Shhh..It’s A Secret

It has come to the attention of some members of Congress that data and research used to justify Environmental Protection Agency regulations have been hidden, unavailable for review even by congressional committees with oversight of the EPA.

The Agenda’s foot soldiers are the Stasi (secret police) along with The IRS, the Jackboots are a comin’ for YOU! 🙂

The Environmental Protection Agency is for protect the Progressive Agency agenda, not the actual environment. The Political environment is all that matters.

The agency’s refusal to provide this information is simply unacceptable.

But wholly within the SOP of The Obama Administration.

Thousands of pages of new regulations are written each year, imposing hundreds of billions of dollars in costs upon American households.

And those regulations might all be worthwhile. To the extent they are constitutional (a subject for another column) and save lives or prevent illness, improve product or workplace safety, or prevent fraud or disaster, regulations may be perfectly justified.

But to know whether a regulation actually can achieve such lofty goals, we must be able to evaluate whether the research used to justify it is sound.

When researchers announce a breakthrough or a new study comes out, it is only through the sharing of assumptions, data and methodologies that other scientists can test the claims and verify or falsify the results.

Replicability is the hallmark of science. Trust may be key to interpersonal relationships, and faith is critical to religion, but transparency, replicability and verification are central to science. Studies used by regulatory agencies to impose rules costing millions and sometimes billions of dollars are no exception.

If the government is going to use a rule to restrict peoples’ freedom and cost them money, the public has a right to know that the findings are sound and the savings or public health benefits the study claims the rules would produce are likely to materialize.

Regulatory agencies don’t get to say, “Trust us!” and expect legislators or the public to do so.

Secrecy in science is especially offensive when one considers that federal and state governments (that is, the public) pay for most of the research used to justify regulations — directly, through grants, scholarships and awards, or indirectly, by funding university science departments and research endeavors.

The rule should be, if the public pays for it, the public has the right to know the study’s methodologies, assumptions and raw data.

This shouldn’t even be controversial, and for most regulatory agencies it isn’t. They adhere to the rule of transparency, testing and replicability. Increasingly, however, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency does not do so.

In each of the past few sessions of Congress, the House of Representatives has passed a bill that, in the words of the most recent version, H.R. 4012, would “prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from proposing, finalizing, or disseminating regulations or assessments based upon science that is not transparent or reproducible.”

But fits The Agenda!

The bill requires the EPA to disclose all the science, research, models and data used to justify regulations, and the results would have to be reproducible by independent researchers.

That’ll never happen. The Liberals want what they want when they want it and you’re just a partisan “denier” if you don’t let them do whatever they want to do.

Plus, Trust them, they know what they are doing! 🙂

Here’s what the legislation’s sponsor, David Schweikert, R-Ariz., chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology’s subcommittee on the environment, said when introducing the bill:

“The Secret Science Reform Act ends costly EPA rule making from happening behind closed doors and out of public view. Public policy should come from public data.

The Ministry of Truth disagrees.

“For far too long, the EPA has approved regulations that have placed a crippling financial burden on economic growth in this country without public evidence to justify all their actions.”

Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and the Democrat caucus never allowed a vote on the bill in the Senate. With Republicans now in control, the bill cleared its first hurdle, passing out of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on a strict party-line vote of 11 to 9.

No bias there. 🙂

President Obama has threatened to veto the bill. Why would Obama, who promised to run the most transparent presidential administration in history, want to hide from scientific scrutiny and public view the science used to justify his environmental agency’s key programs? These aren’t state secrets or issues of national security.

Well, of course he’d veto it, it’s not on his Agenda. Keeping Secrets and “pas before you know what’s in it” is the hallmark of this “most transparent” President. It’s just what he’s transparent about that is disturbing.

The only ones who benefit from keeping science secret are: researchers whose fraudulent, flawed or otherwise unverifiable results were predetermined by the need to make the Obama administration agencies who fund them happy; and the regulatory agencies that are exercising mission creep, who can’t justify their call for increased authority and larger budgets without ginning up fear of a public health threat.

