A top Republican senator is pressing Attorney General Eric Holder for answers following allegations by a government watchdog that the IRS may have improperly accessed the tax records of a political donor or candidate -- but the Justice Department declined to prosecute the case.
J. Russell George, the inspector general who audited the IRS has claimed he turned over evidence of criminal behavior that the DOJ refused to press charges on. Among George's claims was that politicians were targeted for audits and that confidential donor and candidate tax information was accessed.
Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), questioned whether these breeches were politically motivated.
George pointed out one case where information was willfully accessed against the current US law and in his letter to congress said, "we presented evidence of a willful unauthorized access to the Department of Justice, but the case was declined for prosecution."
The DOJ is refusing to pursue any charges against the IRS for audits or harassment of politicians, Conservative Groups or Donors or related individuals.
This is hardly the first time Eric Holder has refused to prosecute a case against democrats and liberals.
He also refused to prosecute the two New Black Panthers, who committed voter intimidation, even though career attorneys at the DOJ, strongly recommended it. Holder has also refused to prosecute Wall Street big wigs like Jeffrey Katzenberg, Jon Corzine, and the board of Solyndra, all large contributors to President Obama's campaigns, and how about all the other Obama administration scandals from Fast and Furious to Benghazi, just to mention a few.
And for anyone out there that thinks these scandals don’t or won’t affect them… There has also never been an answer as to why none of the Tea Party and other Conservative Groups were never granted their non-profit status through the IRS in 2012… or any answers to 2012 Voter Fraud allegations in general. When it affects our votes or the election process, it affects all of us.
'Coincidence? You decide': Sarah Palin's father 'horribly harassed' by IRS under probe led by Obama donor, her brother claims
In a January 11 Facebook post, Chuck Heath Jr. accused the IRS of going after his dad Chuck Heath Sr.
He said the elderly man said he had been 'horribly harassed' six times since Palin became the GOP vice presidential nominee in 2008
Heath Jr. suggested the new found interest was no coincidence, but part of an IRS's heightened security of conservative groups
Sarah Palin's father has been 'horribly harassed' by the IRS, her brother has claimed.
In a January 11 Facebook post, Chuck Heath Jr. accused the tax man of going after his dad Chuck Heath Sr. six times since Palin became the GOP vice presidential nominee in 2008, suggesting the new found interest is no accident.
Harassed? Sarah Palin's father Chuck Heath Sr, pictured above, has been 'horribly harassed' by the IRS, her brother has claimed
'My father, who worked multiple jobs and faithfully and honestly paid his taxes for fifty years, had never heard a word from the IRS.
'In 2008, his daughter was tapped to run for vice president of the United States. Since that time, he has been, in his words "horribly harassed" six times by the agency.'
He added: 'They've tried to dig up something on him but he's always operated above board. Government and politics are ugly. Kudos to the few that are trying to clean it up.'
Attack: In a January 11 Facebook post, Chuck Heath Jr., pictured working his sister's campaign, accused the tax man of going after his dad Chuck Heath Sr six times since Palin became the GOP vice presidential nominee in 2008, suggesting the new found interest is no accident.
Support: After streams of anti-Obama comments to his post, Heath Jr responded, 'Thank you guys for the support. I know Dad appreciates it'
Heath Jr. was suggesting the attention allegedly directed towards his father was part of the IRS's heightened scrutiny of conservative groups.
On Monday, The Wall Street Journal reported that the FBI doesn't plan to file criminal charges in the probe, after it failed to find enough evidence of political bias to prove a violation of criminal law had occurred.
The news will likely intensify debate over the politically charged scandal.
After streams of anti-Obama comments to this post, Heath Jr. responded.
'Thank you guys for the support. I know Dad appreciates it,' he wrote.
'I wasn't going to say anything about the IRS targeting him when he told me about it a few months ago. I guess I feared some kind of retaliation from them.
'But when I heard the person heading up the IRS investigation for their targeting of Tea Party groups was a major Obama donor, I felt compelled to say something.
'We are all so sick of cronyism and backdoor tactics that bring good people down.'
Barbara Bosserman, a trial attorney within the IRS's Civil Rights Commission, is leading the internal investigation. According to reports she is a frequent donor to the Democratic National Committee and President Obama.
Chuck Heath and Chuck Heath Jr., Sarah Palin’s father and brother, like her children, are private citizens who are being harassed at every turn by the media and now the IRS because they are related to her. Sarah’s great sin… she stood up to the corruptocrats in Alaska and won and gave life to the McCain ticket after her rousing VP nomination acceptance speech and scared the Hell out of the establishments in both parties and the ruling elite everywhere. Why? Because she is and would represent the American people and continue to call out the beltway politicians and power elite. So they had their minions in the media destroy her with lies, frivolous law suits… all of which she won, and continuous attacks on her and her family.
In a recent interview Roger Ailes said, “The only two people I knew who got worse press than Sarah Palin were Richard Nixon and George W. Bush — much of it unfairly, most of it unfair to her family.”, and she is still standing strong and Undefeated. CNN Said Palin Influence Far from Diminishing and Jim DeMint at the Heritage Foundation said there was no more valuable endorsement in conservative circles than that of Sarah Palin… as Ted Cruz and others have said, Palin is the Kingmaker. Ailes also knows that Palin just might take another shot at the big job herself… after all who better to go head to head with Hillary Clinton. The DNC’s carrot would be electing the first female president. It truly would be the battle of the Century! And Ailes as well as the powers that be know it!
Election 2016 is a make or break it election for America’s future direction and definitely for Conservatives the Republican Party! Conservatives have lost their credibility because the don’t stand up for their own! And Progressives, Obama, Reid, Pelosi and Holder will do anything and everything to steal that election (2014 and 2016).
Barracuda Brigade: We’ll make it simple for ya all, yes he did; he’s Guilty of Perjury…
The House Judiciary Committee is investigating whether Attorney General Eric Holder lied under oath during his May 15 testimony on the Justice Department’s (DOJ) surveillance of reporters, an aide close to the matter told The Hill.
The panel is looking at a statement Holder made during a back and forth with Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) about whether the DOJ could prosecute reporters under the Espionage Act of 1917.
“In regard to potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material — this is not something I’ve ever been involved in, heard of, or would think would be wise policy,” Holder said during the hearing.
However, NBC News reported the following week that Holder personally approved a search warrant that labeled Fox News chief Washington correspondent James Rosen a co-conspirator in a national security leaks case.
The panel is investigating whether NBC’s report contradicts Holder’s claim that he had not looked into or been involved with a possible prosecution of the press in a leaks case.
The May 15 Judiciary hearing was held after The Associated Press revealed Justice had secretly subpoenaed its phone records in a separate leaks investigation.
Justice did not return a request for comment, but Johnson on Tuesday defended Holder, arguing his statement was specific to Johnson’s line of questioning about the Espionage Act and not meant to pertain to other investigations.
“The attorney general’s statement that no journalists have been prosecuted under the Espionage Act during his tenure is accurate,” he told The Hill.
Johnson said he raised the Espionage Act issue because he believes the law could be misused to target reporters due to the way it was written. He argued it should be changed.
“Congress is responsible for protecting the press while giving law enforcement the tools to prosecute officials who leak classified information,” Johnson said. “I support considering amendments to the Espionage Act and passing the Free Flow of Information Act to refine this balance.”
Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, told The Hill that Holder was “forthright” with the panel and that there was “no need to turn a policy disagreement into allegations of misconduct.”
But Rep. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (Wis.), the second-ranking Judiciary Committee Republican, told The Hill that Holder should resign.
He accused the attorney general of misleading the panel during the investigation of the “Fast and Furious” gun-walking operation, and again when he claimed to not know about the AP probe.
“As we saw in Fast and Furious and are seeing now, Attorney General Holder refuses to hold himself accountable,” Sensenbrenner said. “He misled the Judiciary Committee under oath when he said he had not heard about Fast and Furious and he misled us again when he claimed to be unaware of the AP scandal. The head of DOJ should be someone the American people can trust. Attorney General Holder should resign.”
Justice’s probe into national security leaks is threatening to become the biggest controversy of Holder’s career.
President Obama last week said he was “troubled” by reports about the DOJ’s surveillance of reporters, and argued that journalists “should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs.”
He ordered Holder to review his department’s guidelines governing investigations that involve reporters. The DOJ will present its findings to the president on July 12.
A report in The Daily Beast over the weekend suggested Holder felt a sense of personal remorse over the aggressive tactics used in targeting the Fox News reporter. Citing aides close to Holder, the article said the Attorney General knew Justice would be besieged by questions about the two probes as he read a Washington Post story about the investigation of Rosen.
The DOJ seized Rosen’s personal emails and used other surveillance methods to investigate whether he was complicit in a leak of classified information. It also examined Rosen’s phone records and tracked his visits to the State Department using security-badge data during the 2009 probe.
Justice filed legal papers saying Rosen may have acted as “an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator” by getting materials from a government official also under investigation.
The investigation was primarily focused on rooting out Rosen’s alleged source, a State Department worker who is facing federal charges for disclosing classified national security information and could see a trial as soon as next year. The DOJ has said it never intended to prosecute Rosen.
Some Republican senators have said Holder should not be in charge of reviewing his own department.
Speaking on CBS’s “Face the Nation” on Sunday, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) called Holder’s review a “conflict of interest.” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said a special counsel or some other independent body should be appointed to conduct the review.
The DOJ has also faced criticism over its seizure of phone records belonging to the AP. The news wire was never a target of that investigation.
The House voted to find Holder in contempt over his refusal to turn over documents to lawmakers on “Fast and Furious,” an operation in which the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives purposely allowed guns to be illegally purchased in the United States and Mexico in the hope they could be tracked.
Joshua Pundit: Here's a smoking gun for you. Attorney General Holder is speaking to Democrat Rep. Hank Johnson of Georgia of the oversight committee about the AP scandal...and at 5:00 Holder says clearly, under oath that he never had anything to do with signing off on spying on the press:
"In regard to potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material. This is not something I’ve ever been involved in, heard of, or would think would be wise policy."
And who was the DOJ attorney who filed in district court to keep the illegal surveillance ongoing and secret for years even though they hadn't found anything? That would be U.S. Attorney Ronald Machen - the same attorney who was charged with deciding whether to pursue the House’s contempt citation against his boss, Eric Holder, over Fast and Furious. And - what a coincidence - he just happens to be leading the FBI investigation into the leak that involved the DOJ subpoenaing AP reporters’ phone records.
And who appointed him to that position? None other than James Cole, Holder's deputy, who took over after Holder recused himself.
Even more disgusting, President Obama acted socked, just shocked about all this and proclaimed yesterday in that faux sincere baritone of his that he had ordered the Attorney General to review the DOJ’s guidelines for spying on reporters.
In other words, Eric Holder will be in charge of investigating what Eric Holder did. And in the areas where he recused himself , he has a couple of loyal, dependable soldiers to take care of things.
Yet the fact remains that Holder committing perjury and likely obstruction of justice, and that particular cat is now out of the bag.
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin posted a lengthy message to her Facebook wall Thursday criticizing the Obama administration for its handling the Benghazi, IRS, and Associated Press phone records scandals:
Scandalous Hat Trick
Mr. President, when it rains it pours, but most Americans hold their own umbrellas. Today in the Rose Garden you dismissed the idea of a Special Counsel to investigate the IRS scandal. With that, your galling political hubris shined bright in the midst of today’s dark clouds.
Mr. President, how can we trust your Justice Department to conduct an independent investigation when there is a systemic violation of the Hatch Act throughout your administration?
Surely you are aware that the Hatch Act prevents certain federal employees from engaging in political activity. Specifically, it’s illegal for these federal employees to engage in action in support of or in opposition to a political party, a candidate for partisan political office, or a partisan political group.
Yet that is exactly what’s happened within the IRS, the Justice Department, and in the Benghazi cover-up. This scandalous hat trick is on your watch. It is not believable that you knew nothing about Obama administration actions in dealing with these scandals. And in regards to Benghazi, when you should have taken appropriate action to save American lives – for instance by calling in the Marines – you were AWOL. Just weeks before the election your team scrubbed the Benghazi talking points in 12 different versions, lied to the American people about some YouTube video being to blame for the deaths of brave Americans who put our country first, and you prove Michael Barone right when he writes, “What actually happened in Benghazi was out of sync with the Obama campaign line.” That’s why you all did what you did. Pure raw politics were at play during a horrific time of loss.
For more evidence of Hatch Act violations right under your nose, simply consider DOJ’s “massive and unprecedented intrusion” into the free press. Do you think they picked up some political talk when tapping the phones in the House press gallery?
Your team is out of control. Those who cannot remember the past and learn from it are doomed to repeat it, and that is exactly what is happening. Look back exactly 40 years ago this week and apply that disheartening chapter of American history to the team you’ve chosen and lead today.
Some of us warned America; we cautioned voters in 2008 that a community organizer with no executive experience and no sense of accountability would be a very poor choice for the nation’s top management position.
Mr. President, you said today that you have “complete confidence” in the Attorney General. America doesn’t. Eric Holder needs to appoint an unbiased Special Counsel to investigate the illegal political action of this administration. And then Eric Holder needs to resign.
Most Americans see ominous dark clouds looming beyond the White House Rose Garden, Mr. President. They’ll roll away only when light is shined on the Obama administration’s antics, and America will only recover when you cease avoiding responsibility in this mission of yours to fundamentally transform America. For that to happen, the press had better learn from their experiences of being duped and provide a deserving public fairer, more intelligent coverage.
Speaking of coverage, glad you finally called in the Marines… shame it was just to hold your umbrella.
Making the Sunday show rounds, Senator Tom Colburn (R-OK), one of the most respected Senators in Washington, told Fox News’ Chris Wallace that Senate Negotiators Are Not Close to a Deal on GunBackgroundChecks ... As one of four Senators working on legislation to expand background checks for firearm purchased, he made it very clear that there would be no record keeping (lists or a national registry created) on law-abiding gun owners in this country.
Coburn has been working with Illinois Republican Mark S. Kirk, New York Democrat Charles E. Schumer (a definite Progressive anti-gun guy) and West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin III on developing narrower ‘background check’ legislation which aims to ensure that criminals and those with mental health issues are not able to access/purchase firearms.
Being in full agreement, my first reaction is how do you stop the government from creating and keeping a list and can you believe them? Just look at all the falsehoods and indiscretions that have been leaked about the TSA and other government entities, including the White House. NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre spoke out and continues to speak out on universal gun registration, realizing that it will ultimately lead to the disarming of Americans. The Founding Fathers painstakingly chose every word that is in the Bill of Rights and the Constitution for a purpose and giving the American people the right to keep and bear arms is the lynch pin to guarantee that we can keep the rest.
NRA executive vice president and CEO Wayne LaPierre speaks on universal gun registration. (Photo: NRA)
The Blaze: National Rifle Association executive vice president and CEO Wayne LaPierre continued speaking out against President Obama’s recent gun control proposals Saturday night, zeroing in on “the real consequences of background checks,” according to the NRA.
Most recently, the NRA has been publicizing a memo it obtained from the Justice Department that says the success of universal background checks would depend in part on “requiring gun registration,” and says gun buybacks would not be effective “unless massive and coupled with a ban.”
LaPierre began his speech with a reminder on why he believes it’s so important to counter strict gun control measures:
“The Second Amendment — it’s not just words on parchment. It’s not a frivolous suggestion from our Founding Fathers to be interpreted on a whim. It lies on the very heart of what our country was founded upon. Our Founding Fathers knew that without the Second Amendment, all of our other freedoms could be in jeopardy. [And] our freedoms are the very essence of America. They are what make America unique!
Now, he said, we’re witnessing the single-most devastating attack on that right that “our country has ever seen.”
He discussed NRA proposals to make schools safer, noting that Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) admitted that she had gun control legislation in her desk for a year and was waiting for the “right time” to introduce it. In his opinion, many gun control opponents more about politics than they are proven solutions.
“Waiting for an unspeakable act to occur so the American people could be persuaded to buy her political agenda?” LaPierre commented with disgust. “It’s not about making our kids or our streets safer, it’s all about their decades-old agenda.”
He soon got to the heart of his speech: universal background checks, and what he claims they’re really all about:
“Don’t you be fooled. There is nothing “universal,” nor “reasonable” about it. They ought to stop pretending and stop calling it what it will never be. Criminals will never be a part of it, and I have come to believe that the adjudicated mentally incompetent [won't either]…This so-called universal background check that you’re hearing about is aimed at one thing: it’s aimed at registering your guns and, when another tragic opportunity presents itself, that registry will be used to confiscate your guns.”
“Imagine right now, your name on a massive government list,” he asked the audience, noting that it would be pretty “handy” for a drug dealer, thug, or criminal. “How safe do you think that government list will be?” he continued, noting the flood of personal information released this year by various media outlets on gun owners.
The crowd stands and cheers after the NRA executive vice president and CEO Wayne LaPierre urges them to stand for their rights. (Photo: NRA)
LaPierre proceeded to highlight other gun control proposals state by state, concluding with a word on how the Mexican government has asked the U.S. Senate for a registry of all gun owners in the United States.
“What is the point of that?” he asked.
“They have all the security they want,” LaPierre said, referring to politicians. “Our only means of security is the Second Amendment when the glass breaks in the middle of the night, and we have a right to defend ourselves…They don’t have the right to take that right away.”
“Was this what our Founding Fathers intended?” he asked. What Washington needs to do is recognize that Americans really have shared goals: they want their communities to be safer, and they will do anything to protect their kids.
Start focusing on that, he said, and “stop trying to convince the American people that all law-abiding gun owners are criminals in waiting.”
He concluded with an inspiring statement on how many gun control proposals have failed, and NRA members and Americans need to continue standing up and making their voices heard. He told the crowd to call their congressmen and senators this week, then sit down and write a hand-written letter, and follow up with an email.
“We will not be duped. We will not be demonized. And we will not be divided,” he said.
“As lawful gun-owners, we deserve nothing less than absolute respect as people that believe in our individual rights, believe in individual responsibility, believe in protecting our families, and believe in defending our country.”
DOJ memo states: “Buybacks are ineffective unless massive and coupled with a ban.”
The National Rifle Association has obtained a Department of Justice memo calling for national gun registration and confiscation. The nine page “cursory summary” on current gun control initiatives was not officially released by the Obama administration.
The DOJ memo (downloadable here as a PDF) states the administration “believes that a gun ban will not work without mandatory gun confiscation,” according to the NRA, and thinks universal background checks “won’t work without requiring national gun registration.” Obama has yet to publicly support national registration or firearms confiscation, although the memo reveals his administration is moving in that direction.
The memo stands in stark contrast to the administration’s public stance on so-called gun control. White House spokesman Jay Carney said last month that laws proposed by Obama would not “take away a gun from a single law-abiding American.”
The NRA declined to explain how it obtained the document. The memo was written by the acting director of the Justice Department’s National Institute of Justice, Greg Ridgeway. It is dated January 4, two weeks before Obama mounted his attack on the Second Amendment following the Sandy Hook massacre. Ridgeway came to the Justice Department from the RAND corporation.
The memo says universal background checks on firearms purchases may help the government push to control and eventually outlaw firearms, but it would lead to an increase in illegally purchased guns.
It pointed out that banning high capacity ammunition clips would be ineffective due to the fact there is a large number of them already in circulation.
A Justice Department official said the memo is an unfinished review of gun violence research and does not represent administration policy.
The DOJ memo arrived a few weeks prior to a letter sent out by the Department of Veterans Affairs. “A determination of incompetency will prohibit you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition,” the sent to military veterans states. “If you knowingly violate any of these prohibitions, you may be fined, imprisoned, or both pursuant to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, Pub.L.No. 103-159, as implemented at 18, United States Code 924(a)(2).”
“US veterans are receiving letters from the government informing them that they are disabled and not allowed to own, purchase or possess a firearm. If the veteran does decide to purchase a firearm he will by fined, imprisoned or both,” the Gateway Pundit remarked.
Please don’t be manipulated. Big brother is counting on you being uninformed! The reason for the second Amendment, per Founding Father and President Thomas Jefferson, has nothing to do with hunting, or even defending oneself from intruders, although both good reasons to own a gun. The reason for the second amendment is if and when all goes wrong, for the people to be able to defend themselves against the government and exactly why someone could need and should be allowed to own an AR-15 or any of the other guns and ammo on the so-called assault weapons list. One only has to watch a movie like The Bourne Legacy [Blu-ray/Digital Combo] to figure that one out!
Shown above is an aerial shot of the Ames Research Center. (NASA.gov)
FoxNews.com – h/t to AJ: A four-year FBI investigation into the transfer of classified weapons technology to China and other countries from NASA’s Ames Research Center is being stonewalled by government officials, sources tell FoxNews.com.
Documents obtained by FoxNews.com, which summarize these and other allegations and were given to congressional sources last week by a whistle-blower, described how a “secret grand jury” was to be convened in February 2011 to hear testimony from informants in the case, including a senior NASA engineer. But federal prosecutor Gary Fry was removed from the case, which was then transferred from one office in the Northern District of California to another where, according to the documents, “this case now appears to be stalled.”
“The information is staggering,” the whistle-blower told FoxNews.com.
A Justice Department spokesman on Thursday told FoxNews.com it “does not comment on grand jury proceedings,” as a matter of longstanding policy. Fry, reached for comment late Thursday, also would not confirm or deny the claim.
'When I mentioned the tech that was compromised to the Armed Services Committee, their jaws just dropped.' …Congressional source
The claims originate with several past and current NASA employees concerned with the systemic leak of highly sensitive information relating to missile defense systems, as well as what they call a troubled investigation into the leak.
The documents claim the FBI has been working with other agencies since 2009 on an investigation into foreign nationals working at Ames. This follows allegations by two Republican lawmakers earlier this month that the U.S. attorney’s office in the Northern California district was ultimately denied by the Justice Department when it tried to proceed with indictments.
Melinda Haag, the U.S. attorney for the Northern District of California, denied claims her office was blocked in trying to proceed with the case.
“I am aware of allegations our office sought authority from DOJ in Washington, D.C. to bring charges in a particular matter and that our request was denied,” she said in a written statement. “Those allegations are untrue. No such request was made and no such denial was received.”
Yet two members of Congress, Reps. Frank Wolf, R-Va., and Lamar Smith, R-Texas, said in a statement to FoxNews.com that Haag’s denial “conflicts with information we have received from federal law enforcement sources,” and added “we hope that the DOJ Inspector General will take our request seriously.” The lawmakers had requested, via letter, an IG investigation.
Rob Storch, a spokesman for the DOJ inspector general’s office, confirmed to FoxNews.com the office received the letter from Wolf and Smith. “We’re evaluating (the letter),” he said.
Located in the heart of Silicon Valley, the Ames Research Center has been a center of high tech innovation for more than 60 years. As the space agency’s mission has changed over the years since it was built, NASA has turned it into a commercial research facility, leasing out space to a number of companies including rocket firm SpaceX and tech giant Google, which leases 42 acres there through a holding company called Planetary Ventures.
The accusations stem from a reported violation of the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR), which governs the export of defense weaponry. In 2006, Ames adapted specialized rocket engines -- originally developed for the Pentagon missile defense “Kinetic Kill Vehicle” program -- for a moon lander prototype that ultimately became NASA’s Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE). The robotic moon orbiter is set to launch on Aug. 12, 2013.
Information on guidance and terrain-mapping systems from the Tomahawk cruise missile and a radar from the F-35 were also shared, according to one report in Aviation Week.
"When I mentioned the tech that was compromised to the Armed Services Committee, their jaws just dropped," a congressional source told FoxNews.com.
The sources allege that Ames Center Director Simon P. “Pete” Worden and Will Marshall, a British citizen, shared that moon lander project - and the missile defense technology – with individuals from foreign countries including China, South Korea and Saudi Arabia.
“Will Marshall in particular had demonstrated far too great an interest in locating U.S. spy satellites, giving interviews to Chinese and American newspapers on curtailing U.S. space security,” reads a document that was purportedly given to the FBI. Marshall could not be reached for comment by FoxNews.com.
The document claims foreign nationals, under the direction of Worden, were since 2006 brought in to work on space flight projects, without the proper export control licenses. Further, the document claims they were planning to share technology with the Chinese and other countries through the International Space University.
The document also charges the Department of Homeland Security “intercepted” Marshall at the San Francisco airport, and “confiscated” his NASA-issued computer, suggesting it contained sensitive information.
“Foreign nationals had access to technology and even brought foreign visitors in to see it. Three left the country and talked about the technology,” congressional sources told FoxNews.com. “The case was referred to the U.S. attorney – it’s a clear violation of ITAR.”
A NASA engineer was subpoenaed to testify before a secret grand jury in February 2011 in San Jose, according to the documents. But the attorney assigned to the case – Gary Fry -- was removed at the last minute, before the case was transferred to another office within Haag’s district. Fry still works out of the San Jose office.
NASA headquarters deferred questions to the Department of Justice. The Justice Department headquarters also declined to comment to FoxNews.com.
But Worden told FoxNews.com the accusations are “rubbish.”
“I take very seriously our responsibility to safeguard sensitive information. I say this unambiguously — I have not, would not, and could not impede a law enforcement investigation. To the best of my knowledge I am not the subject of a current investigation,” he said in a statement.
On Feb. 8, Reps. Wolf and Smith sent letters to the Justice Department inspector general and the director of the FBI regarding the allegedly illegal movement of this crucial technology. Wolf chairs the House Appropriations Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies subcommittee. Smith heads the House Science, Space and Technology Committee.
The letters allege the FBI had uncovered the ITAR violations, and the U.S. attorney was prepared to issue indictments. But it says the case has been stalled for more than a year, agents in the case were reassigned, and the statute of limitations on the violations is already beginning to expire.
“It is our understanding that this illegal technology transfer may have involved classified Defense Department weapons system technology to foreign countries, including China, potentially with the tacit or direct approval of the center’s leadership,” the letters read.
Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, also wrote to NASA as early as April 2012 asking about allegations that Worden “allowed foreign nationals” to access Ames – along with “NASA secrets and cutting edge technology” in violation of ITAR.
There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what…These are people who pay no income tax.
I was going to respond to each of these alleged “gaffes” one by one, but then I got to thinking what gaffes?
Both statements are true and self evident. So, go Mitt!
Every one knows the Palestinians don’t want peace. Duh.
Oh, sure, they want “peace” …. if by peace you mean the “one state solution” which is just a sophisticated way of saying the utter destruction of a Jewish state in the Middle East.
There are two types of people who think Mitt got this wrong:
1) Those in utter denial of reality 2) Antisemites
There is a third camp here that is angry over Mitt’s statement. This camp doesn’t think Mitt got it wrong, which is why I didn’t include them in the above. Instead, this group thinks Mitt is exactly right, but think that it is not in America’s best interest to say this out loud.
Personally, I’m not in that camp. I don’t mind our future President being honest about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Lying to ourselves about the Palestinians has gotten us nowhere. We tried that strategy for the past 20 years, and it has failed. When a strategy fails, it’s time to change it and try something else.
Let’s give the truth a chance.
As to the second point, Mitt is right on again. Great going. More please!
Obama’s electoral strategy has always been to divide Americans into discreet interests with each interest being dependent on government largess.
Obama goes after the farm vote by promising farmers more subsidies. He goes after blue collar workers by (finally) taking on China’s manufacturing subsidies and currency manipulation. He goes after the poor by expanding WIC, welfare, and medicare. He goes after the lower middle class by extending tax breaks that only apply to them.
Any one who thinks that Obama’s strategy isn’t exactly how Mitt described it is in utter denial of the truth.
Which is why the media thinks this is a big deal. It isn’t.
They only think it’s a big deal because they are Obama partisans and liberals who think that votes ought to be bought by government largess.
The real scandal here is the media coverage. I get that Mother Jones thinks this is a scandal. Mother Jones is so far to the Left that they think Barack Obama is a mainstream conservative.
But for CNN or any other network of publication to claim non-partisanship to think this is a big deal? Sometimes the partisanship is subtle, but this time not so much.
Hat tip: Hot Air, where Ed seems to be in total agreement.
The conventions are done. It’s go time. This is the most important Presidential election in our lifetime. One path leads to Atlas Shrugs (sort of). The other? It leads to real hope. Real change. We have two months. Let’s do this!
“And when somebody does not do the job, we got to let them go!” - Clint Eastwood
“Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, who first began the Fast and Furious investigation, said the assertion by the White House of executive privilege raises “monumental questions.”
“How can the president assert executive privilege if there was no White House involvement? How can the president exert executive privilege over documents he’s supposedly never seen? Is something very big being hidden to go to this extreme? The contempt citation is an important procedural mechanism in our system of checks and balances,” he said.”
By now, you probably know that President Barack Obama invoked executive privilege to stall Congress’ attempt to get Attorney General Eric Holder to fork over documents in the Fast and Furious Scandal.
You probably also know, by now, that Obama explicitly spoke out against executive privilege before he was president, saying “the American people need to know what’s going on,” in yet another classic “do as I say, not as I do” moment brought to you by the first dictator in the history of the United States.
But did you know the president has to be involved in a situation in order to invoke executive privilege?
Under those precedents, the privilege, which is constitutionally rooted, could be invoked by the President when asked to produce documents or other materials or information that reflect presidential decision making and deliberations that he believes should remain confidential.
Note the emphasized language, and the grammar of the sentence that leaves no doubt that the president MUST be involved in whatever issue for which he invokes executive privilege: “when asked to produce documents or other materials or information that reflect PRESIDENTIAL DECISIONMAKING AND DELIBERATIONS.
You won’t hear this from the lapdog media. But, hey, I’m just a blogger.
So, what we have here, then, is the president not only protecting Holder, he’s also protecting himself.
Meanwhile, over at Think Regress (see comments), the left is rejoicing about the president’s actions, once again, as leftists do, defending the indefensible.
I wonder how the president’s new 800,000 voters feel about him covering up information about the murder of Mexicans.
UPDATE II: Breitbart is saying this is deliberative process privilege, rooted in common law not the Constitution, and therefore Obama didn’t invoke EP to protect himself.
This is what we, in the data analysis community call “contrary facts.” In other words, one datum (“we knew nothing”) contradicts the other (“we will not reveal what we knew”).
Expect the Media Myth Generators to offer a package of “reasons” explaining how you can deny knowing and yet still claim “privilege” to protect the “nothing” that you know.
Head them off at the pass. Call them on it.
They.
Are.
Lying.
To us.
Never mind lying to Congress. They are lying to the entire population.
“Lying to America” may not be a crime on the books, but I reckon it’s a crime nonetheless.
A quick update from a longtime D.C. political operative who indicated two years ago the Obama administration was facing a serious political crisis rooted within the Department of Justice. With a contempt vote now looming over Obama Attorney General Eric Holder, and Barack Obama’s use of Executive Privilege in refusing to comply with Congressional requests for related Fast and Furious documents, – that political crisis foretold to readers of the UlstermanReport has now arrived in full.
I’m watching the news reports same as you. Made a number of calls back to my people in D.C. Getting many different versions of things but they all share the same thing and that is a real sense of urgency and shock at a couple of things. One is the use of Executive Privilege by the Obama White House. That makes a direct tie to the administration now. The perception of that is now the reality of it. Obama owns Fast and Furious. He can’t walk that back. It’s his. He is telling Congress he won’t hand over docs. The line in the sand was placed there by the president himself. That alone has people really scrambling now to figure out how deep this thing could go. Will it hurt the re-election. Will there be blowback against the party. Basically all the things I told you were concerns before have now become concerns. And some of them I told myself months and well over a year ago to prepare. Some listened. Some didn’t. Poor bastards who didn’t.
Second, something just now breaking out is Holder walked back a Blame Bush statement he gave to Congress just last week. Fast and Furious was nothing like anything the Bush boys did. Bush era program was much smaller and had the full cooperation of the Mexican authorities. Holder lied when he attempted to link the two and now he is already trying to correct that testimony from one week ago. This kind of sloppy mistake is a clear sign he’s in big trouble and really feeling the heat. It’s also a signal to party leaders and the White House he is falling apart on this.
Obama is saying to Congress “come and get me if you dare”. Now we gotta see if Republicans dare. It’s an election year so the White House is banking on enough Republicans in the leadership to not want to look like they are beating up too bad on Obama. They fear the race card. Part of me says they are a bunch of spineless pukes for that fear and the political operative in me understands the concern. The White House is more than willing to push that race issue much farther than we have seen already. You know what I’m talking about there.
So now we wait to see what the Republicans do. Contempt vote? How hard are they gonna fight the Executive Privilege order? Are they willing to make this a presidential election year issue? Word back to me is some are. Some don’t even care about the politics of it. They are pissed and disgusted by what this administration and Eric Holder have done. It’s a fight of principle vs politics within the Republican Party right now.
Lastly I want to give a nod to the Old Man. This entire Fast and Furious thing was a slow drip not so long ago. He made a push on some folks who in turn had a few meetings on the Hill and got this thing going again. At least he was a big help in that. Not sure if you know but there’s been another health setback for him and we probably won’t hear from them for a bit. I’ll update you on that situation as soon as I know anything more. It’s not hopeless but it’s not good. Say some prayers for him. He really wants to make it to the next inauguration.
I’m on the road but like I said, am keeping contact back in D.C. If there is anything new on FnF will clue you in when I can.
-WHI
Secondly, something just now breaking out is Holder walked back a Blame Bush statement he gave to Congress just last week. Fast and Furious was nothing like anything the Bush boys did. Bush era program was much smaller and had the full cooperation of the Mexican authorities. Holder lied when he attempted to link the two and now he is already trying to correct that testimony from one week ago. This kind of sloppy mistake is a clear sign he’s in big trouble and really feeling the heat. It’s also a signal to party leaders and the White House he is falling apart on this.
Received in-house word regarding “scrambling” at the White House. Something has them very spooked. I hinted at this to you last week regarding the meeting that had staff coming out looking very concerned. The Grassley message had to have shook them up. Told Issa has been repeating comparisons to Watergate to staff and fellow House members. White House must be aware Issa and Co. might have something that could inflict a hell of a lot of damage.
Dem leadership sent out signals to staff to prepare for necessary insulation from the White House to limit damage to individual campaigns. Black Caucus member engaged in a 10 minute “explosive” rant against someone from Issa’s office following a recess. Some Dems getting openly fearful and aggressive. Chaffetz had “face to face” with one of them. He is proving very willing to aggressively engage the opposition at any time.
This is far from won but recent events are proving to be damn favorable to those of us who want to defeat the president.
Don’t get over confident though. This administration is gonna fight this hard.
I’ve been called back. That indicates this has become real important real fast to a lot of real important people.
20 June 2012: It is interesting that it was exactly forty years ago this week that five “burglars” were caught inside the Watergate complex, setting off one of the most notorious presidential scandals in U.S. history. The events of June 17, 1972 resulted in the resignation of U.S. President Richard Nixon just over two years later. During that two years, the press was aggressive in its coverage and investigation, while the White House denied any involvement with, connection to, or knowledge of the incident.
During the two years following the arrests of the men caught inside the Watergate complex and until the White House could no longer suppress evidence behind the claims of “executive privilege,” the press and congressional investigators were relentless in determining “what Nixon knew and when he knew it.” How times have changed.
Not very fast, and no fury
Unless you’ve been trapped in a cave or your television has been stuck on MSNBC, chances are good that you are aware of a growing scandal known as Operation Fast & Furious. Chances are equally good that you don’t know all of the intricate details of Fast & Furious, as it has been the practice of this administration and many in leadership positions to confuse the public, convolute the facts, and downplay the murderous scandal that leads directly to the highest levels of this administration.For example, Chris Matthews of MSNBC has stated that anyone wanting Operation Fast & Furious investigated is “another strain of the crazy far right.” Rachel Maddow, however, believes that the coverage of Fast & Furious is “the insane paranoid message from the NRA.” Jon Stewart of The Daily Show is even less articulate, calling any investigation into Fast & Furious “f***ing crazy.” (As noted by Katie Pavlich, author of “Fast & Furious, Barack Obama’s Bloodiest Scandal and it’s Shameless Cover-Up”).
Meanwhile and unlike the Watergate era, all but a few in power and the media have been proactive in their quest for answers, except for Washington based CBS News investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson. Add the disinformation deliberately published on the internet, one is likely to be left confused, uncertain of those involved and the timelines, and the actual components of this mother of all scandals.
Background: “Project Gunrunner”
Operation Fast & Furious is the name of an aggressive anti-gun initiative launched and conducted by the United States Department of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, an agency under the oversight of the U.S. Department of Justice. It officially began in early 2009 as an extension of a program known as Project Gunrunner, an operation that was started under the Bush administration in 2005 as part of the Southwest Border Initiative (SBI). The pilot program for Project Gunrunner began in Laredo, Texas. The objectives were to conduct surveillance, identify and stop the flow of weapons and ammunition from the U.S. illegally entering Mexico and eventually making their way to the drug cartels.
In April of 2006, the program was expanded to a national level as a weapons interdiction program under the BATFE, formerly known as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF). Project Gunrunner also involved the use of an Internet based weapon tracking system known as eTrace, a program that would permit participating law enforcement agencies to track the origin of confiscated or questionable guns, through their serial numbers, to their point of origin.
On April 10, 2008, former Attorney General Michael Mukasey briefed the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations on the status of the project. At that time, Mukasey stated that the “ATF has approximately 148 special agents…and 56 industry operation investigators (IOI) responsible for conducting regulatory inspections.” Mukasey also stated that the ATF “is also expanding its presence at the El Paso Intelligence Center (EPIC) which serves as the central repository and “clearinghouse” for all weapons related intelligence collected and developed by ATF’s field personnel and attaches in Mexico as well as by all other Federal, State and local law enforcement entities involved in narcotics interdiction and investigation along the U.S./Mexico border.”
At the end of the Bush administration, Project Gunrunner was responsible for approximately 650 criminal cases being filed against about 1400 defendants, involving about 12,000 firearms.
It is relevant to point out here that “Project Gunwalker” is not the name of any legitimate operation, but a satirical moniker attached to Project Gunrunner.
Operation Fast & Furious
Under the Obama administration, “Operation Fast and Furious” was launched in early 2009. By extension of Project Gunrunner, the BATFE commissioned gun shops along the southern U.S. border to sell weapons to known criminal suspects. Ostensibly, this operation was for interdiction purposes, but the agents involved were directly ordered not to interdict the weapons. What resulted was a mass amount of weapons that actually and genuinely originated in the U.S., with the knowledge and approval of the BATFE, being permitted to “walk” unmolested across the southern border (hence the satirical name “gunwalker”).
From early 2009 through December 2010, this process was repeated over and over in the southern U.S. despite the objections of numerous BATFE agents and gun shop owners. During this time, several agents began to notify congress and became “whistleblowers” about the stand-down orders.
Late on the night of December 14, 2010, the inevitable happened. U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was gunned down in Rio Rico, Arizona by an AK-47 that was “walked” across the U.S. Mexican border with the knowledge and allowance of the BATFE. Two weapons that were allowed to “walk” across the border were found at the murder scene.
The guns found at the scene were traced to a purchase made on January 16, 2010 from a U.S. gun shop with the full knowledge and authority of the U.S. government by a Mexican national identified as Jaime Avila. On January 16, 2010, Jaime Avila bought 52 firearms, and paid for the guns in cash. ATF agents watched, but were ordered not to stop Avila from making the purchase or crossing back into Mexico.
In addition to Agent Terry, Immigration Customs Enforcement Agent Jaime Zapata, 32, was also killed by a weapon allowed to “walk” into Mexico. Agent Zapata and his partner, Victor Availa, were driving a government SUV with diplomatic plates on a Mexico highway, returning from a meeting at the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City when they were ambushed. Agent Availa was badly injured but survived. It should be noted that neither agent was armed, as Mexican law prohibits U.S. agents from carrying weapons in Mexico.
With the tragic death of agents Terry and Zapata, questions began to be raised about Operation Fast & Furious, but it was evident that no one from the Obama administration wanted to talk. Attorney General Eric Holder, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, and Barack Hussein Obama claimed that they had absolutely no knowledge of Operation Fast & Furious or that any weapons were being permitted to be sold and “released.”
Fatalities increase
If the goal of Operation Fast & Furious was to interdict weapons and stop the cross border violence, and that objective is certainly in question, it was a dismal failure from the beginning. In December 2009, there were 849 people murdered. Every month thereafter, the numbers grew: 937 in January, 2010; 988 in February, 2010, and 1200 in March of that year. In total, 15,273 people were murdered in drug cartel related activity.
Despite this obvious increase in fatalities, no one from our government put a halt to the gun shipments to Mexico. Why?
The real objective behind Fast & Furious?
After taking office, Barack Hussein Obama began a coordinated effort with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to control the purchases and ownership of guns in the United States. To justify the implementation of tougher gun control laws and in a direct assault on the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, this administration cited a statement made to Congress by William Hoover, Assistant Director for Field Operations for the BATFE on February 7, 2008. According to that report, 90 percent of the weapons used by the Mexican drug cartels were purchased from or originated in the U.S.
That stunning revelation empowered the Obama administration to solicit public support for banning so-called assault weapons in the U.S., and calling for tougher gun control laws. The problem, however, is that the statement is disingenuous at best.
First and perhaps most transparent, it has been noted that only 1 in 5 guns that have been recovered in Mexico actually underwent any form of tracing, leaving 80% untraced. Accordingly, the 90 percent figure is already factually inaccurate.
In 2009, 21,313 guns were recovered in Mexico and submitted for tracing. Less than a quarter of those guns were found to have originated in the U.S.
Secondly and perhaps the most scandalous of all is that all figures of cited by this administration pertaining to weapons tracing include weapons sold to the Mexican military via U.S. arms-trading policies under programs such as Direct Commercial Sales (DCS) initiatives.The fact is that the bulk of the arms used by the Mexican drug cartels did not – and do not originate from gun shop sales in the U.S.,but from U.S. government sponsored programs that sell weapons and ammunition to the Mexican military as well as other third-world nations. This process was accelerated under Obama.
Many of the weapons used in Mexico and counted in border violence statistics actually arrived in that area from Central American countries involved in U.S. government sanctioned programs administered by the Pentagon and with the knowledge and imprimatur of the U.S. State Department.
Interestingly, confirmation of the government’s programs and knowledge by government officials, particularly Hillary Clinton was made public by the release of State Department cables published by Wikileaks. The cables prove that the U.S. State Department and Hillary Clinton knew the origins of the bulk of the weapons used by the Mexican drug cartels, although kept this information secret for the greater agenda of U.S. gun control.
Meanwhile, it appears that the Obama administration with the full cooperation of Eric Holder, used various weapons tracking programs already implemented to inflate the statistics involving guns originating in the U.S. to advance even tougher gun control measures.
Research and investigation indicates that a series of programs implemented under the umbrella of a government sanctioned program known “Project Gunrunner” were purposely exploited with the knowledge and consent of government officials at the highest of levels.
According to several agents who have provided testimony, each operation where weapons were allowed to “walk” into Mexico from the U.S. was approved at the highest levels of the United States Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of State. Some believe that operations of this magnitude could not have been possible without the knowledge and approval of Obama himself.
Forty years after the biggest scandal to rock the nation, it is again time to ask the question to Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama under oath and in front of congress: What did you know and when did you know it?
), which governs the export of defense weaponry. In 2006, Ames adapted specialized rocket engines -- originally developed for the Pentagon missile defense “Kinetic Kill Vehicle” program -- for a moon lander prototype that ultimately became NASA’s Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer (