep. Wolf said today, the “report makes clear that the division has become a rat’s nest of unacceptable and unprofessional actions, and even outright threats against career attorneys and systemic mismanagement.”

Former Voting Section Chief Chris Coates and I both testified about the hostility towards race-neutral law enforcement by the Justice Department.

Today’s report paints a disgusting portrait, confirming our accounts.

It is entirely possible that Tom Perez was simply following orders issued by Attorney General Holder, but do we want to promote someone who was unwilling to enforce the law equally for all Americans? Please follow the link to the article at PJMedia to read the entire account.

Enhanced by Zemanta

We Really Do Need To Clean Out The Justice Department

Pajamas Media posted a story yesterday about Stephanie Celandine Gyamfi, a career employee in the Justice Department, who has now admitted to perjury during an inquiry into Justice Department leaks during the Bush Administration. The article points out that although she has admitted to committing perjury, there have been no consequences for her actions so far–in fact, she continues to be assigned to politically sensitive cases.

What is this actually about? The article reports:

Ms. Gyamfi made no secret of her hatred of conservatives and Republicans when I worked in the Voting Section from 2001 to 2002. Later, when I moved to the Civil Rights Division’s front office, she had a difficult time hiding her contempt any time she was forced to meet with the political leadership. In revelations now known throughout the Voting Section, she apparently went beyond hatred and resorted to flagrantly violating Justice Department confidentiality requirements and ethical obligations. It is now common knowledge in the Section that she lied about her actions to Inspector General investigators and was caught in the lie with e-mail documentation. Ahh, it’s always the cover-up.

According to numerous sources within the Section, Ms. Gyamfi had been asked in two separate interviews whether she was involved in the leaking of confidential and privileged information out of the Voting Section. Each time, she flatly denied any knowledge as to who was responsible for the leaks. In a third interview, she was once again questioned about her role in the leaks. At first, she adamantly denied involvement. Then, however, she was confronted with e-mail documents rebutting her testimony.

The purpose of the leaks was to make the Bush Administration look bad. Of course all of the major news outlets reported the leaks. Please follow the link above and read the entire article. Evidently the U. S. Justice Department was politicized long before President Obama took control of it. That is very sad. This is another reflection of the fact that many Americans supposedly serving the country are putting politics above what is good for America.

Enhanced by Zemanta