The Agenda Warriors, who call you “deniers”, “racists” aqnd “bigots” for not bowing to their superiority.

They are holier than thou and they are above your petty need to know what they are up to, right?

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Transparency Rides Again

More of that famous Democrat Party “transparency” on display. 🙂

Reporters covering the House Democrats’ retreat in Philadelphia this week are having a much different experience than when they’re on their home turf on Capitol Hill. 

Reporters are being escorted to and from the restroom and lobby and are being barred from entering the hotel outside of scheduled events, even if they’ve been invited by a member of Congress. 

During Vice President Joe Biden’s remarks at the retreat Friday, reporters were required to have a staff member, usually a junior member of the press team, escort them when going to the bathroom or to the lobby. The filing center for reporters was at a separate hotel from where the retreat was taking place, so access was limited to members of Congress specifically made available to the press.

“It was a police state. It was absurd how heavy handed the capitol police and Democratic staff were in trying to control everywhere the press went,” New York Times reporter Jeremy Peters said in an interview.

Peters said at one point he was also barred from entering the hotel where the retreat was taking place, despite the fact he had an invitation to eat breakfast with a member of Congress.

“I was an invited guest into this hotel, into the restaurant of the hotel. The staff from the Democratic caucus refused to let me into the hotel, and the Capitol Police told me to leave, even after the congressman went to them and said ‘no, he is my invited guest,'” Peters said. 

Peters said he was told by a staffer they were being escorted to prevent them from talking to members of Congress.

OMG! NOT THAT ANYTHING BUT THAT! THAT WOULD LEAD TO THE END OF THE WORLD FOR SURE!!

At a press conference with Democratic leadership, Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.) said they were not aware reporters were being followed.

“We were not aware they were following you. We had to have the security in the hotel that we were in because it was expected by Capitol Police that we would be secure. This hotel, where the press was located, we did not have those types of requirements. If you want to give me some names, I’m willing to talk to them. That was not at the direction of the caucus,” Becerra said.

The incident is reminiscent of the Clinton Global Initiative conference in September, where reporters were being escorted by staff right up to the bathroom stall. (Politico)

And what’s ultimately hilarious about this is that this is the Press that has been bending over backwards to kiss The Left’s ass and cover up all their dirty laundry for years.

The Lapdog is put on lease and sent to the doghouse.

Now, that’s funny. 🙂

Vice President Joe Biden told Democrats that, “To state the obvious, the past six years have been really, really hard for this country.”

“And they’ve been really tough for our party. Just ask [former DCCC chair] Steve [Israel]. They’ve been really tough for our party. And together we made some really, really tough decisions — decisions that weren’t at all popular, hard to explain,” said Biden.

So they didn’t bother to explain them, they just crammed them down your throat and had the Press call you “racist” or “extremist”  if you objected (and the Press obliged willingly).

Only in Amerika! 🙂  God Bless, Crazy Uncle Joe…

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Transparency

“This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies. Okay? So it’s written to do that.

“In terms of risk-rated subsidies, if you had a law which said healthy people are gonna pay in — made explicit that healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed. Okay?

“Lack of transparency’s a huge political advantage. And basically, you know, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to get anything to pass.

Jon Gabriel transcribing John Gruber, one of the ObamaCare architects.

Gruber concluded his confession with, “yeah there’s things I wish I could change, but I’d rather have this law than not.” (Ricochet)

Well, there’s a shock. ObamaCare was jury-rigged mess to accomplish an Agenda goal and Health Care reform for the people was not a real consideration.

The Agenda was the Agenda and everything else be damned.

Gee, I’ve only been saying that since this blog began in 2009. I’m shocked… 🙂

Now, will the Ministry of Truth tell you about this, of course not, why would they it’s not within their mandate to do so.

And the leftist minions, the food soldiers of The Ministry will be out in force proclaim their faith and hammering at nitpicks and ignoring anything that is a Thoughtcrime.

The Examiner: Doctors, nurses, politicians and everyday citizens are coming to grips with the reality that the debate on ObamaCare isn’t over, and neither is the discussion on the White House’s credibility.

As the November 2014 election nears, October Obamacare horror stories creep and radiate wicked truths: throughout the population, even those who originally supported the idea of the Affordable Care Act, people are discovering the malicious plan, as hatched, is not doing what it was disguised to do.Although the cast of usual characters, like the sympathetic mainstream media, congressional leadership and all the president’s men and women have done everything they can to keep their fingers in the dike, the damn thing is leaking profusely.

America was delivered a masqueraded evil that is fast driving up costs and eroding the quality of healthcare.

Just last month, the largest insurance company with the lowest rates and most sign-ups (59 %) for the Obamacare health exchange in Minnesota, PreferredOne Health Insurance, announced they are pulling out because the government health plan is “not sustainable” in 2015. Steve Peterson, a spokesman, said that offering coverage through this system is “not administratively and financially sustainable going forward.”

“PreferredOne has now discovered that Obamacare is broken and can’t possibly work,” the president of Citizens’ Council for Health Freedom (CCHF) Twila Brase stated. “Even with the $25 billion reinsurance scheme to redistribute dollars between health plans that was put in place to keep premium prices low until enrollment for 2017, conveniently after the 2016 Presidential election.”

“This is undoubtedly what happens when we depend on the government for health care coverage—we lose it,” said Brase. “Those who enrolled through PreferredOne must either change their Obamacare coverage in 2015 or stay with PreferredOne and lose any subsidies.”

“Minnesotans are now faced with fewer healthcare choices, some will lose their plans for a second time, and families will be hurt,” state Sen. Michelle Benson (R) said.

One of the most embarrassing events was practically covered up in the media when, in an October 2013 speech, Obama mentioned Jessica Sanford, the Washington state single mother who signed up for Obamacare for just $169 a month. Oops. Not true. Another Obama Boo-Boo. She soon discovered the lowest she was being forced to pay was $324 per month. She dropped out quickly and now faces a fine on his tax returns for not having insurance.

Physicians, hospitals and health care providers aren’t the only ones confused by Obamacare. On July 22, 2014 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled the feds should not be providing subsidies for health insurance premiums in states that use Healthcare.gov. On that same day, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld the existing practice of permitting premium subsidies for those purchasing health insurance in either the federal marketplace or a state exchange.

Other demons are creeping out of the laws, faux-laws and mandates.

Obamacare signups can’t always keep their doctors if they want to. The 8 million people who enrolled, as President Obama claimed last spring, is not anywhere near that figure according to Marilyn Tavenner, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Even Doug Holtz-Eakin, former Congressional Budget Office director stated signing up doesn’t mean you are enrolled because “you have to sign up and pay on a regular basis to really be enrolled.”

Perhaps the Barack Obama staff didn’t give him the bad news or Obamacare website and system problems could be to blame, his 8 million enrollment number is simply not true. Numerous duplicate enrollments are being discovered daily as a new regime continue with repairs to the plagued Healthcare.gov website. Insurance companies in many states are reporting large percentages of people dropping out of the coverage by not paying premiums. In Florida it’s been more than 20 percent. Some companies are reporting over 50 percent.

Through the IRS and other institutions directed by the White House, the federal government is charging a record number of fines to over 2,600 hospitals for readmitting too many of Medicare patients. An analysis by Kaiser Heath indicates that so far, in 29 states, the government is draining an overwhelming amount money, $428 million, from a majority of hospitals because their patients returned within a month of treatment, an Obamacare law.

A Kaiser Family Foundation poll recently reported that 52 percent of women view the Affordable Care Act (ACA) unfavorably, the highest disapproval rate from women ever. This is especially notable since women make about 80 percent of health care choices in American families.

Women have discovered that Obama’s promise that the plan would “lower premiums by up to $2,500 for a typical family per year,” was nothing but a masked fabrication of deceit.
Rather than reducing health care costs as promised, health insurance premiums have gone up under Obamacare. “Increases are largely due to changes under the ACA,” found a June 2014 Morgan Stanley study, with women facing extremely high premium increases that range from 23 percent to 237 percent.

So here’s a Present from your Transparent architect: http://www.amazon.com/Health-Care-Reform-Necessary-Works/dp/0809053977#reader_0809053977

 Happy Trails…

The Real World

President Obama says his domestic surveillance practices are “modest encroachments on privacy.” Sure. And, as in Orwell’s “1984,” “Freedom Is Slavery” and “Ignorance Is Strength.”

Barack Obama is now not only following George Orwell’s model in his newly uncovered domestic spying practices; he’s copying one of the most shocking aspects of the dystopian society Orwell conjured: telling people the exact opposite of the truth with a straight face.

He boasted an executive branch with “the toughest transparency rules of any administration in history.”

But as the New York Times pointed out in a scathing editorial on the man it helped elect and re-elect, he now issues platitudes that “you should just trust us” because of our “internal mechanisms (that we won’t tell you about) to make sure we do not violate your rights.”

Obama has now “lost all credibility” on transparency, says the Times.

When a president who promised “the most open and transparent administration in history” must now scramble and assure the country that “nobody is listening to your telephone calls,” it exposes a grave breach of trust.

On top of the news last week that the National Security Agency has Verizon phone call records comes the revelation — once again, not from American news media, but from Britain’s left-wing Guardian — that a top secret program called Prism lets the NSA collect data “directly from the servers of these U.S. Service Providers: Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple” — without those firms’ permission or knowledge.

The president last month suggested that the global war on terror has ended. If so, why then are we laying the groundwork for a full-scale surveillance state?

Talk radio powerhouse Mark Levin wants Obama to “tell us why we need to live in this semi- or soft-police state, why we need to have all these records collected,” to “be honest with the American people” about the “fundamental transformation” he’s engineering.

Levin, appearing on Fox, provided a litany of intrusiveness — the Supreme Court letting police take DNA samples in arrests; the IRS collecting “extensive financial and personal information” into a database; ObamaCare’s “massive data collection … of our private, personal medical conditions”; the Transportation Department’s “proposed black boxes in all of our automobiles”; “domestic drones from EPA to make sure farmers aren’t stepping out of line”; Homeland Security “checking laptops and iPhones and other data.”

It’s a short distance between mere possession of so much information, and the politically corrupt misuse of it — a small step from Orwell’s 1984 to Obama’s 2013. (IBD)

“The Affordable Care Act is bringing the cost of health care in our country down.”–Nancy Pelosi.  But it’s the rate of growth that’s dropped, not the actual cost of care — which is still rising.

So yet again, a “cut” or “down” is a decrease in the increase which means the increase is just less than it was but still an increase.

Just like the sequester.

But that’s a triumph for the Democrats in “cutting” costs.

It’s like you paid $7 for that movie Ticket for Iron 3. But for Iron Man 4 you pay $10 but Obama, Reid and Pelosi come along and say, “yeah, but it could have $13! so we cut the price for you aren’t we magnificent! 🙂

then now

She also said it would create “4 Million new jobs”….
Months before ObamaCare takes full effect, its popularity has hit an all-time low. And that’s before the public experiences firsthand the many ill effects it will impose on the nation’s health care system.
Shortly before Democrats rammed ObamaCare through Congress, President Obama’s pollster, Joel Benenson, wrote in the Washington Post that “once reform passes, the tangible benefits Americans will realize will trump the fear-mongering rhetoric opponents are stoking today.”Not quite.

A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll finds 49% now say ObamaCare is “a bad idea” — the highest negative rating ever in that survey. And the share who feel “strongly” about this climbed from 38% in May 2010 — just after the law passed — to 43% today.

At the other end of the spectrum, just 37% believe ObamaCare is a good idea.

That’s in keeping with the Kaiser Family Foundation’s monthly tracking poll, which shows that support for ObamaCare is now just 35%, down from 46% just after Obama signed it into law. Even support among Democrats has softened considerably, falling from 78% when the law passed to just 57% today.

The Kaiser poll also found that more than half think the law’s critics should keep trying to block or change it.

The left continues to claim, as Paul Krugman did not too long ago, that the law “will become more popular once ObamaCare goes into effect.”

But its numbers are virtually certain to fall once millions of Americans learn firsthand that all those promises Democrats made — about how it would lower costs and let everyone keep their health plans and doctors — were bogus.

Last month, for instance, AP reported that millions who now have individual coverage could see their policies canceled because they don’t comply with the law’s mandates. Many will end up forced to buy far more expensive coverage in one of those ObamaCare exchanges.

Countless small businesses that currently offer health benefits will also find their insurance costs skyrocketing, thanks to ObamaCare’s myriad taxes, benefit mandates and intrusive market regulations.

Millions more will likely find themselves dumped by their employers into the government-run exchanges. The Congressional Budget Office expects that 7 million will lose their employer coverage thanks to ObamaCare, and says this figure could reach as high as 20 million.

Anyone want to guess how popular these real-world ObamaCare effects will be? (IBD)

Now ask, if the Liberals care…and you’ll have your real answer.

IT WAS BUSH/REPUBLICANS/RICH/CORPORATIONS FAULT! 🙂nixon

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Transparency

Death Panel anyone?

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius rebuffed an appeal from Rep. Lou Barletta on behalf of a girl who needs a lung transplant but can’t get one because of a federal regulation that prevents her from qualifying for a transplant.

“Please, suspend the rules until we look at this policy,” Barletta, a Pennsylvania Republican, asked Sebelius during a House hearing Tuesday on behalf of Sarah Murnaghan, a 10-year-old girl who needs a lung transplant. She can’t qualify for an adult lung transplant until the age of 12, according to federal regulations, but Sebelius has the authority to waive that rule on her behalf. The pediatric lungs for which she currently qualifies aren’t available.

“I would suggest, sir, that, again, this is an incredibly agonizing situation where someone lives and someone dies,” Sebelius replied. “The medical evidence and the transplant doctors who are making the rule — and have had the rule in place since 2005 making a delineation between pediatric and adult lungs, because lungs are different that other organs — that it’s based on the survivability [chances].”

So it has to be worth the government’s time and money to save you because you don’t meet the bureaucratic guidelines. Gee, that doesn’t sound ominous at all.

Barletta countered that medical professionals think Murneghan could survive an adult lung transplant. During the exchange, he also said that the girl has three to five weeks to live.

Sebelius reminded Barletta that 40 people in Pennsylvania are on the “highest acuity list” for lung transplants.

The good of the many outweigh the needs of the one.

She’s not exactly Spock is she. 🙂

And the other question is, why is someone on the children’s list if a modified adult lung would save them? I don’t understand offhand using a fixed age cutoff instead of a qualitative assessment of each patient to maximize their odds of a transplant. If an adult organ would work for her and there are more adult organs to be had, that’s the list she should be on.

She checking her list.

Having the head of HHS telling Congress “someone lives and someone dies” is poisonous optics with the public already sour on ObamaCare.

Since President Obama’s EPA administrator, HHS Secretary, and nominee for Labor Secretary have all been exposed for using pseudonymous email accounts as an end-run around transparency efforts, have any officials inside the White House employed the same trick?  Sorry, the spokesman for the “most transparent administration in history” won’t comment on that:

“There’s nothing secret,” Carney said. The AP reviewed hundreds of pages of government emails released under the federal open records law and couldn’t independently find instances when material from any of the secret accounts it identified was turned over. Congressional oversight committees told the AP they were unfamiliar with the few nonpublic government addresses that AP identified so far, including one for Secretary Kathleen Sebelius of the Health and Human Services Department.

Now that’s transparency. 🙂

And they get to control your health care. Enjoy.

It’s Good to Be The King

Once, only nobles were granted an audience with the King.

In America, we’ve prided ourselves on abandoning those privileges of class some 237 years ago, following that little uprising in the 13 colonies.

And we again congratulated ourselves at 12:01 pm Eastern Time on January 20, 2009, just moments after Barack Obama was sworn in as the 44th president of the United States and as he committed to making his administration the most transparent and open in history.

But more than four years later it is time to ask questions. The most transparent administration ever? The most transparently political, yes. The most open government? If you have the money to buy access, yes.

Since last weekend, Mr and Mrs Regular Citizen have been denied the access people used to be granted to tour the White House, purportedly because of the clampdown on federal spending since the “sequester” that imposed cuts across the board.

These tours, most recently guided by volunteers though monitored by paid Secret Service staff, have been an American tradition since John and Abigail Adams, the first White House residents, personally hosted receptions for the public.

And their cancellation is an austerity measure that saves a pittance, while more frivolous taxpayer funding for items like the White House dog walker continues.

Meanwhile, noble Americans can buy time with the president for a suggested donation of $500,000 to his new campaign group, Organising for Action.

Yes, the announcement offering access to the president for cold, hard cash was made openly and with total transparency. But it was also made without shame.

It’s the third version of Obama’s original monster campaign machine, Obama for America, which then morphed into a re-election campaign machine, Organising for America, on the third day of his first term.

It has now re-launched again as Organising for Action (OFA) – a non-profit, tax-exempt group headed by his former campaign advisers. Apparently no longer “for America”, the group might just as well be called Organising for Obama’s Agenda.

Its mission: to support the president in his attempt to achieve enactment of gun control, environmental policies and immigration reform.

At the two-day kick-off event last week for the new OFA’s founding summit, attended by 75 folks for the “bargain” rate of just $50,000, Obama at least acknowledged the concerns raised by others about the funding, purpose and influence of the organisation.

However, he brushed them aside. With greater humility than new Pope Francis, Obama said he prided himself on feeling no obligation in the past to the interests of the generous donors who made his election and re-election possible. Though paradoxically he also said he wanted “to make sure the voices of the people are actually heard in the debates that are going to be taking place”. So, he’ll take money to listen to the voices of the privileged, but not do their bidding?

May I humbly suggest he could hear more voices, more clearly if he mingled with the public he serves? Perhaps the White House could hold open tours for the public! Why has no one in his administration thought of that? And volunteers could manage those tours, to keep costs down!

But, of course, those are what have just been cancelled. Meanwhile, three calligraphers reportedly remain on staff. I suppose their services are needed for the special hand-lettered, gold-foiled invitations sent to the nobles who are willing to pay for an audience with the King.

OFA is a legal, tax-exempt advocacy organisation, established as a social welfare group under the rules of both the Internal Revenue Service and the Federal Elections Commission. It can accept unlimited contributions, so long as it promotes the common good and does not primarily engage in electoral politics.

As it is not required to publicly disclose donors, OFA is actually one of those “shadowy” organisations Obama railed against as a candidate when he supported campaign finance reform.

In 2010 the Supreme Court made a controversial ruling known as Citizens United that allowed unlimited corporate and individual donations to so-called “super political action committees”, which at least have to disclose their donors, and to social welfare organisations, which do not.

At the time, Obama loudly criticised the decision, saying: “That’s one of the reasons I ran for president: because I believe so strongly that the voices of ordinary Americans were being drowned out by the clamour of a privileged few in Washington.”

But then he reversed course, giving his blessing to a super PAC supporting his 2012 re-election, and now to OFA. What has changed?

Obama is looking to his legacy. And his eye is on the 2014 Congressional elections. If he can maintain his appeal among the masses and help Democrats win back a majority in the House of Representatives, while maintaining control of the Senate, there will be no stopping his agenda.

He explained the “grassroots” purpose of OFA like this: “If you have a senator or a congressman in a swing district who is prepared to take a tough vote… I want to make sure they feel supported and they know there are constituencies of theirs that agree with them, even if they may be getting a lot of pushback in that district.”

Engaging voters is always a good thing. But the president should not charge for the privilege. If he will look out the Oval Office window beyond his own reflection, King Barack I will see the public he is meant to serve. He ought to invite them in. (UK Telegraph)

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Distrust and Verify

Photobucket

The entertainment today will be see what kinda of Dance AG Holder will do this time when he lies to Congress again about “Fast & Furious”.

Perjury. Impeachment. Contempt. Murder. Coverup.

Attorney General Holder will appear before the House Oversight Committee this morning on Capitol Hill to answer questions specifically surrounding his role in the the lethal Operation Fast and Furious program. Holder will have a ton of explaining to do including: when he was briefed about the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, whether he was informed by his deputy chief of staff at the time Monty Wilkinson about Fast and Furious guns being used to kill Terry the same day of his murder, why the Justice Department has been stonewalling Congress for information and more.

Just this week, emails surfaced showing Holder was briefed about Brian Terry’s death just hours after he was murdered in the early morning hours on December 15, 2010. Later in the day, Wilkinson was told directly by former Arizona U.S. Attorney Dennis Burke that the guns found at the murder scene were part of Operation Fast and Furious. It is unknown whether Wilkinson told Holder about the connection between the murder weapons and Fast and Furious, but it’s fair to assume he did.

The dance steps and the Orwellian Doublespeak should be entertaining.

But as Holder has already said Lying is “complicated”.

You can tell because the House Democrats released a “report” saying it was rogue agents in Arizona’s fault.

Naked Politics to serve THE AGENDA. Now that’s transparent. 🙂

Democrats on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on Tuesday are expected to publish a report on the disputed gun trafficking investigation called Operation Fast and Furious, concluding that agents in Arizona — not Obama administration officials — were responsible for the tactics used in the inquiry and for providing misleading information relayed to Congress.

Surprise!! It was someone else’s fault!  Amazing how that happens… 🙂

Next thing you know $6 trillion Dollars in Debt between 2009-2012 is not Obama’s fault either… 🙂

“This report debunks many unsubstantiated conspiracy theories,” Representative Elijah E. Cummings, Democrat of Maryland, wrote in a cover letter. “Contrary to repeated claims by some, the committee has obtained no evidence that Operation Fast and Furious was a politically motivated operation conceived and directed by high-level Obama administration political appointees at the Department of Justice.”

Which means that IS what happened. 🙂

The Justice Department has delivered fewer than 8% of the 80,000 documents we know it has identified as being related to this flawed operation.

• It has refused to allow investigators access to numerous witnesses who participated in the operation – one witness, after being served with a subpoena, invoked his Fifth Amendment right to protection against self-incrimination rather than answer questions.

• Justice Department now asserts that many documents pertaining to internal discussions and decision making about its response to Operation Fast and Furious are off-limits to investigators.

“This report debunks many unsubstantiated conspiracy theories,” Representative Elijah E. Cummings, Democrat of Maryland, wrote in a cover letter. “Contrary to repeated claims by some, the committee has obtained no evidence that Operation Fast and Furious was a politically motivated operation conceived and directed by high-level Obama administration political appointees at the Department of Justice.”

Holder: As I testified in a previous hearing, the Department does not intend to produce additional deliberative materials about the response to congressional oversight or media requests that post- date the commencement of congressional review. (like when this operation started!)

“Documents turned over late Friday night indicate (Criminal Division chief Lanny Breuer) was still discussing plans to let guns cross the border with Mexican officials on the same day the department denied to me in writing that ATF would ever let guns walk,” Grassley said. (ABC & FOX)

To paraphrase Reagan, “Distrust AND Verify” when it come to the “Justice” Department and head liar, Eric Holder.

A U.S. Justice Department source has told The Daily Caller that at least two DOJ prosecutors accepted cash bribes from allegedly corrupt finance executives who were indicted under court seal within the past 13 months, but never arrested or prosecuted.
The bribed officials, an attorney with knowledge of the investigation told TheDC, remain on the taxpayers’ payroll at the Justice Department without any accountability. The DOJ source said Holder does not want to admit public officials accepted bribes while under his leadership.

DOJ leadership has been fretting internally, the source said, about how to handle the story when the news breaks because it represents a new level of corruption in the Obama administration. The Holder Justice Department is concerned about the appearance that it lacks the competence to enforce the laws in which Obama has shown political interest, including those related to corruption and other financial crimes.

So trust us, we know what we are doing. And it’s someone else’s fault anyhow…
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

 Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden