Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. (Credit: AP)

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) on Wednesday made it crystal clear that he is not in Washington, D.C. to play ball with politicians in either party, especially when it comes to the nation’s out of control debt. In fact, he revealed that he doesn’t trust Republicans or Democrats to do the right thing.

Cruz objects to starting House-Senate budget negations unless Democrats take a debt limit increase off the table. He reiterated his stance on Wednesday, saying he is not willing to put blind trust in his own party.

“The senior senator from Arizona (John McCain) urged this body to trust the Republicans. Let me be clear, I don’t trust the Republicans,” Cruz said on the Senate floor. “And I don’t trust the Democrats.”

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), with the support of Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) on Tuesday ripped some of his fellow Republicans for blocking the budget negotiations.

“Unfortunately,” Cruz continued, “one of the reasons we got into this mess is because a lot of Republicans were complicit in this spending spree. And that’s why so many Americans are disgusted with both sides of this house. Because we need leaders on both sides…to roll up our sleeves, to compromise, to work together and fix the problem, fix the enormous fiscal and economic problems. Stop bankrupting our country.”

“And every Republican who stands against holding the line here is really saying, let’s give the Democrats a blank check to borrow any money they want with no reforms, no leadership to fix the problem,” he added.

(H/T: TPM)

Featured image via Getty

Follow Jason Howerton on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Getty Images.

The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday voted 241-175 to approve a bill that would bypass the president and speed the approval of the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada to Texas.

Democrats criticized the legislation as a blatant attempt to allow a foreign company to avoid environmental review. Republicans said the measure was needed to ensure that the long-delayed pipeline, first proposed in 2008, is built.

“This is the most studied pipeline in the history of mankind,” said Rep. Lee Terry, R-Neb., the bill’s sponsor.

“When is enough enough?” added Rep. Jeff Denham, R-Calif. “Five years? Six years? Ten years?”

But Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., called the bill a “reckless attempt to avoid environmental review.” The bill would deem the project approved without a presidential permit, as required under current law, and with no further environmental review. The legislation also would limit legal challenges to the project.

The White House says President Barack Obama opposes the bill because it would “circumvent longstanding and proven processes” by removing the requirement for a presidential permit.

The $7 billion pipeline, proposed by Calgary-based TransCanada, would carry oil extracted from tar sands in western Canada to refineries along the Texas Gulf Coast. The 1,700-mile pipeline would travel though Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma on its way to refineries in Houston and Port Arthur, Texas.

Supporters say the pipeline would create thousands of jobs, help lower fuel prices, and bolster North American energy resources.

Opponents call the project a “carbon bomb” that would carry “dirty oil” that could trigger global warming. They also worry about a spill. Converting tar sands into oil can uses as much as 15 percent more energy than conventional oil production.

Obama has twice thwarted the pipeline project amid concerns about a proposed route through environmentally sensitive land in Nebraska. The bill approved by the House would apply to an 875-mile portion of the pipeline from Canada to Nebraska.

The State Department, which has completed more than 15,000 pages of environmental review on the proposed pipeline over the years, said in a draft report this spring that the project was unlikely to cause significant environmental impact to most resources along the planned route. The report also said other options to move the oil from Canada to Gulf Coast refineries, such as trucks or rail cars, would be far worse for climate change.

The State Department expects to issue a final report this summer. The department has authority over the pipeline because it crosses a U.S. border.

This latest attempt to speed the pipeline marks at least the fourth time the House has tried to do so.

Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., defended the House actions, even though the Keystone bill is unlikely to be taken up by the Democratic-controlled Senate.

“There may be a few of my colleagues who are tired of Keystone bills, but the American people are also tired – tired of $3.70 a gallon gasoline, tired of unemployment above 7 percent, and tired of four years of delays that continue to block this critical jobs and energy project,” Upton said.

Here’s a complete breakdown of the vote (Rep. Justin Amash voted “present”?):

We reached out to Rep. Amash’s office for comment on his vote.

“He supports the construction of the pipeline but he opposes singling out a particular company or individual in a bill,” a spokesman told TheBlaze in a statement.

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

But unlike yesterday’s Senate hearing on the same topic, Wednesday’s House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing was packed with explosive and enlightening exchanges between U.S. lawmakers and the government officials directly involved in the IRS scandal.

So without any further introduction, here are the seven most riveting moments from Wednesday’s hearing on the IRS scandal [in no particular order]:

7. I Did Nothing Wrong

Lois Lerner. (AP)

Lois Lerner, the IRS official who first acknowledged the scandal two weeks ago while responding to a planted question from Washington-based tax lawyer, announced this week that she would invoke her Fifth Amendment right to remain silent.

She appeared before the House committee on Wednesday determined to defend herself while refusing to answer questions.

“I have done nothing wrong,” she said in her opening statement. “I have not broken any laws. I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations and I have not provided false information to this or any other committee.”

Lerner then repeated that she would invoke her right to avoid incriminating herself.

“One of the basic functions of the Fifth Amendment is to protect innocent individuals, and that is the protection I am invoking today,” she said.

However, her opening statement, coupled with her refusal to talk, did not go over so well with certain members of the committee.

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) demanded that Lerner testify, adding that she waived her constitutional privilege by delivering her defensive opening statement.

“You don’t get to tell your side of the story and not be subjected to cross-examination. That’s not the way it works. She waived her right to Fifth Amendment privilege by issuing an opening statement, she ought to stand here and answer our questions,” Gowdy said, earning applause from the audience.

Despite Rep. Gowdy’s objections, Lerner refused to answer questions from committee chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and was eventually excused from the hearing.

As of this writing, there is still some discussion about whether the IRS official waived her rights by delivering an opening statement and whether Rep. Issa can make her talk.

It’s unclear whether that argument will stick.

6. Bipartisan Agreement: This Scandal Stinks

Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) (AP)

Though he generally disagrees with his Republican colleagues, Rep. Elijah Cummings joined with his GOP counterparts on Wednesday in reprimanding former IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman for his dereliction of duty.

And he pulled no punches:

5. There Will be Hell to Pay

Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) (AP)

Speaking of criticism from the left, here’s Democrat Congressman Stephen Lynch promising Doug Shulman that “there will be hell to pay” if IRS officials can’t truthfully answer questions regarding the agency’s targeting of conservative groups:

And here’s a clip of Rep. Lynch raking Shulman over the coals for saying in 2012 that there was “absolutely no” targeting of conservative groups by the IRS:

Ouch.

4. The IRS Held May 2012 Internal Probe from U.S Lawmakers

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) (AP)

The IRS performed an internal investigation of its targeting practices one year before the Treasury Department Inspector General report was completed, according to Rep. Darrell Issa.

The agency hid its findings from Congress.

“Just yesterday the committee interviewed Holly Paz, the director of exempt organizations, rulings and agreements, division of the IRS,” Congressman Issa said.

“While a tremendous amount of attention is centered about the Inspector General’s report, or investigation, the committee has learned from Ms. Paz that she in fact participated in an IRS internal investigation that concluded in May of 2012 – May 3 of 2012 – and found essentially the same thing that Mr. George found more than a year later,” he added.

So, yes, the IRS knew of the political targeting in May – but agency official apparently didn’t think it was worth mentioning to Congress.

“Think about it,’ he added. “For more than a year, the IRS knew that it had inappropriately targeted groups of Americans based on their political beliefs, and without mentioning it, and in fact without honestly answering questions that were the result of this internal investigation.”

3. Trey Gowdy Goes Scorched Earth

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) (AP)

South Carolina Congressman Trey Gowdy wasn’t interested in listening to a former IRS official mince his words — so he went right for the throat.

“Why was the culture such under your watch that an employee felt comfortable targeting conservative groups?” Gowdy asked. “Did you investigate that?”

“From my reading of the report, um, I can’t tell if it was political motivation or if it was tone-deaf, somebody trying to expedite a way –” Shulman started.

“You still don’t know that this was political?”

“Excuse me?”

“You still don’t know that this was political?”

“I defer to the inspector general.”

“Well, I’ll tell you this, Mister Shulman, your predecessor said that he wasn’t sure if it was partisan and that requires the listener to be as stupid as the speaker.”

2. Oh, Really? You Don’t Accept Responsibility?

Former IRS Chief Dough Shulman. (AP)

Shulman said Tuesday that he is not responsible for the IRS’ targeting of conservative groups.

“I certainly am not personally responsible for creating a list that had inappropriate criteria on it,” Shulman told Texas Senator John Cornyn. “What I know, with the full facts that are out is – from the Inspector General’s report – which doesn’t say that I’m responsible for that.”

Shulman on Wednesday repeated the claim, arguing that he shouldn’t have to bear the burden of responsibility even if he was IRS chief at the time of the targeting.

Illinois Congresswoman Tammy Duckworth, a U.S. Army veteran who lost both her legs in Iraq, was not impressed with Shulman’s dodging and decided to give it to him with both barrels:

1. Easter Egg Roll?

Courtesy @JohnEkdahl

Between 2010 and 2011 (i.e. during the height of the IRS’ political targeting), Shulman visited the White House 118 times.

And when he was asked why he visited the White House 118 times, the former IRS chief paused for a moment and responded by citing the annual Easter Egg Roll:

Unsurprisingly, Shulman couldn’t say whether he discussed the IRS’ targeting of conservatives or the implementation of Obamacare during those 100+ visits.

But he does remember the Easter Egg Roll.

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image Getty Images.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

But let’s step back for a moment and explain what this means. For an analysis of this milestone, we turn to Zero Hedge.

The bulk of Fed reserves (i.e. cash) have been “parked not with US banks, but with foreign banks with US-based operations,” the Hedge reports.

But how is this possible? How have foreign banks in the U.S. bulked up their cash reserves?

The Fed has been “providing a constant cash injection to foreign banks courtesy of the rate on overnight reserves which is the amount Fed pays to banks that hold reserves with it,” the report notes.

In short, foreign banks operating in the U.S. have been collecting interest.

In fact, the Fed’s policies “have led to foreign banks operating in the US holding an all time high amount of reserves, surpassing $1 trillion for the first time, or $1,033 billion to be precise,” the report adds.

So what does this mean?

It means that “the only recipient of ongoing Fed money printing are not US banks, but foreign banks operating in the US,” Zero Hedge notes.

And to help visualize what this means, here’s a chart illustrating cash held by U.S. and foreign banks along with the amount of total reserves created by the Fed since the beginning of the 2008 financial meltdown:

Courtesy ZH.

“And just to prove that ALL the unsterilized cash from both QE2 and QEternity has essentially gone to support offshore banks, here is the conclusive chart showing the change in Fed reserves and cash held by foreign banks:

Courtesy ZH.

And here’s a chart that shows the difference between cash in U.S. banks versus cash in foreign banks operating in the U.S.

Courtesy ZH.

“At $1.03 trillion in foreign cash, the Fed’s policies have once again led to more cash being held by foreign banks than all cash held by domestic banks,” Zero Hedge notes.

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

U.S. President Barack Obama visits visits the Center for Urban Families on May 17, 2013 in Baltimore, Maryland. (Photo: Getty Images)

The Obama administration has been under heavy scrutiny in recent weeks over a number of troubling scandals.  The controversies surrounding Benghazi, the IRS targeting conservatives, and the U.S. Department of Justice spying on and secretly seizing the phone records of AP and Fox News reporters (that we know of so far) have all drawn concentrated attention by Congress, the American people, and the press.

Perhaps because the issue hits closest to home, though, many in the press seem most concerned about the actions of the DOJ.

On Tuesday, both the New York Times editorial board and Dana Milbank at the Washington Post penned scathing opinion pieces about the Obama administration limiting press freedom, while highlighting the ramifications.

The New York Times editorial board wrote:

With the decision to label a Fox News television reporter [James Rosen] a possible “co-conspirator” in a criminal investigation of a news leak, the Obama administration has moved beyond protecting government secrets to threatening fundamental freedoms of the press to gather news.

The Washington Post article was much more scathing:

To treat a reporter as a criminal for doing his job — seeking out information the government doesn’t want made public — deprives Americans of the First Amendment freedom on which all other constitutional rights are based. Guns? Privacy? Due process? Equal protection? If you can’t speak out, you can’t defend those rights, either.

Beyond that, the administration’s actions shatter the president’s credibility and discourage allies who would otherwise defend the administration against bogus accusations such as those involving the Benghazi “talking points.” If the administration is spying on reporters and accusing them of criminality just for asking questions — well, who knows what else this crowd is capable of doing?

[...]

If Obama really is “a fierce defender of the First Amendment,” as his spokesman would have it, he will move quickly to fix this. Otherwise, Obama is establishing an ominous precedent for future leaders whose fondness for the First Amendment may not be so fierce.  [Emphasis added]

Milbank also notes that President Obama’s administration has prosecuted more people accused of leaking information than all previous administrations combined.

But The Hill’s Jeff Bachman takes it all a step further, adding that there is a monstrous double standard regarding leaking information to the press:

The New York Times and The Washington Post are propagating a false narrative, one that depicts Obama as some sort of crusader hell bent on plugging all leaks. The reality is the Obama administration has either authorized or acquiesced to the leak of information that is deemed politically beneficial, while relentlessly investigating and prosecuting those who reveal information that reflects poorly on his administration and the U.S. government.

[...]

The Obama administration has sent a clear message. Government officials and journalists who wish to work together to create news stories through the leak of classified information that portray the president and his administration in a positive light should have no fear. And to the journalists and whistle-blowers thinking about publishing that other kind of classified information, be prepared to have your emails read, your phones tapped without your knowledge and your life and career turned upside down.  [Emphasis added]

Related:

• Beck Ties Together Benghazi, IRS, & AP Scandals: ‘Fundamental Transformation’
• Wait, Did the Inspector General Who Audited the IRS ‘Date’ Michelle Obama?
• Vote: How will Obama’s scandals impact the GOP?

Follow Erica Ritz on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

(Image: AP)

Paul Ryan is working on his first major book to mix “autobiography, political analysis and policy prescriptions.”

So far, Ryan has been doing the writing by himself. The early theme of the draft is a broad discussion of American renewal, with an emphasis on the Republican future and the party’s need to articulate what he calls the “American idea.”

Behind the scenes, Ryan is worried that the GOP is losing its connection with working Americans, and he has been writing about how the party needs to speak more to those in poverty about empowerment and economic freedom. His recent speeches at the American Enterprise Institute’s Kristol dinner and at Benedictine College have touched on this issue, and Ryan is eager to broaden the argument into chapter form.

On a personal level, the book will highlight his childhood in Janesville, Wis., his time as an aide to Jack Kemp, and his rise through the congressional ranks. Kemp, especially, will have a special place in the book, and in many ways, Ryan’s effort will likely echo Kemp’s book, An American Renaissance: A Strategy for the 1980s.

The Romney-Ryan campaign will also be part of the book, but there will only be kind words and appreciation for Mitt Romney, who put Ryan on the GOP ticket. They remain close and Ryan has assured his friends that he won’t write a tell-all memoir.

Follow Meredith Jessup on Twitter

Follow Meredith Jessup on Facebook

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

“I feel same [regarding] NYC mayoral candidate Weiner as I did President Clinton,” Rivera, ow a Fox News anchor, tweeted Wednesday. “If their wives are cool with their funky stuff, so I am. Won’t be boring.”

Neither Hillary Clinton nor Huma Abedin, Weiner’s wife, have ever publicly stated they’re “cool” with their husband’s “funky junk,” or any variation thereof. It is true, though, that they both declined to pursue a divorce after their husbands proclivities made it into the news.

Former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer (D) didn’t receive the same support from Rivera in his own sexual transgressions. “[H]e talked about morality, that’s the problem,” Rivera said in 2008. “It’s another horny hypocrite.”

@eScarry

Follow Eddie Scarry on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

“If there’s inappropriate conduct being done on your watch in the IRS,” Rep. Gowdy said, “then that inappropriate conduct can last as long as the inspector general’s investigation lasts.”

The congressman’s remarks were in response to former IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman saying he didn’t stop the agency’s political targeting of conservative groups because the IG was looking into it.

“Is that what you’re telling me?” Gowdy continued. “You’re not going to step in and stop it? If there’s someone wielding a knife in the parking lot, are you going to call the inspector general? Are you going to wait until his or her investigation is over until stop it?”

There was a long pause after that question.

“Did you do anything to verify that the practice — as insidious as it was — was stopped?” the South Carolina congressman persisted, a response to Shulman saying that when he found out about the targeting he also was under the understanding that it had stopped.

“Um, the inspector general was going to be looking into it and that’s — ” Shulman started to say.

“Is it that you can’t say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ or you’re just choosing not to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’? Can you answer the question: Did you do anything personally to make sure that this insidious, discriminatory practice was stopped? Yes or no?”

Things continued to become heated between the two, Shulman hedging his responses and Gowdy demanding answers:

“Why was the culture such under your watch that an employee felt comfortable targeting conservative groups?” Gowdy continued. “Did you investigate that?”

“From my reading of the report, um, I can’t tell if it was political motivation or if it was tone-deaf, somebody trying to expedite a way –” Shulman started.

“You still don’t know that this was political?”

“Excuse me?”

“You still don’t know that this was political?”

“I defer to the inspector general.”

“Well, I’ll tell you this, Mister Shulman, your predecessor said that he wasn’t sure if it was partisan and that requires the listener to be as stupid as the speaker.”

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image Associated Press. This post has been updated.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Before voting, take a moment to consider both sides.

First, Ramesh Ponnuru lays out the argument that the scandals could hurt the GOP:

Watch the way the Republicans are handling today’s controversies and it’s easy to see how their tactics could backfire again. You would expect that Senator Lindsey Graham, who helped to lead the impeachment proceedings against Clinton, had learned to be cautious in pursuing a scandal. Yet he decided to tie the Benghazi investigation explicitly to the 2016 presidential race, saying that the controversy would doom Hillary Clinton. If Graham were a Democratic plant trying to make the investigation look like a merely partisan exercise, he couldn’t have done better. [...]

The biggest danger for Republicans in giving themselves over to scandal mania is one that the conventional retelling of the Clinton impeachment neglects. Republicans didn’t lose seats simply because they overreached on Clinton’s perjury. It is true that his impeachment was unpopular, and public approval of the Republicans sank as they pursued it. Still, only 5 percent of voters in the 1998 election told exit pollsters that the scandal had played a role in their decision, and Republicans got a majority of those voters.

The Washington Examiner‘s Philip Klein outlines 5 reasons why focus on the scandals will not hurt the GOP:

1) Clinton’s scandal involved sex

2) Clinton was more popular than Obama

3) The economy was a lot better in 1998 than it is today

4) Obamacare was not being implemented in 1998

5) Republicans have the benefit of the memory of 1998

I tend to agree with the editors of National Review who noted the Republican downfall in 1998 wasn’t so much about “overreach” when it came to Clinton’s various scandals; their mistake was assuming the American public outside the Beltway cared as much about the scandals as those inside the Beltway:

The problem was not so much that Republicans “overreached” in pursuing the impeachment of President Clinton, as the conventional wisdom has it. The Republicans that year did not really run on a promise to remove Clinton from office — or on any other agenda. Their strategy was to assume that the scandal would redound to their benefit, and that they merely had to sit back and let victory rain o’er them. It didn’t.

The current lot should not make the same mistake. Democratic scandal does not take the place of a Republican agenda. It does not reform the tax code or reduce the debt or ease regulatory burdens on small business. It cannot substitute for a strategy to replace Obamacare. By all means, Republicans should run against the president and his party — against their refusal to take the entitlement crisis seriously, against the implementation of their “train wreck” health-care law, and even against the unusually politicized executive-branch culture that contributed to the post-Benghazi cover-up. They should at the same time understand that a purely negative message, however justified, will not produce the governing majority Republicans should be aiming for in the next two elections.

Given the fact that the ongoing scandals don’t seem to be making any significant dent in the president’s overall approval rating, it’s really anyone’s guess at this point.  I never would’ve previously thought 55% of Americans could believe their president was lying to them and yet 51% still give him a solid approval rating… but that’s exactly what’s going on right now.  With an electorate so unpredictable, who knows where we’ll be a year from now?

What say you?  Vote in our poll and leave a comment with your thoughts!

Follow Meredith Jessup on Twitter

Follow Meredith Jessup on Facebook

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Left to right: Lois Lerner, the director of the exempt organizations unit at the Internal Revenue Service, and ex-IRS chiefs Steven Miller and Douglas Shulman. (Getty Images)

Despite the Obama administration’s repeated promises to get to the bottom of the Internal Revenue Service’s political targeting scandal, nothing has been done.

And it looks like nothing can be done for quite some time.

Although IRS officials have known about the targeting of conservative groups since at least 2011, not a single employee has been reprimanded. In fact, according to a spokesperson for the National Treasury Employees Union, the union for IRS employees hasn’t even been contacted to deal with certain personnel.

“Why weren’t more people fired?” Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) asked Tuesday during a hearing on the scandal.

Indeed, if employees engaged in behavior that even President Obama has characterized as “outrageous,” then why hasn’t anything been done?

POLITICO explains: “Most employees involved in the targeting program are covered by protections for federal workers that could drag out the termination process.”

In fact, according to the same report, the process for firing someone like Lois Lerner, the top IRS official who first acknowledged the agency’s inappropriate targeting of conservative groups two weeks ago, is an arduous, bureaucratic nightmare.

Here’s how the Washington-based news agency explains the process:

The incoming acting IRS Commissioner, Daniel Werfel, could try to clean house — but he’d have to be prepared for a lengthy appeals process.

Under federal rules, a fired government worker has the right to appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board. He or she can challenge the decision, argue that their actions don’t meet the threshold for termination and ask to be reinstated — especially if there was no warning of trouble in past performance reviews.

The board is set up so fired employees appealing their termination get two chances to prove they should stay. Their first stop is at the merit board’s regional level, which — for the Cincinnati-based IRS employees in question — would be in Chicago.

The initial appeals take an average of 93 days to process, said William Spencer, a spokesman for the board.

If the regional board rules against the IRS employees, they could appeal to the national Washington, D.C.-based board, which takes on average another 245 days.

The IRS employees wouldn’t collect a paycheck during the appeals process. They would get back pay only if they are ultimately reinstated.

Of course, you could always go the Raymond Maxwell route and force employees to take “administrative leave.”

“But IRS workers could always fight back if they’ve had positive performance reviews until now — and the board has been known to mitigate penalties if an employee is a first-time rule violator,” POLITICO notes.

“Making this case about conduct does make it easier, however, to skip one part of the disciplinary rules for federal workers.”

Federal rules are written in such a way that if a public employee is terrible at his job, he is given a chance to improve before being fired.

However, if it’s a “conduct case” (like the IRS scandal), the agency is not required to inform the employee that he needs to “improve.” And here’s something else to consider: an IRS commission can let go of any employee — without appeal — if said employee commits any of the “10 deadly sins” explained in the agency’s 1998 overhaul law.

“The ‘sins’ include falsifying information or destroying documents to cover up mistakes, violating a taxpayer’s constitutional rights, abusing privacy clauses to conceal information from a congressional inquiry and threatening to audit taxpayers for personal gain or benefit,” the report notes.

J. Russell George, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, at Tuesday’s hearing said IRS employees could be let go under these circumstances.

However, he added, it depends on whether it can be proven that they knowingly committed the “sins.”

And if none of the above options work, you can always hope bad employees resign.

“Outgoing acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller, for example, could have hung on if he’d really wanted to,” POLITICO notes. “Just because he was filling in for a politically appointed position doesn’t mean he can be fired by the president like political appointees typically can.”

But pressure and public outcry put Miller in a position where it became obvious that he couldn’t stay on as department interim chief. The same type of pressure could be applied to Lerner.

Click here to read the full report.

On TheBlog: Vote: How will Obama scandals impact the GOP?

———-

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image Getty Images.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

In this photo reviewed by the U.S. Department of Defense, towers overlooking a U.S. detention facility are silhouetted against a morning sunrise at Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base, Cuba, Thursday, Oct. 18, 2012. (Photo: AP)

WASHINGTON (TheBlaze/AP) — The Pentagon is asking Congress for more than $450 million to maintain and upgrade the Guantanamo Bay prison that President Barack Obama says he wants to close.

New details on the administration’s budget request emerged on Tuesday and underscored the contradiction of one branch of the government claiming it wants to close the facility, while another calculates the financial requirements to keep the installation operating.

The budget request for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1 calls for $79 million for detention operations, the same as the current year, and $20.5 million for the office of military commissions, an increase over the current amount of $12.6 million. The request also includes $40 million for a fiber optic cable and $99 million for operation and maintenance.

The Pentagon also wants $200 million for military construction to upgrade temporary facilities. That work could take eight to 10 years as the military has to transport workers to the island, rely on limited housing and fly in building material.

The facility at the U.S. naval base in Cuba currently holds 166 prisoners, and hunger strikes by 100 of them over their indefinite detention and reported prison conditions have prompted Obama to renew his effort to close Guantanamo. The president is expected to discuss the future of the facility in a speech on counterterrorism on Thursday.

This image reviewed by the US military shows the solitary recreation room in Cell Block C in the ‘Camp Five’ detention facility of the Joint Detention Group at the US Naval Station in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, January 19, 2012. (Photo: AFP/Getty Images)

“Guantanamo is not necessary to keep America safe,” the president said at a White House news conference last month. “It is expensive. It is inefficient. It hurts us in terms of our international standing. It lessens cooperation with our allies on counterterrorism efforts. It is a recruitment tool for extremists. It needs to be closed.”

Obama claimed on the campaign trail in 2008 that he would close the prison within his first year on office, signing an executive order for its closure during his first week. But both Republicans and Democrats in Congress have blocked his efforts to transfer terror suspects to the United States.

The law that Congress passed and Obama signed in March to keep the government running includes a longstanding provision that prohibits any money for the transfer of Guantanamo detainees to the United States or its territories. It also bars spending to overhaul any U.S. facility in the U.S. to house detainees.

That makes it essentially illegal for the government to transfer the men it wants to continue holding, including five who were charged before a military tribunal with orchestrating the Sept. 11 attacks.

Lawmakers have cited statistics on terror suspects striking again and argued that Obama has failed to produce a viable alternative to Guantanamo.

People dress in orange jumpsuits and black hoods as activists demand the closing of the US military’s detention facility in Guantanamo during a protest, part of the Nationwide for Guantanamo Day of Action, April 11, 2013 in New York’s Times Square. (Photo: AFP/Getty Images)

Some members of Congress counter that U.S. maximum security prisons currently hold convicted terrorists and can handle such suspects. Among those in U.S. prisons is Zacarias Moussaoui, who helped plann the Sept. 11 attacks.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., said he favors closing Guantanamo for several reasons, including the expense. Money in a time of deficits could be a factor for other lawmakers, including fiscal conservatives in Congress.

Rep. Adam Smith of Washington state, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, sent a letter to Obama on Tuesday offering his help to get the facility closed.

Until then, Smith wrote, “it will continue to symbolize an unjust attempt to avoid the rule of law and to undermine the United States’ moral standing in defending its values and protecting human rights.”

–

Related:

• NY Times Publishes First Person Acct. of Gitmo Prisoner: ‘I Would Not Wish This Cruel Punishment Upon Anyone’
• Chaos at Gitmo: Guards Use ‘Less-Than-Lethal’ Rounds to Quell Hunger Strike Violence
• Pentagon: Officials ‘Don’t Know’ if Bulgaria Bomber Was Once at Gitmo

Follow Erica Ritz on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Associated Press.

J. Russell George, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, is known today as the man who helped unearth the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of conservative groups.

But to one Virginia congressman, George is also notable for having once “dated” First Lady Michelle Obama.

No, really.

“[G]eorge has operated in these halls of power his entire career. He worked for Dole, and then in President George H.W. Bush’s White House,” writes Shane Goldmacher for National Journal.

“In between, he attended Harvard Law School, graduating in 1988 alongside a young Michelle Obama (then Michelle Robinson),” he adds.

Goldmacher continues:

They weren’t in the same section – the academic groupings that Harvard uses to divide its students – but as two young black law students, George said they traveled in some of the same social circles, including the Black Law Students Association (BLSA).

“I think he actually dated Michelle at one point,” said former Rep. Tom Davis, a Virginia Republican, who worked with George when he was staff director for a House oversight subcommittee in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

“That is overstating it,” said George. But they did socialize in group settings. “Michelle was a lovely person and down to earth,” he said. “…The BLSA went out for pizza we would go out together.”

He paused, for a beat. “Don’t get me in trouble,” George added.

Of course, this whole thing is a matter of perspective and it all depends on how you define “dating.” Even George says the claim in an overstatement.

Still, if George and the First Lady actually “went out” as the IG claims they did, and if he means “go out together” in the sense you and I usually think of, what a strange, little world we live in.

Click here to read the full National Journal report.

–

RELATED:

• Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold
• Ex-Cincinnati IRS Manager: This Was Not the Work of ‘Low-Level’ Employees
• Coulter and Hannity Decry ‘Disturbing’ Obama Admin Scandals: ‘You Can’t Do This to Any American’

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image photofunny.net

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Former President Bill Clinton and Comedy Central’s Stephen Colbert answer questions from the audience during the Clinton Global Initiative at Washington University Saturday, April 6, 2013, in St. Louis. (ASSOCIATED PRESS)

In April 2013, Stephen Colbert interviewed former President William Jefferson Clinton. It would be difficult to imagine a more flattering interview, unless scripted by Clinton’s own press people (upon reflection – perhaps it was).

For those not familiar with The Colbert Report, Stephen Colbert (masquerading as a right-wing political commentator) combines sardonic humor and detailed research, with biting political commentary, to produce excellent and informative entertainment. (Colbert’s show received 2 well-deserved Peabody awards.)

As one example, former NY Congressman Anthony Weiner has recently been in Colbert’s sights. Weiner previously resigned from Congress because of his habit of sending suggestive photos of himself to random women – certainly weird, but not illegal. Weiner (to my knowledge) has never been accused of any other wrongdoing in his professional or personal life.

However, in April 2013, in response to reports that Weiner was again considering running for office, Colbert aired the following segment entitled (I quote):

Anthony Weiner’s Comeback – After withdrawing from public life to spend more time with his penis, ex-congressman Anthony Weiner is ready to stick it back in. (http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/425351/april-10-2013/anthony-weiner-s-comeback)

Given the Clintons’ history and Colbert’s aggressive style of reporting and criticism, I expected the Clinton interview (or at least the surrounding material) to be entertaining, provocative and informative. I certainly was disappointed.

For those who’ve forgotten, here are a few highlights from a broad selection of entertaining moments during Clinton’s presidency, such as then President Clinton’s:

• Engaging in sexual acts with Monica Lewinsky while on the phone with members of Congress,
• Paying almost $1 million to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit,
• Being accused in The Wall Street Journal, The Guardian and other publications of having committed rape – Clinton’s attorney denied the charge,
• Making misleading statements under oath and consequently getting disbarred, and
• As the grand finale before leaving the presidency – and without consulting the relevant prosecutors – pardoning a convicted felon and fugitive from justice (whose family, coincidentally, made donations amounting to seven figures to both Clinton’s Library/Foundation and his wife Hillary’s Senatorial campaign).

To add to this circus, Hillary Clinton tried to explain away the fuss about Bill’s shenanigans as nothing more than an anti-Clinton “vast right wing conspiracy” which brings to mind (since both Clintons are lawyers) the old legal adage:

When the law is on your side, argue the law.

When the facts are on your side, argue the facts.

When neither the facts nor the law are on your side, make an ad hominem attack.

More recently, while Hillary Clinton was a U.S. Senator and subsequently Secretary of State – Bill Clinton received millions of dollars in consulting and speaking fees, and contributions to his Library/Foundation – arising from business dealings in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kazakhstan and other countries not ranked highly for transparency or good governance.

Clinton repeatedly informed us during the Colbert interview that he currently dedicates himself to philanthropy and saving the world.  If saving the world includes eradicating poverty in one’s own family, Bill Clinton’s truly been successful. The Clintons’ net worth at the end of Bill’s presidency was negligible; but it’s since blossomed into a net worth of around $40 million. This is particularly noteworthy when you realize that, nominally, the Clintons spent this entire period committed to public service.

I’m not a comic genius, and haven’t won any Peabody Awards, but just asking Bill Clinton about any of the above would’ve been informative and entertaining.

With the amount of great material available, and Colbert’s penchant for deflating the hypocritical and pompous, what did America’s king of satirical news raise during the Clinton interview? Colbert prodded him to join Twitter. Oh, and gave openings for Clinton to tell us what a really great guy Clinton is. I’m not exaggerating – watch the video here.

In the humorous spirit of The Colbert Report, let’s query why Clinton would be treated so gently (when Colbert’s skewered Weiner and others with far less serious transgressions):

Does Clinton have pictures of Colbert doing something really odd with a household pet? Were Colbert’s writers on vacation? Or are the Clintons simply too powerful for Colbert to “speak truth to power”?  Because if prominent satirists are now afraid to make fun of powerful politicians, our American Republic is in trouble, and it’s no laughing matter.

But Anthony Weiner, don’t give up hope.  If someday you become powerful enough – Colbert might overlook your failings too.

Follow Steven Strauss on Twitter

Follow Steven Strauss on Facebook

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

The report says ABC News already has a Washington Bureau that can house its show, thus the Newseum space is no longer needed. This Week has a separate studio in New York, as well.

As for Al Jazeera America taking This Week‘s place:

According to a source familiar with the plans of Al Jazeera America (AJAM to insiders) and its ramp-up, confirms that the news net will be building a Washington studio at the Newseum in preparation for its launch later this year.

Although a source said that Al Jazeera would have the ABC space only Monday-Friday, they added that ABC would have had to reconfigure and unconfigure it weekly to use the space for the Sunday show.

Unlike ABC, Al Jazeera will have both office space and editing facilities at the Newseum according to a source there.

The Newseum also has a separate smaller studio that it rents out. Al Jazeera has used it in the past.

@eScarry

Follow Eddie Scarry on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Internal Revenue Service Director of Exempt Organizations Lois Lerner leaves a hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee after refusing to testify on May 22, 2013 in Washington, D.C. The committee is investigating allegations that the IRS targeted conservative nonprofit organizations with “Tea Party,” “patriot” and other words in their names for additional scrutiny. Lerner, who headed the division that oversees exempt organizations, exercised her constitutional right not to answer questions. (Getty Images)

The Internal Revenue Service official at the center of the political targeting scandal invoked her constitutional right not to answer lawmakers’ questions on Wednesday, but defiantly asserted that she has done nothing wrong — prompting confusion about how exactly she was using her right not to incriminate herself.

House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) told Politico that Lois Lerner, who leads the IRS office that determines which organizations receive tax-exempt status, will be brought before his panel again.

Lerner was the first to publicly disclose earlier this month that the IRS gave extra scrutiny to conservative groups.

“I have not done anything wrong, I have not broken any laws, I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations and I have not provided false information to this or any other congressional committee,” Lerner told House Oversight and Government Reform Committee members. “While I would very much like to answer the committee’s questions today, I have been advised by my counsel to assert my constitutional right not to testify or answer questions related to the subject manner of this hearing.”

Lerner added that by asserting her right not to testify, “I know that some people will assume I have done something wrong. I have not. One of the basic functions of the Fifth Amendment is to protect innocent individuals, and that is the protection I am invoking today.”

Issa noted during the hearing that because Lerner had asserted her innocence in her opening statement, “I believe you have not asserted your rights but have effectively waived your rights” and took her refusal to answer as a refusal to testify.

An incensed Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) spoke up that Lerner should testify, agreeing that she already waived her constitutional privilege.

“You don’t get to tell your side of the story and not be subjected to cross-examination. That’s not the way it works. She waived her right to Fifth Amendment privilege by issuing an opening statement, she ought to stand here and answer our questions,” Gowdy said, earning applause from the audience.

This post has been updated.

Follow Madeleine Morgenstern on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

The 38-year IRS veteran said she was shocked when she saw headlines blaming the scandal on “rogue” employees. She added that she was equally surprised when she saw headlines tying the scandal to the Obama White House.

“Those were things that were not consistent with my knowledge of the way the organization works,” she said:

She said she does not believe a few employees in the Cincinnati office are responsible for the targeting of nearly 500 conservative groups. You may recall that when this scandal started to unfold, a congressional source told CNN “two rogue” employees were to blame for the targeting.

“The idea of two rogue employees,” Esrig said, “is inconsistent with the kinds of checks and balances that are inherent in the way the organization is set up.”

She added that, contrary to what the IRS told the inspector general, these were not “mistakes” made by “front-line career employees.”

“Front-line employees (at the Cincinnati office) do not make key decisions about policy and how work is processed,” Esrig told NBC News.  “Work is reviewed by the managers. The employees don’t operate autonomously where there is no review. The managers review.

“I think that even if an employee were to veer off in a separate direction briefly, I would be very surprised if anyone could sustain that before management became involved,” she added.

However, she was careful to add that she believes the IRS official(s) who orchestrated the targeting did so for “efficiency” purposes and “not out of any political or partisan viewpoint.”

“I don’t believe that it was in any way political,” she said, adding that in al her years with the department, she never saw partisan behavior.

Ousted IRS interim chief Steven Miller claimed last week that IRS employees looked for terms such as “tea party” and “patriot” because it was more “efficient.” Esrig said this is entirely plausible.

“I absolutely believe that cases could be grouped for reasons that had absolutely nothing to do with partisan concerns,” she said. “I don’t think that there is anything political about the grouping of cases.”

She also stated that she doesn’t believe the department was acting on outside orders.

“The way the IRS operates,” Esrig said, “over my years of experience in various roles, including working in Washington, D.C, I have never seen anything come down where the administration was directing the IRS to handle something in one way versus another way.”

Esrig “worked as an area manager in the Determinations Unit of the IRS’ Exempt Organizations department in 2011 and 2012,” NBC reports.

“Esrig worked on tax-exemption status issues in the IRS office, but for other types of organizations, such as charter schools – not on the political advocacy groups cases at the center of the controversy. She retired from the IRS in January,” the report adds.

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image screen grab.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Weiner’s campaign announcement isn’t entirely surprising — up until his lewd photos scandal and resignation in 2011, Weiner had been a career politician for nearly 20 years. But just weeks after former South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford proved that second chances are possible in politics, Weiner is launching his own campaign for forgiveness:

“Look, I’ve made some big mistakes and I know I’ve let a lot of people down,” Weiner says in a new 2-minute video announcing his bid. “But I’ve also learned some tough lessons. I’m running for mayor because I’ve been fighting for the middle class and those struggling to make it for my entire life. And I hope I get a second chance to work for you.”

I’m really curious about the “tough lessons” he’s learned from his “big mistakes”…  Did he “learn” that he shouldn’t text underwear selfies to women who aren’t his wife?  Did he “learn” that he shouldn’t lie about it?

According to Politico, Weiner’s considered an underdog at the moment.  But he’s banking on middle-class support and a large campaign war chest to move his campaign forward:

Weiner’s biggest advantage may be the $4.3 million he has in a city campaign account, money raised mostly before his resignation. He will also be eligible for $1.5 million in public matching funds if he runs for mayor.

Unfortunately for Weiner, however, he’s too much like Bill Clinton to even get Bill Clinton‘s endorsement:

Even though Anthony Weiner claims that Bill Clinton has “been a great source of support and friendship” throughout his crotch-shot scandal, the Post reports today that the Clintons will not be endorsing Weiner in his potential mayoral run. In fact, they wish he would just “disappear,” because his very existence supposedly serves as “a reminder of Bill’s scandal with Monica Lewinsky, and it isn’t helpful to Hillary’s hopes for 2016.”

Follow Meredith Jessup on Twitter

Follow Meredith Jessup on Facebook

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

And the Drudge Report:

Follow Eddie Scarry on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Well, we’ve decided to excerpt that article so you can see. Fox has said that the “2009 story was published online [and] said North Korea planned to respond to looming U.N. sanctions with another nuclear test.” And here is the relevant opening:

NK’s Post UN Sanctions Plans, Revealed

June 11, 2009

By James Rosen, Fox News State Department Correspondent

U.S. intelligence officials have warned President Obama and other senior American officials that North Korea intends to respond to the passage of a U.N. Security Council resolution this week — condemning the communist country for its recent nuclear and ballistic missile tests — with another nuclear test, FOX News has learned.

What’s more, Pyongyang’s next nuclear detonation is but one of four planned actions the Central Intelligence Agency has learned, through sources inside North Korea, that the regime of Kim Jong-Il intends to take — but not announce — once the Security Council resolution is officially passed, likely on Friday.

The other three actions include the reprocessing of all of the North’s spent plutonium fuel rods into weapons-grade plutonium; a major escalation in the North’s uranium-enrichment program; and the launching of another Taepodong-2 intercontinental ballistic missile from the Yunsong military complex on the west coast of North Korea. The North last launched a Taepodong-2 on April 5; it conducted its second nuclear test in the last three years on Memorial Day.

The intelligence community only learned of North Korea’s plans this week, prompting CIA to alert senior officials. Asked who would be briefed on this kind of data, a source told FOX News: “The top people: POTUS, DNI.” “POTUS” is acronym for the president of the United States; “DNI” refers to the director of the Office of National Intelligence.

FOX News is withholding some details about the sources and methods by which American intelligence agencies learned of the North’s plans so as to avoid compromising sensitive overseas operations in a country — North Korea — U.S. spymasters regard as one of the world’s most difficult to penetrate.

[...]

If that seems unlike a bombshell that would get a reporter in trouble with the government, you’re not alone. The Daily Beast’s Michael Tomasky is baffled:

This is a disgrace.

And even a Reuters column critical of Rosen’s techniques admits it wasn’t much of a scoop:

He appears to have uncovered no wrongdoing by the CIA in North Korea and no dramatic or scandalous change of U.S. policy that’s being concealed from the U.S. public. Boiled to its essence, the story says the U.S. has penetrated North Korean leadership.

“It doesn’t matter whether Rosen worked for Fox News or the Daily Worker,” Tomasky concludes. “This is way out of bounds.”

Follow Jonathon M. Seidl on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

It was reported Monday that Rosen had his whereabouts tracked and his phone records and emails viewed by the Department of Justice as part of a government leak investigation. Though Fox News is often on its own in terms of friends in the mainstream press, most reporters have rallied behind Rosen in the spirit of the First Amendment.

The Times‘ editorial goes on to say the Obama administration, also under fire for its DOJ secretly seizing phone records of Associates Press staffers, is showing “a heavy tilt toward secrecy and insufficient concern about a free press.”

@eScarry

Follow Eddie Scarry on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

[Reddit]

Follow Eddie Scarry on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

The ex-congressman whose career imploded in a rash of raunchy tweets two years ago said in a YouTube video announcement late Tuesday that he’s in the New York City mayoral race. He’d said last month he was considering it.

“I made some big mistakes and I know I let a lot of people down, but I also learned some tough lessons,” he said in the video. “I’m running for mayor because I’ve been fighting for the middle class and those struggling to make it my entire life. And I hope I get a second chance.”

With that, Weiner is embarking on an audacious comeback quest, hoping to go from punch line pol whose tweeted crotch shot was emblazoned on the nation’s consciousness to leader of America’s biggest city.

Anthony Weiner attends the game between the Brooklyn Nets and the Toronto Raptors on November 3, 2012 in the Brooklyn borough of New York City. The Brooklyn Nets defeated the Toronto Raptors 107-100. Credit: Getty Images

The Democrat is jumping into a crowded field for September’s primary. He’s arriving with some significant advantages, including a $4.8 million campaign war chest, the possibility of more than $1 million more in public matching money, polls showing him ahead of all but one other Democrat — and no end of name recognition.

His participation makes a runoff more likely, and many political observers feel he could at least get to the second round.

But Weiner also has continued to contend with questions about his character and the scandal that sank his career just two years ago.

After a photo of a man’s bulging, underwear-clad groin appeared on his Twitter account in 2011, he initially claimed his account had been hacked. After more photos emerged — including one of him bare-chested in his congressional office — the married congressman eventually owned up to exchanging racy messages with several women, saying he’d never met any of them. He soon resigned.

In recent interviews, he has said he shouldn’t have lied but did it because he wanted to keep the truth from his then-pregnant wife, Huma Abedin, a longtime aide to former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. She told The New York Times Magazine that she has forgiven him.

Weiner has taken a series of steps recently to rehab his image and reintroduce himself, including the lengthy magazine profile and a series of local TV interviews. He hasn’t responded to interview requests from The Associated Press.

He also has released a platform of sorts, a list of ideas styled as a blueprint for helping the city’s middle class thrive. He’s made a point of highlighting one or more of the concepts on most days, via his newly revived Twitter presence.

The suggestions, some of them updates from a mayoral run he nearly made in 2009, range from giving every public school student a Kindle reader to using Medicaid money to create a city-run, single-payer health system for the uninsured.

Some seem to draw on his Washington experience, such as making more use of a federal cigarette-smuggling law. But others fall squarely within City Hall, including suggestions to create a “nonprofit czar” in city government and eliminate paid positions for parent coordinators in schools.

The document also opens a window on a vision of the city – a place with “a can-do attitude, competitive spirit and aggressive nature” – that sounds not unlike Weiner himself. He was known during his seven terms in Washington as a vigorous defender of Democratic viewpoints, unafraid to get combative whether it was on cable TV or the House floor, and as a tireless and instinctive politician.

Watch Weiner’s video announcing his candidacy, below:

“Anybody who underestimates Anthony Weiner’s ambition is a fool. And anybody who underestimates his ability as a candidate is a fool,” retired Hunter College political science professor Kenneth Sherrill said. But “we’re going to see, basically, if Weiner can take hits as well as he can dish them out.”

In recent interviews, he has said he shouldn’t have lied but did it because he wanted to keep the truth from his then-pregnant wife, Huma Abedin, a longtime aide to former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. She told The New York Times Magazine that she has forgiven him.

In seeking a second chance from the public, Weiner will have to overcome some voters’ misgivings. In a recent NBC New York-Marist Poll, half said they wouldn’t even consider him, though the survey also showed that more registered Democrats now have a favorable than unfavorable impression of him.

Weiner can expect opponents to hammer at his prior prevaricating, and he said in a recent interview on the RNN cable network that he couldn’t guarantee that no more pictures or people would emerge.

And while he might welcome attention to his policies rather than his past, they also have attracted some criticism. About a dozen young people recently demonstrated outside his Manhattan apartment building to denounce his proposal to make it easier to suspend disruptive public school students; “(hash)Weiner: You ask for a second chance in (hash)NYC2013 but deny students a second chance,” read one sign, using Twitter’s beloved hashtag marks.

Since leaving office, Weiner has put his government experience to work as a consultant for various companies.

His Democratic opponents include City Councilman Sal Albanese; Public Advocate Bill de Blasio; Comptroller John Liu; City Council Speaker Christine Quinn; the Rev. Erick Salgado, a pastor; and former Comptroller Bill Thompson.

Republican contenders include billionaire businessman John Catsimatidis, former Metropolitan Transportation Authority Chairman Joseph Lhota and homelessness-aid organization head George McDonald. Former White House housing official Aldolfo Carrion Jr., a Democrat who recently dropped his party affiliation, is running on the Independence Party line and also interested in the Republican nomination.

Follow Billy Hallowell on Twitter

Follow Billy Hallowell on Facebook

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Ousted IRS Chief Steve Miller, left, and former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman are sworn in on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, May 21, 2013, prior to testifying before the Senate Finance Committee hearing on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) practice of targeting applicants for tax-exempt status based on political leanings. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

Wayne Allyn Root’s latest book, “The Ultimate Obama Survival Guide,” is in stores and available online now

The IRS scandal just gets bigger and bigger. No ordinary scandal, this is the very definition of an un-American, Joe McCarthy-style persecution. This is Gambino Crime Family criminal behavior. We now officially know America is being run by a gangster government, the Obama Crime Family.

The real question is “Will the same IRS (or IRS-like bureaucracy) that targeted and persecuted conservatives, GOP donors, Tea Party groups, Pro Israel Jewish Groups, Christian groups, Pro-Life groups, and outspoken critics of the President (like me), now use Obamacare to deny us medical care?”

Will these same thugs use the process to frustrate, intimidate or slow it down just long enough…to allow us to die?

Think I’m kidding? Exaggerating? The IRS official that targeted and persecuted conservatives is the EXACT same executive assigned to oversee the IRS office of Obamacare. This couldn’t happen in a fictional horror movie, without media critics charging it’s absurd and unrealistic.

This is the same IRS that asked questions such as “What books do your members read?” “What is the content of the PRAYERS of your members?” “Please send us all your Facebook posts” and “Send us the list of your donors.” Now they are in charge of your healthcare.

Will the same litmus test be in place? Before granting approval for expensive medical treatment, will we be asked what groups we belong to? What books we read? What is the content of our prayers? Will they look at our Facebook postings before deciding if we’re worthy of receiving expensive medical care?

Just as the groups who dared to teach American citizens about the U.S. Constitution were targeted and denied tax exempt status, will those of us who dare to believe in the U.S. Constitution be denied the health care we need to save our lives?

A close friend headed a large Tea Party group in Florida. Every Board member was audited and intimidated by the IRS. Do you doubt that this same IRS (or whatever thug-like bureaucracy they put in charge of approving medical care) might make it difficult or impossible for these same Tea Party Board members to get permission for necessary medical care? What about care for the television anchorman in St Louis who was pressured by the IRS after interviewing Obama?

Another friend, a successful hedge fund CEO, attended a Romney fundraiser. Within 60 days, almost everyone who wrote a check to Romney’s campaign was targeted for painful audits by the IRS. Will large GOP donors be denied medical treatment by these same corrupt government bureaucrats? Will Wall Street CEO’s be denied medical care for the sin of “being rich” in Obama’s America?

I’ve been criticizing the President in columns and television appearances nonstop for 4 years, and as a result, I faced a massive IRS attack. I was profiled, targeted, and marked for financial destruction. In the future, with the IRS or an IRS-like bureaucracy in charge of Obamacare, will I be put on “Obama Enemies List” and denied lifesaving medical care?

After what I’ve gone through let me assure you, the threat and intimidation is serious enough to make even someone as patriotic and committed to freedom as me, think twice. I can stand the heat. But am I really willing to put the lives of my wife and children at risk?

Are you aware the IRS shared confidential tax information of conservative organizations with their liberal opposition? It now appears they shared Mitt Romney’s confidential tax information with Obama’s Presidential Campaign Co-Chairman. With the IRS in charge of Obamacare, will the confidential medical records of GOP candidates now be shared with their Democratic opponents?

Am I suggesting the IRS and other executive branch Obamacare bureaucracies are capable of murder? No, of course not. They’ll just play politics with your medical care, the same way they used the power of the IRS to bleed the finances of Obama’s critics.

They will:

*Slow pay your bills

*Repeatedly lose your medical requests or bills

*Deny permission just long enough that you’ll be denied your chance to live.

*Compound your illness by adding frustration and stress, thereby cutting years off your life.

*Approve only 50% of your bills for cancer treatment, while paying 100% for Obama donors.

*Or maybe they’ll just extort Obama’s enemies- by offering to pay for the medical care you need, as long as you never appear again on Fox News or conservative talk radio.

You know- “little stuff” like that.

The liberal media laughed when conservatives warned about “Death Panels” manned by government bureaucrats deciding whether you get the treatment you need to live or die. They accused us of paranoia and conspiracy theories. Well who’s laughing now? We were right. 

Then, there’s the Associated Press scandal.  It’s clear the media better stay in line. Write a story that Obama doesn’t appreciate and you’ll soon find your medical care denied or delayed too.

Forget “Death Panels.” Now we must fear TARGETED DEATH PANELS.

Follow Wayne Allyn Root on Twitter

Follow Wayne Allyn Root on Facebook

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

“The destruction of a 3.5 kilometer viaduct in the Chinese city of Wuhan has set a record for the longest concrete bridge ever demolished in China,” ITN notes.

“With 100,000 volt wires running alongside, 30 major gas pipelines underneath and residential buildings all around it was also one of the most difficult demolitions ever undertaken in China,” the report adds:

Considering that the viaduct was built in 1997 as part of the main highway between Shanghai and Tibet, according to Bloomberg, it seems a little early to scrap the whole thing, doesn’t it?

Then again, the Chinese are really, really into infrastructure investments.

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image screen grab.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

As the day was coming to a close, reports rolled in with news of some that appeared to be quite successful.

• WTSP in Tampa reported that 300+ showed up at noon today
• Sidewalks in front of the Cincinnati offices of the IRS were jammed today. (Cincinnati was said to be where the rogue agents came from.)
• Myrtle Beach, SC saw 100+ marching against the IRS intimidation of conservative groups
• The Boston Herald counted “nearly two dozen” protesters marching outside the John F. Kennedy Federal Building in downtown Boston.
• And a number of protesters came to Washington DC to voice their displeasure.

Image: MRC

And what about NYC?

TheBlaze offices in midtown Manhattan happen to be in the same building as the Internal Revenue Service on Sixth Avenue. Three different times I wandered out of our offices to see what was happening. Before noon there was not a single soul marching in front of the building.

Around 1pm, I again strolled out to see how big of a protest New York had managed to put together. After all, New York and the surrounding metropolitan area is home to 20+ million people. As I turned the corner on 45th Street and Sixth Avenue, I was shocked to see just one protester. One. This guy.

Image: Mike Opelka

The man in the photo is Keith Keary, a New Yorker – born and raised in the city. Keith is an artist — a sculptor who makes his living creating art from metal. His work includes delicate small pieces of jewelry like these sea horses.

Image KeithKeary.com

He also created several large installations seen around the country, like this one on display in El Paso, Texas.

“Occotillo” – El Paso, TX

Mr. Keary agreed to give TheBlaze an exclusive interview:

If you attended or participated in one of the protests not covered here, please send your photos and facts to mopelka@TheBlaze.com.

Follow Mike Opelka on Twitter @stuntbrain

Follow Mike Opelka on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Vice President Joe Biden (Credit: AP)

Vice President Joe Biden poked fun at President Barack Obama’s teleprompter use during a Jewish American Heritage Month reception in New York City on Tuesday. Prior to his address, Biden reportedly asked that the teleprompter be taken down, according to the pool report.

“You can’t tell Barack that the teleprompter’s down,” Biden began. “The standing joke in the office is Barack’s learning to speak without a teleprompter, I’m learning to speak with one. I apologize for the teleprompter.”

There is also a “standing joke” among the president’s critics who have long criticized Obama for his heavy teleprompter use and apparent inability to improvise remarks at times.

Biden, on the other hand, has never had a problem giving off-the-cuff and often lengthy speeches that regularly stray from his prepared remarks.

The vice president went on to praise the Jewish community for having “contributed greatly to America.”

“No group has had such an outsized influence per capita as all of you standing before you and all of those who went before me and all of those who went before you,” he said.

Featured image via AP

(H/T: The Hill)

Follow Jason Howerton on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Witnesses at the four-hour hearing included former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman, who headed the agency during the period when it “aggressively” discriminated against conservative groups, Treasury Department Inspector General J. Russell George, and ousted IRS interim chief Steven Miller.

And despite the fact that the hearing was dominated by Shulman and Miller’s “I don’t knows” and “I’m not sures,” there were still a few noteworthy moments.

Here are the five most intriguing moments from Tuesday’s hearing on the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups [in no particular order]:

5. Ex-IRS Chief’s Pseudo “Apology”

Ousted IRS Chief Steve Miller, left, and former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman are sworn in on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, May 21, 2013, prior to testifying before the Senate Finance Committee hearing on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) practice of targeting applicants for tax-exempt status based on political leanings. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) asked former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman if he planned on apologizing for the IRS’ “overly aggressive” targeting of the senator’s constituents.

“I’m deeply, deeply saddened by this whole set of events,” Shulman said. “I’ve read the IG’s report and I very much regret that it happened and that it happened on my watch.”

“Is that an apology?” Cornyn asked.

“To your constituents?” Shulman responded. “I don’t know the details of our constituents. I don’t know what happened to them.”

Shulman continued, arguing that between 2008 and 2012, he had nothing to do with cases that involved political activity.

“So, it’s not your responsibility,” Cornyn said. “The buck doesn’t stop with you.”

“I certainly am not personally responsible for creating a list that had inappropriate criteria on it,” Shulman replied. “What I know, with the full facts that are out is – from the Inspector General’s report – which doesn’t say that I’m responsible for that.”

4. Sen. Hatch: You Lie!

(AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) was one of the few senators to address the IRS’ political targeting as it happened during the 2012 presidential election.

So Hatch took the opportunity on Tuesday to give Miller a dressing down for not being, as the senator claims, forthright with Republican senators when they approached him last year with their concerns.

“Why did you mislead me and my colleagues?”

“Mr. Hatch, I did not lie,” Miller responded.

“That’s a lie by omission,” Sen. Hatch shot back. “There’s no question about that in my mind. It’s a lie by omission.”

“Frankly,” Miller added, “the concept of political motivation here — I did not agree with that in May. I do not agree with that now. We were not politically motivated in targeting conservative groups.”

3. Oh, Now  I Remember All About That Planted Question

Steve Miller, center, flanked by former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman, right, and J. Russell George, Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, listens on Capitol Hill, in Washington, Tuesday, May 21, 2013. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

Disgraced Internal Revenue Service interim chief Steven Miller on Tuesday took full responsibility for the planted question that put the IRS scandal directly in the spotlight, adding that the scheme was actually “an incredibly bad idea.”

“I will take responsibility for that,” Miller said in response to a question from Republican Senator Chuck Grassley. “The thought was to – now that we had the TIGTA [Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration] report, you had all the facts. We had our response.”

“We thought we’d get out an apology,” he added. “The way we did it — we wanted to reach out to Hill staff about the same time … — did not work out. Obviously, the entire thing was an incredibly bad idea.”

Washington-based tax lawyer Celia Roady (i.e. the “plant”) asked senior IRS official Lois Lerner two weeks ago at the American Bar Association conference in the nation’s capital a prepared question involving the agency’s targeting of conservative groups.

Lerner’s canned response, and supposed “apology,” kicked off the major scandal.

Technically, Miller didn’t say last week during the House Ways and Means committee hearing that he didn’t know anything about the planted question. Still, his response today shows that he knew much more than he let on last week, which raises serious questions about his credibility.

2. Really, the Targeting Wasn’t ‘Politically Motivated’

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont. left, accompanied by the committee’s ranking Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, questions ousted IRS Chief Steve Miller, former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman, and J. Russell George, Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, on Capitol Hill. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

The message presented by ex-IRS officials in both hearings is clear: Although the targeting was bad, it wasn’t “politically motivated.”

However, Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) on Tuesday made a good point while trying to figure out who was responsible for compiling the list of conservative groups [from the Washington Examiner]:

If neither former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman, nor outgoing commissioner Steven T. Miller, can point to the employee or employees who hatched this plan, which they have repeatedly insisted they cannot, how can they be so sure that the individual or individuals behind it weren’t politically motivated to aid President Obama and the Democrats?

Obama and congressional Democrats are clearly outraged about what happened at the IRS; possibly not as much as conservatives would prefer, but it’s apparent that they are not pleased with what happened at the nation’s tax administration agency.

But until Treasury investigators or a congressional committee, or both, can figure out who was responsible for the targeting, and question them about how and why they developed their approach, it would appear premature, as Toomey suggests, to settle on a conclusion to one of the biggest unanswered questions that remain since the House Ways and Means panel launched the congressional committee phase of this scandal…

Why did it occur in the first place?

Indeed, if the targeting wasn’t “political,” then why did it happen at all? And if IRS officials aren’t exactly sure who is responsible, then how do they know that it wasn’t “political”?

1. Ex-IRS Chief: I Have no Idea How This Happened

Associated Press.

The one thing former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman wanted to make clear during today’s hearing was he is totally ignorant of what went on under his watch.

“The man who led the Internal Revenue Service when it was giving extra scrutiny to tea party and other conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status told Congress on Tuesday that he knew little about what was happening while he was still commissioner,” the Associated Press notes.

“Douglas Shulman, who vacated his position last November when his five-year term expired, told the Senate Finance Committee he didn’t learn all the facts until he read last week’s report by a Treasury inspector general confirming the targeting strategy,” the report adds.

Shulman in his first public remarks since the scandal was broken said: “I agree this is an issue that when someone spotted it, they should have brought it up the chain. And they didn’t. I don’t know why.”

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image AP photo. This post has been updated.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

White House press secretary Jay Carney speaks during his daily news briefing at the White House in Washington, Tuesday, May, 21, 2013. Carney announced that Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano will travel to Oklahoma Wednesday to inspect damage from the deadly tornado that struck there. Credit: AP

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney on Tuesday revealed some rather startling details about how the Obama White House operates.

First, Carney defended Kathryn Ruemmler’s alleged decision to not inform the Commander-in-Chief about the impending Internal Revenue Service scandal because – well, she simply decided that the president shouldn’t be informed about it.

“People in the know and people who understand why it’s important to maintain distance from these kinds of things for the White House understand that that was the right call,” Carney said.

Second, according to Carney, the president is aware pretty much everyone in his administration knew about the IG’s report before him – and he’s okay with that.

Third, the White House knew well in advance of the release of the IG report that things weren’t going to go over so well and they actually coordinated with the IRS on how to present the public with the IG’s findings.

“There was ‘discussion about the possibility of a speech’ by Lois Lerner, who oversaw the IRS’s work on tax-exempt groups,” Politico explains, citing Carney, “and conversation about testimony by the acting commissioner of the agency and ‘what he would say’ if asked about the issue.”

Now the first two points raise serious questions about the president’s leadership style (just who’s running this country anyway?). But the third point is equally troubling because it calls into question the White House’s account of events.

The Treasury Department, according to the press secretary, worked with deputy White House chief of staff Mark Childress to coordinate the release of the IRS news.

Carney, however, was careful to note that he was among those who were not informed of White House’s attempts to contain the story.

But whether he knew the exact details or not, Carney knew of the report and of the upcoming scandal. Why didn’t he say anything?

“He also said he didn’t inform reporters about the discussions earlier because he hadn’t been asked ‘precise’ enough questions,” Politico notes.

“I gave you the information in response to the questions and we have provided an enormous amount of information about the communication we’ve had, who learned what about this and when, the fact that the president was not informed,” he said.

But, again, the words coming out of Carney’s mouth raise serious questions about the White House’s supposedly honesty account of events.

From Politico:

On Monday, a senior White House official confirmed to POLITICO that Treasury Department staffers told White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler the inspector general report was nearing completion during the week of April 22.

Carney had originally acknowledged that the counsel’s office had been told of the investigation during a press briefing the previous week. But he hadn’t explicitly said Ruemmler had learned that conservative groups were targeted and how they were singled out.

Later, during Monday’s White House briefing, Carney told reporters that some staff in the counsel’s office were told of the report — and others nearing completion — a week earlier, on April 16.

Ruemmler did inform chief of staff Denis McDonough’s office of the investigation, Carney said then, and other senior staff were also told of the report. Carney wouldn’t say Monday who those other staffers were, but did say there were communications between White House and Treasury Department staff ahead of the first news reports of the IRS investigation 10 days ago.

Though senior staff knew of the probe, Carney said Ruemmler had concluded that the investigation was “not a matter she should convey to the president” until the report was finalized.

Carney’s defense?

“I said that I didn’t know (these details) until Friday, but I’m getting this information to you now,” he said.

BONUS: CBS New’s Major Garrett during Tuesday’s press briefing asked Carney if the White House believes Republican inquiries about recent scandals (i.e. the IRS, the DOJ snooping on the AP and Fox News, Sebelius’ fundraising efforts, and the administration’s handling of the Benghazi debacle) are “legitimate.”

“We could go down the list of questions — we could say, ‘What about the president’s birth certificate? Was that legitimate?’” Carney said.

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image Getty Images. This post has been updated.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

From the report:

A top IRS official in the division that reviews nonprofit groups will invoke the Fifth Amendment and refuse to answer questions before a House committee investigating the agency’s improper screening of conservative nonprofit groups.

Lois Lerner, the head of the exempt organizations division of the IRS, won’t answer questions about what she knew about the improper screening – or why she didn’t reveal it to Congress, according to a letter from her defense lawyer, William W. Taylor 3rd.

Lerner was scheduled to appear before the House Oversight committee Wednesday.

“She has not committed any crime or made any misrepresentation but under the circumstances she has no choice but to take this course,” Taylor said in a letter addressed to committee Chairman Darrell E. Issa, R-Calif.

Her lawyer said that the DOJ has “launched a criminal investigation,” and that the House committee has asked Lerner to explain why she provided “false or misleading information” to the committee four times last year, the L.A. Times notes.

But because Lerner has decided to remain silent on the subject, her lawyer has asked that she be excused from Wednesday’s hearing because it would “have no purpose other than to embarrass or burden her.”

Rep. Issa was not swayed by the letter and has issued a subpoena to Lerner anyway, according to National Journal.

“The subpoena was delivered after the committee received the letter from Lerner’s attorney,” the report adds.

Lerner discovered in June 2011 that the IRS was targeting groups that used terms like “Tea Party” and “Patriots,” according to the IG’s report.

However, Lerner failed to mention the political intimidation in 2012 when she participated in several Congressional hearings.

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP/IRS.gov. This post has been updated.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Follow Eddie Scarry on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

“I will take responsibility for that,” Miller said in response to a question from Republican Senator Chuck Grassley. “The thought was to – now that we had the TIGTA [Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration] report, you had all the facts. We had our response.”

“We thought we’d get out an apology,” he added. “The way we did it — we wanted to reach out to Hill staff about the same time … — did not work out. Obviously, the entire thing was an incredibly bad idea.”

Miller is referring to Washington-based tax lawyer Celia Roady asking senior IRS official Lois Lerner at the American Bar Association conference two weeks ago a prepared question involving the agency’s targeting of conservative groups.

Lerner’s answer, and subsequent “apology” to conservative groups, was the first shoe dropped in what has now become a major scandal.

And make no mistake about it, Roady was most definitely a plant. She admitted to it last week [via Talking Points Memo]:

On May 9, I received a call from Lois Lerner, who told me that she wanted to address an issue after her prepared remarks at the ABA Tax Section’s Exempt Organizations Committee Meeting, and asked if I would pose a question to her after her remarks.

I agreed to do so, and she then gave me the question that I asked at the meeting the next day. We had no discussion thereafter on the topic of the question, nor had we spoken about any of this before I received her call. She did not tell me, and I did not know, how she would answer the question.

“The planted question reveals coordination at high levels of the IRS with regard to the disclosure of the sensitive information,” National Review Online notes.

“Lerner and Miller testified before Congress two days before Lerner addressed the ABA, but said nothing about the IRS’s scrutiny of tea-party groups.”

But issues of information coordination aside, let’s go back to Miller taking responsibility for the planted question. Let’s go back and look at what he said last week during his four-hour interrogation by the House Ways and Means Committee.

First, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) had an interesting exchange with Miller regarding this exact topic.

“Did you know that Ms. Lerner was going to appear last Friday, May 10th, on a panel called ‘News From the IRS and Treasury’ at the American Bar Association conference?” the California congressman asked.

“I knew she was appearing; I did not know the topic,” he replied.

“Did you or any of your subordinates direct Lois Lerner to make the public statement at the panel discussion acknowledging the targeting of tax-exempt groups?”

“It was a prepared Q-and-A.”

“Do you know Ms. Celia Roady, a member of IRS’s Advisory Council on Tax-Exempt and Government Entities?”

“I do.”

“Was Ms. Roady’s question to Ms. Lerner about targeting conservative groups planned in advance?”

“I believe that we talked about that, yes.”

But that’s not all. There were many more questions where that came from:

“Who told her to ask the question?” Republican Congressman Kenny Marchant asked.

“I don’t know, actually, I’m not sure, might have been Lois Lerner,” Miller answered.

Wait. What?

Lastly, there was this exchange between Miller and Rep. Peter Roskam (R-Ill.) [via the Wall Street Journal]:

REP. ROSKAM: You admit that you spoke with Ms. Lerner and Celia Roady about the planted question beforehand. Can you tell us more about that conversation?

MR. MILLER: I did not speak to Celia Roady, and I believe I did talk to Lois about the possibility of, now that the TIGTA report was finalized, now that we knew all the facts, now that we had responded in writing and everything was done, did it make sense for us to start talking about this in public.

REP. ROSKAM: Can you walk me through the logic that animated in your mind at that time, where you thought it would be a good idea to make a public disclosure to the American Bar Association rather than coming and following up on your duty to disclose that to the House?

MR. MILLER: So we were going to do it at the same time, I believe; that our intent was to talk to you all at the same time.

REP. ROSKAM: But that didn’t happen, did it?

MR. MILLER: It did not happen, I don’t believe.

Later, he turns his questions to why lawmakers weren’t updated, and if the IRS made any effort to update lawmakers before the disclosure at the ABA conference.

REP. ROSKAM: Now, you’re a lawyer and I’m a lawyer. You know that in the process of discovery, Mr. Miller, that when you find subsequent information, counsel has a duty to disclose that to the opposite party. There’s no Perry Mason moments. There’s no gotcha moments. There’s no litigious situation where somebody comes in and says, oh, we are just showing up, Your Honor, with this information and we haven’t disclosed it to the other side.

Don’t you acknowledge that you had a duty, based on your testimony before this committee, of what your actual knowledge was — didn’t you have a duty, Mr. Miller, to come forward and disclose that to the committee, based on all the cascading inquiries that had happened from the Ways and Means Committee directed to you?

MR. MILLER: So I don’t believe so, sir. What was happening was I was in possession of some facts, was not in possession of all facts. ….

REP. ROSKAM: So you weren’t concerned about the timing of the TIGTA investigation when you and Ms. Lerner made the decision to move forward and do the planted question. Is that right?

MR. MILLER: It was done.

REP. ROSKAM: It was done. And so you had the –

MR. MILLER: We had all the facts, and we had made our written response –

REP. ROSKAM: Right. I understand that. So in other words, you had the actual information. The totality of the information that you’re describing today — you had it all in your possession at the time at which you were under a scheme with Ms. Lerner to go and do a planted question. Is that right?

MR. MILLER: I sort of object to the term “scheme.” We had the information. We were reaching out to the committee at the same time.

[...]REP. ROSKAM: What form did that outreach take?

MR. MILLER: We called to try to get on the calendar.

REP. ROSKAM: You called to try and get on the calendar. Is that all you got?

MR. MILLER: It’s the truth.

You can watch their exchange here:

Now although an argument can be made that Steven Miller didn’t technically state falsehoods during his testimony last week, today’s admission that the planted question was a “terrible idea” that didn’t live up to expectation seems to show that the former interim chief knew much more about the Lerner/Roady plan then he let on last week.

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image Getty Images.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Cardinal Sean O’Malley. (Getty Images)

Cardinal Sean O’Malley skipped Boston College’s commencement Monday to protest its decision to honor Irish Prime Minister Enda Kenny, who backs legislation to permit abortion, and O’Malley’s views were echoed outside the ceremony by a few dozen pro-life activists.

The protesters gathered at an entrance to the stadium where Kenny gave the keynote address and received an honorary degree, with some holding signs saying it was a scandal that the Catholic school was hosting Kenny.

O’Malley announced he’d skip Boston College’s graduation earlier this month, saying Irish bishops had concluded the bill “represents a dramatic and morally unacceptable change to Irish law,” and noting that U.S. bishops have asked Catholic institutions not to honor officials who promote abortion.

Boston College spokesman Jack Dunn said Monday that Kenny’s invitation was unrelated to the controversial legislation and was offered solely because of historical ties between his country and a school founded by an Irish Jesuit to serve Irish immigrants.

He said the invitation to Kenny in no way erodes the school’s anti-abortion stance.

“Boston College as a Catholic institution fully supports the church’s commitment to the unborn,” he said.

But the bill Kenny supports allows abortion if a doctor determines that it could save the mother’s life or if the mother threatens suicide.

Protester C.J. Doyle of the Catholic Action League called that “the proverbial Mack truck loophole” and said Boston College’s decision to honor Kenny undermines the church’s anti-abortion teachings.

“What rational person can reasonably be expected to take seriously Catholic opposition to abortion when our own Catholic institutions honor someone who’s trying to legalize abortion in his country?” he said.

Ireland is currently in the middle of its own “Roe v Wade” moment and the Irish PM has chosen the side that favors abortion.

Enda Kenny. (Getty Images)

After his address, Kenny told reporters the bill does nothing to change an 1861 Irish law that makes abortion a crime punishable by life in prison.

Instead, the bill “is setting out clarity and legal certainty, that is intended to save lives, not to end them,” he said, seemingly ignoring the life of the unborn child.

The bill being debated now permits a single doctor to authorize an abortion if he decides that the woman’s life is in immediate danger. Two doctors must approve if a pregnancy poses a potentially lethal risk. The approval of three doctors is required if the woman is threatening suicide.

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Former IRS Chief Douglas Shulman. (Getty Images)

WASHINGTON (TheBlaze/AP) — The man who led the Internal Revenue Service when it was giving extra scrutiny to tea party and other conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status told Congress on Tuesday that he knew little about what was happening while he was still commissioner.

Douglas Shulman, who vacated his position last November when his five-year term expired, told the Senate Finance Committee he didn’t learn all the facts until he read last week’s report by a Treasury inspector general confirming the targeting strategy.

In his first public remarks since the story broke, Shulman said: “I agree this is an issue that when someone spotted it, they should have brought it up the chain. And they didn’t. I don’t know why.”

Shulman testified at Congress’ second hearing on an episode that has largely consumed Washington since an IRS official acknowledged the targeting and apologized for it in remarks to a legal group on May 10. Shulman and the two officials who testified at Tuesday’s three-and-a-half hour session – the outgoing acting commissioner, Steven Miller, and J. Russell George, the Treasury Department inspector general who issued the report — were all sworn in as witnesses, an unusual step for the Finance panel.

Shulman said he first learned about the targeting and about the inspector general’s investigation in the spring of 2012, during the presidential election. He said that in a meeting with Miller, he was told that IRS workers were using a list to help decide which groups seeking tax-exempt status should get special attention, that the term “tea party” was on that list and that the problem was being addressed. But he said he didn’t know what other words were on that list or the scope and severity of the activity.

Pressed by committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., on how the improper screening system could have occurred in the first place, Shulman said, “Mr. Chairman, I can’t say. I can’t say that I know that answer.”

He said he did not tell Treasury officials about the improper activity.

“I don’t recall talking to anyone about it,” Shulman told the committee. “This is not the kind of information” that, with an inspector general’s probe underway, “should leave the IRS.”

Asked by Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, whether he owed conservative groups an apology, Shulman said, “I’m certainly not personally responsible for creating a list that had inappropriate criteria on it.”

That was a reference to a list of words IRS workers looked for in deciding which groups to screen, a list that included the terms including “tea party” and “patriot.”

“I very much regret that it happened and that it happened on my watch,” Shulman said.

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image Getty Images.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

In this photo released by the Bell County Sheriff’s Office, Nidal Hasan is seen in a booking photo after being moved to the Bell County Jail on April 9, 2010 in Belton, Texas. (Photo by Bell County Sheriff’s Office via Getty Images)

Did you know that under the Military Code of Justice the U.S. Army can’t suspend pay for an employee who has been accused of a crime unless he is proven guilty?

It’s true.

And it’s the reason why Nidal Hasan, the accused Fort Hood shooter, has been paid more than $270,000 by the U.S. government since the Nov. 5, 2009, mass shooting that left 13 dead and 32 injured, NBC DFW reports.

“If Hasan had been a civilian defense department employee,” the report continues, “the Army could have suspended his pay after just seven days.

Personnel rules for most civilian government workers allow for “indefinite suspensions” in cases “when the agency has reasonable cause to believe that the employee has committed a crime for which a sentence of imprisonment may be imposed.”

But that’s not the case here.

Nov. 10, 2009: A memorial to victims of the Fort Hood shooting. (AP)

And if you think it’s outrageous that Hassan has been receiving paychecks while he awaits trial, keep in mind many of the soldiers wounded by his alleged rampage are still fighting to get pay and medical benefits given to those wounded in combat.

Retired Army Spc. Logan Burnett, for example, was shot three times when the shooting spree took place inside the Army Deployment Center.

“I honestly thought I was going to die in that building,” said Burnett. “Just blood everywhere and then the thought of — that’s my blood everywhere.”

In the years after the attack, Burnett has had more than a dozen surgeries – but all without the U.S. military assisting him as it would a soldier wounded in combat.

“I refuse to continue letting Nidal Hasan win. And I leave the ‘Major’ part out, because even though, unfortunately, he’s still being paid better than I am, he doesn’t deserve that rank,” said Burnett.

Why has the U.S. military refrained from helping these soldiers? Well, as many Blaze readers know, it’s because the shooting has been classified as “workplace violence.”

“Sickens me. Absolutely sickens me. Workplace violence? I don’t even know if I have the words to say,” said Burnett, who has recently joined other Fort Hood victims in a lawsuit against the U.S. Army demanding the benefits they say they’ve been unjustly denied.

“They don’t need to be treated like this. They don’t need to sit and fight every day for this benefit or that,” said Torey Burnett:

“The Army could get some money back from Hasan by demanding re-payment for the cost of treating the wounds he sustained when a police officer shot him during the incident,” NBC 5 reports.

Hey, at least there’s that.

“What happened here is not a case of workplace violence,” said Rep. Thomas Rooney (R-Fla.), a former prosecutor at Fort Hood.

“What happened here was an attack on our military by a terrorist element specifically targeting our military, which just so happened to be in the United States of America,” continued, adding that it has “resulted in an embarrassing lack of care and treatment for the victims and their families.”

Click here to read the full report.

On TheBlog: Ft. Hood shooter is still collecting a paycheck

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image Getty Images.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. (Getty Images)

Raymond Maxwell, one of four State Department employees recently disciplined by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, made headlines this month for penning slightly cryptic verses critical of the agency’s handling of the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.

And now Maxwell, who was placed on forced “administrative leave” despite his claim had no role in consulate-related security issues, is back in the news for ditching the poetry and outright accusing former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of making him the Benghazi scapegoat.

“The overall goal is to restore my honor,” Maxwell said in an interview with The Daily Beast.

The former deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern Affairs, who is currently stuck in a sort of legal limbo, has filed grievances regarding his treatment by the State Department’s human resources bureau and the American Foreign Service Association, the report notes.

Maxwell is the only official in the bureau of Near Eastern Affairs (i.e. the group responsible for Libya) to lose his job over the September 11 attacks.

“I had no involvement to any degree with decisions on security and the funding of security at our diplomatic mission in Benghazi,” he said.

Maxwell was placed on forced “administrative leave” on December 18, the day after the Accountability Review Board released its report on the Benghazi attack. The department placed him on leave so that it could decide whether he should be permanently “let go.” However, here we are five months out and no decision has been made.

The disciplined State Department official sits at home and waits.

A department spokeswoman declined to comment on why Maxwell and three other State officials were disciplined, saying only that the ARB suggested someone be disciplined over the death of four Americans.

“As a matter of policy, we don’t speak to specific personnel matters,” State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki told The Daily Beast.

Maxwell said the reason for him being put on leave has never been explained to him, he has never seen the classified portions of the ARB report that detail personnel failures leading up to the attack, and because his “administrative leave” is not a formal disciplinary action, he has no legal means to appeal his status.

And although he planned on retiring in September 2012, Maxwell remained at his post voluntarily so that he could assist the department in responding to the disastrous attacks. Now, after being singled out for the death of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, Maxwell refuses to let it go until his name has been cleared.

“They just wanted me to go away but I wouldn’t just go away,” he said. “I knew Chris [Stevens]. Chris was a friend of mine.”

“He is seeking a restoration of his previous position, a public statement of apology from State, reimbursement for his legal fees, and an extension of his time in service to equal the time he has spent at home on administrative leave,” the Daily Beast reports.

Raymond Maxwell.

“For any FSO being at work is the essence of everything and being deprived of that and being cast out was devastating,” he said.

Maxwell said that soon after he was removed from his post, a State Department official visited him at his home one night and asked him to sign a letter acknowledging his removal and “forfeiting” his right to enter the State Department building.

He refused. He said that the letter amounted to an admission of guilt.

So who placed him on leave?

“The decision to place Maxwell on administrative leave was made by Clinton’s chief of staff Cheryl Mills, according to three State Department officials with direct knowledge of the events,” the report notes.

“On the day after the unclassified version of the ARB’s report was released in December, Mills called Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Beth Jones and directed her to have Maxwell leave his job immediately,” it adds.

Getty Images.

But there may be a reason why Maxwell, of all people, was removed from his office the day after the release of the ARB report.

“One person who reviewed the classified portion of the ARB report told The Daily Beast that it called out Maxwell for the specific infraction of not reading his daily classified briefings, something that person said Maxwell admitted to the ARB panel during his interview,” the report claims.

“The crime that he is being punished for is not reading his intel,” this person said.

When asked about this specific claim, Maxwell said he has not been “officially counseled” on any wrongdoing and has not been allowed to read the ARB’s classified report.

But here’s his bombshell claim: Maxwell believes Hillary Clinton’s staff headed the review of the disastrous Benghazi attack – not an independent review board.

“The flaws in the process were perpetrated by the political leadership at State with the complicity of the senior career leadership,” he said. “They should be called to account.”

Click here to read the full report

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image Getty Images.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Treasury Secretary Jack Lew. (Getty Images)

The U.S. government on Sunday reached its borrowing limit — again.

“After a brief hiatus, the nation’s debt limit has returned as a major hurdle for Washington to overcome, and one that will play a central role in fiscal fights heading into the fall,” The Hill reports. “Congress agreed to suspend the nation’s $16.4 trillion borrowing limit the last time they approached it, at the beginning of the year. But that suspension expired May 19.”

During the suspension, U.S. debt grew by an estimated $300 billion, putting the total at around $16.7 trillion.

“With the government once again operating under a borrowing cap, the Treasury is back to employing special measures to free up space under the limit,” the report notes.

“In a nod to how common debt-limit battles have become in recent years, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew told Congress Friday he was prepared to deploy the ‘standard set of extraordinary measures.’”

“He told congressional leaders that the Treasury is preparing to employ its extraordinary measures to free up room to maneuver under the cap, and gave a hint as to how long Congress could haggle over raising it before a damaging default — after Labor Day,” the report adds.

Lew’s letter also made it clear that the Obama administration is not interested in bargaining over raising the debt ceiling

Here’s a full copy of his letter:

One of the “extraordinary measures” at Treasury’s disposal involves the issuance of State and Local Government Series securities (SLGS).

“State and local governments buy the securities as they work to refund municipal bond deals,” The Hill explains.

However, issuing those securities affects the debt limit bottom line, so Treasury would put the brakes on that until further notice.

“The Treasury also has the power to halt new investments in federal employee retirement funds, which would be reimbursed once the limit is hiked. It also can stop reinvesting in its Exchange Stabilization Fund used to buy and sell foreign currencies,” the report continues.

These options would be used to free up billions of dollars to supposedly give U.S. lawmakers more time to come to an agreement over the debt limit.

Of course, that all depends on whether Congress can agree on a plan – and whether the White House will play ball.

“We will not negotiate over the debt limit,” Lew wrote in a letter sent to Congress Friday. “The creditworthiness of the United States is non-negotiable. The question of whether the country must pay obligations it has already incurred is not open to debate.”

We’ll see where this goes from here.

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image Getty Images.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

(Photo: Getty Images)

When you get right down to it, the political targeting and stalling of tax-exempt applications by the IRS was an effort to defund the Tea Party. Rick Santelli, one of the Tea Party founders and my CNBC colleague, was the first to make this point. I’ve taken it a step further: The IRS was taking the Tea Party out of play for the 2012 election, as it looked to avoid a repeat of 2010 and another Tea Party landslide.

There are a lot of numbers out there. Some say Tea Party applications for tax-exempt status averaged 27 months for approval, while applications from liberal groups averaged nine. In one extreme case, according to the Washington Post, the IRS granted the Barack H. Obama Foundation tax-exempt status in a speedy one-month timeframe. Yet some conservative groups waited up to three years, and some still haven’t received approval.

But there can be only one reason for the stalled-out approval process for conservative groups. The IRS was trying to put them out of business. Thus far, there’s not one wit of contradictory evidence.

Think of this: If the IRS wasn’t politically targeting conservative groups, why did its leading spokespeople lie? This was not even cognitive dissonance. It was outright lying before Congress. Lois Lerner, a key player in the IRS’s tax-exempt division, is being accused by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee of no fewer than four lies. The inspector general’s report shows that she knew about the targeting problem in June 2011, but wouldn’t admit to it in correspondence with Congress over the next two years.

Then there’s former IRS commissioner Douglas Shulman, a Bush appointee. He apparently knew about the targeting in May 2012, but told Congress in August 2012 that he didn’t.

Or there’s former IRS acting director Steve Miller, who was just pushed out. He also knew about the targeting in May 2012, but later refused to admit it to Congress during testimony.

In fact, the whole bloody agency may have known about it on August 4, 2011. According to the Treasury Department IG report, various IRS big wigs met that day to talk about the conservative-targeting problem. That meeting may have included the IRS’s chief counsel; while the IG report says he was at the meeting, the IRS has denied that he was. But if one of his minions was at the meeting, the chief counsel would have known about the problem.

And it turns out the Treasury’s inspector general, J. Russell George, told senior Treasury officials in June 2012 that he was auditing the IRS’s political-organization screening. That means White House appointees in the Treasury, including deputy secretary Neal Wolin, were aware of the IRS scandal before the presidential election. According to the New York Times, IG George “did not tell the officials of his conclusions that the targeting had been improper.”

No one knows the exact facts, which presumably will come out in the hearings. But this is important stuff. It is conspiracy stuff. Criminal stuff.

We already know that IRS employees gave heavily to Obama in 2008 and 2012, and very little to candidates McCain and Romney. But who was the quarterback in all this? Who was managing the targeting operation in the bowels of the IRS?

It could have been Sarah Hall Ingram. She served as commissioner of the IRS’s tax-exempt division between 2009 and 2012. And she got a $100,000 bonus for her efforts. And now — incredibly — she’s running the IRS’s Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) office, leaving her successor Joseph Grant to take the fall. But he just turned tail and resigned.

And now get this: President Obama has named OMB controller Daniel Werfel acting director of the IRS. And he’s only going to serve between May 22 and the end of the fiscal year, which is September 30. Are you kidding?

In four months, we’re to believe Mr. Werfel is going to piece together the lies, finger the quarterback, and replace everybody who was involved, not just in the now-infamous Cincinnati office, but in offices in Washington, D.C., two towns in California, and even Austin, Texas. (That’s the latest count.) And this guy Werfel is also supposed to manage the agency which is adding Obamacare to its income-tax-collection responsibilities. In four months.

Nuts.

An independent special counsel with subpoena power is the only possible solution. This counsel must find out exactly what happened and who was involved, and then come up with a fix so it never happens again. Of course, Obama charged Treasury Secretary Jack Lew with straightening this out. But Lew’s an Obama political operative.

By the way, a special counsel will have to do a special investigation, since we’re already learning the inspector-general investigation was a very superficial operation. And an independent special counsel can investigate any possible White House connections with senior Treasury officials, connections that could lead to the Oval Office.

We may hate the IRS because of its taxing power. We may hate it more because of its new Obamacare power. But it is a massively important government agency. And now we know that it is fraught with corruption and a liberal-left political agenda.

Only an independent special counsel could possibly straighten this mess out.

–

RELATED:

• Outgoing IRS Chief Apologizes for ‘Foolish Mistakes’
• IRS Takes a Grilling
• What Billionaires are Buying

©2013 CNBC LLC. All Rights Reserved. Larry Kudlow. Featured image Getty Images.

Follow Larry Kudlow on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

In this Sunday, May 19, 2013, photo provided by CBS News White House senior advisor Dan Pfeiffer appears on CBS’s “Face the Nation” in Washington. Pfeiffer was scheduled to appear on five Sunday news shows Sunday, where he stated no senior officials were involved in the decision to give tea party groups extra scrutiny by the IRS.  Credit: AP

Yesterday, we noted that the the journalists across the spectrum seemed united in their skepticism of the Obama administration and its talking points after the IRS/Tea Party targeting. That was made clear when the Washington Post published a blistering fact-check of IRS official Lois Lerner. Now, the Post has published it’s second fact-check in as many days  with a  focus on Benghazi, showing the president could truly be losing the press.

The latest story focuses on the accusations by the White House attacking ABC News for allegedly misleading the public by representing paraphrased administration emails (specifically ones by national security adviser Ben Rhodes) regarding the editing of the Benghazi talking points as quotes. The Post has excerpts of the criticism:

“That’s a very serious offense that happened where Republicans on the Hill, we voluntarily provided these e-mails to, took one of them, doctored it and gave it to ABC News in an attempt to smear the president.”

— White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer, appearing on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” May 19, 2013

“I think one of the problems that there’s so much controversy here is because one of the e-mails was doctored by a Republican source and given to the media to falsely smear the president.”

— Pfeiffer, on Fox News Sunday, May 19

“They received these e-mails months ago, didn’t say a word about it, didn’t complain … And then last week a Republican source provided to Jon Karl of ABC News a doctored version of a White House e-mail that started this entire fear. After 25,000 pieces of paper are provided to Congress they have to doctor e-mail to make political hay, you know they’re getting desperate here.”

— Pfeiffer, on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” May 19

The “doctored” charge by the White House is a serious one, and the Post painstakingly recaps the timeline and the facts. But as the Post dug deep, it found that ABC’s Jonathan Karl was not “doctoring” emails (as even some of his colleagues at CNN and CBS have flirted with suggesting), but rather excerpting them and adding context:

When the White House last week released all of its e-mails, it became clear that Rhodes was responding at the tail end of a series of e-mail exchanges that largely discussed the State Department concerns.

When the White House last week released all of its e-mails, it became clear that Rhodes was responding at the tail end of a series of e-mail exchanges that largely discussed the State Department concerns.

In other words, the summary would have been fairly close if the commas had been removed and replaced with brackets: “We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities [including those of the State Department] and we don’t want to undermine the FBI investigation.”

[...]

Moreover, the full disclosure of e-mails makes it clear that White House officials were concerned about the State Department’s objections.

Still, Karl has apologized for not making it clear he was summarizing/paraphrasing/adding context:

Karl over the weekend tweeted, “I sincerely regret the error I made describing an email from Ben Rhodes. I should have stated, as I did elsewhere, the reporting was based on a summary provided by a source. I apologize for my mistake.” He declined to comment further.

And the Post does not absolve Karl completely, still noting that he did not disclose the details surrounding the emails at the onset. But “doctored”? That gets three Pinocchios [emphasis added]:

It has long been part of the Washington game for officials to discredit a news story by playing up errors in a relatively small part of it. Pfeiffer gives the impression that GOP operatives deliberately tried to “smear the president” with false, doctored e-mails.

But the reporters involved have indicated they were told by their sources that these were summaries, taken from notes of e-mails that could not be kept. The fact that slightly different versions of the e-mails were reported by different journalists suggests there were different note-takers as well.

Indeed, Republicans would have been foolish to seriously doctor e-mails that the White House at any moment could have released (and eventually did). Clearly, of course, Republicans would put their own spin on what the e-mails meant, as they did in the House report. Given that the e-mails were almost certain to leak once they were sent to Capitol Hill, it’s a wonder the White House did not proactively release them earlier.

The burden of proof lies with the accuser. Despite Pfeiffer’s claim of political skullduggery, we see little evidence that much was at play here besides imprecise wordsmithing or editing errors by journalists.

Be sure to read the full analysis here.

For a full rundown of the specific ABC controversy surrounding the emails, see our coverage below:

• Did ‘Republicans’ Release Altered Versions of the Benghazi E-mails? CBS Releases New Allegation
• CNN Refutes Major Part of ABC’s Bombshell Benghazi Report…But Is There an Explanation?
• ABC Releases Big Benghazi Report: Talking Points Changed 12 Times, ‘Dramatically Edited by Administration,’ and Scrubbed of Terror References
• On TheBlog: More Benghazi whistleblowers to come forward?

Follow Jonathon M. Seidl on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Obama and his closest aides have been exposed. Not just as a cabal of lying, preening, and corrupt politicos, but an administration so wedded to authoritarian progressive doctrine they will hammer at the load-bearing walls of liberty in pursuit of their statist agenda.

President Barack Obama smiles during prayer at the Morehouse College Sunday, May 19, 2013, in Atlanta. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

This is because the Obama administration’s vision of America is inherently in conflict with the Bill of Rights. Recent scandals are merely the latest skirmish in this ongoing battle.

This makes perfect sense when you put it in context. Authoritarian statists despise the Bill of Rights because of the plainness of its language and the clarity of its intent; it’s meant to protect us from them. And when government transgresses the protection the Amendments afford U.S. citizens, it is obvious that our freedoms are in jeopardy.

Which brings us to why the IRS targeting, AP investigation, and Benghazi debacle are, while disgraceful, largely unsurprising. The Bill of Rights stands in the way of just what the Obama administration means by fundamentally transforming America. They want a more collective, centrally planned America. To achieve that, they must disassemble the Bill of Rights, piece by piece, through legislation, executive fiat, and demagoguery.

Even a cursory review of Obama administration positions shows a constant, unnerving tension with core Constitutional protections. Here’s a breakdown showing how the Obama administration has twisted, ignored, or attacked the Bill of Rights.

1^st Amendment–  “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

It is necessary to show the entire 1^st Amendment here because it has been so diligently savaged by the Obama administration. From top to bottom, clause-to-clause, the legal bedrock of our spiritual and intellectual freedom has suffered sustained assaults under the Obama regime.

In President Obama’s America, free exercise of religion is fine, so long as everyone accepts they can be coerced to both pass out contraceptives, and pay for the same. His disdain for people of faith—those who “cling to guns or religion”—is a well-established fact.

But Obama’s attacks on freedom of speech and the press have reached new heights. The AP phone records seizures proves that Obama and his team only like leaks that benefit them. Step out of line, and they will crush you, using the full weight of federal law enforcement to do it. Just ask those who wanted to speak out—and still do—on Benghazi.

Much has been made of the “chilling effect” on speech that the AP phone seizures will have, and that the IRS targeting did have, on free speech. Indeed, that was the point, and it is one that will not be forgotten anytime soon. Those who wish to challenge the administration or expose its misdeeds have been put on notice.

2nd Amendment–  “…The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

There are few things that agitate the authoritarian mindset quite as much as an armed citizenry. The right to bear arms not only allows them to defend their homes and families, it would make them quite unruly should the ruling elites attempt to establish tyranny.

The Obama administration has waged an all-out, scorched earth campaign against the 2^nd Amendment.  Progressive-statist hatred for an armed population burns so hot, they pushed this beyond their own political benefit and lost embarrassingly on their first try to pass national gun control. But make no mistake, they will try again. 

4^th Amendment–  “No Person shall be held to answer for a capital… unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury… nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law”

(For our purposes, dealt with simultaneously alongside)

6^th Amendment–  “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed.”

The NDAA, and President Obama’s drones anywhere, anytime policy, seem to make a mockery of both the 4^th and the 6^th.  Attorney General Holder’s parsing of “due process” and “judicial process” with regard to the targeted killing of Americans more or less summarizes their view, not just of these two Amendments, but our system of law in general. It’s great when it suits them, and irrelevant when it doesn’t.

            8^th Amendment– … Nor Excessive fines imposed…

Perhaps someone should send around a copy of number 8 to the Environmental Protection Agency, the Obamacare enforcers, and every other federal agency that has the power of financial life and death over individuals and businesses. Leave your engine idling too long, and you get yourself thousands of dollars in fines. If your property is declared a wetland, you don’t really own it anymore. The stupidity of unaccountable bureaucrats knows no bounds. Neither does their lack of empathy.

10^th Amendment–The Powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people

While under more subtle assault than the others, the 10^th Amendment received a bailout from the Supreme Court in the ObamaCare decision. In a smack down of federal overreach, the majority decided that funding for Medicaid under the ACA could not constitute, to borrow from Don Corleone, an offer the states couldn’t refuse.

That was just one of many examples of the Obama administration’s disdain for the separation of powers, and more specifically, the sovereignty of individual states within the Union.

–

There is no question now that President Obama, his senior-most advisors, and his left-wing base share an ideology that is inimical to individualism, liberty, and limited government. The Bill of Rights, as written by the Founders, stands athwart that agenda, which is why the Obama administration seeks to render it obsolete.

What remains to be determined is whether the American people, presented with irrefutable evidence of an authoritarian trajectory, will take to the bully pulpit and the polling booth to retrieve our liberties before it is too late.

Follow Buck Sexton on Twitter

Follow Buck Sexton on Facebook

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Democrat Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, for example, while attacking the GOP on Monday for being “anti-science” and for being the party of “climate deniers” worked the Oklahoma tornadoes into his speech.

“So, you may have a question for me,” the senator said. “Why do you care? Why do you, Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, care if we Republicans run off the climate cliff like a bunch of proverbial lemmings and disgrace ourselves?”

He continued:

I’ll tell you why. We’re stuck in this together. We are stuck in this together. When cyclones tear up Oklahoma and hurricanes swamp Alabama and wildfires scorch Texas, you come to us, the rest of the country, for billions of dollars to recover.

And the damage that your polluters and deniers are doing doesn’t just hit Oklahoma and Alabama and Texas. It hits Rhode Island with floods and storms. It hits Oregon with acidified seas, it hits Montana with dying forests.

“So, like it or not, we’re in this together,” he added. “You drag America with you to your fate”:

Sen. Whitehouse wasn’t the only one who criticized Republican lawmakers via the Oklahoma tornadoes . Indeed, several journalists used today’s deadly events as an excuse to criticize the GOP for its opposition to the pork-stuffed Sandy Relief bill.

USA Today’s Susan Davis thought this was a really great point that needed to be made:

5 of the 7 members of the OK congressional delegation voted NO on the Hurricane Sandy relief aid package (1/2)

May 20, 2013 5:45pm via webReplyRetweetFavorite

@DaviSusan

Susan Davis

Two YES votes were Reps. Tom Cole and Frank Lucas. Hurricane hit hard in Cole's hometown. (2/2)

May 20, 2013 5:45pm via webReplyRetweetFavorite

@DaviSusan

Susan Davis

Then there’s this from a Vanity Fair contributing editor:

The Nation magazine editor and publisher Katrina vanden Heuvel (i.e. the same media personality who openly admitted in February that her interns have no idea who Bob Woodward is) thought this was a point worth making:

POLITICO’s Glenn Thrush wanted a piece of the action:

And there’s this from Roll Call’s Meredith Shiner:

And let’s not forget the Huffington Post:

As of this writing, the death toll  from Monday’s tornadoes had surpassed 51.

–

RELATED:

• DISASTER: At Least 37 People Dead After Massive Oklahoma Tornado, Death Toll Expected to Rise
• Watch: Unreal Time-Lapse Footage Shows Massive Tornado Tearing Through Okla.
• Okla. Mom’s Incredible Interview: I Prevented Tornado From Taking My Daughter by Holding on to Her Hair

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

(H/T: The Daily Caller). Featured image Getty Images.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

“This tornado is in Oklahoma so clearly it has been ordered to only target conservatives,” she tweeted.

Winstead clearly did not consider the insensitivity of her disgusting joke. As of 9:45 p.m. ET, the tornado had killed at least 51 people and the death toll was expected to rise.

More than two hours after her “joke,” Winstead tweeted the following apology:

“Made a political joke, Twas before devastation revealed. In hindsight, had I understood, I would have refrained. Beyond sorry.”

She included the hashtag #LetMeHaveIt, apparently understanding she would continue to be criticized for the insensitive tweet.

Winstead later referred to herself as an “idiot” over the joke.

Follow Jason Howerton on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

The DOJ kept track of Rosen’s security badge access records to monitor his comings and goings from the State Department, the Post reports. The department also traced the timing of his calls with a State Department official and obtained a search warrant for his personal emails.

But if you think that’s bad, it apparently gets worse: Rosen wasn’t the only Fox News employee to come under intense DOJ scrutiny.

Fox News’ Megyn Kelly said Monday that Fox News correspondent William La Jeunesse and DOJ and national-security senior producer Mike Levine were also targeted by President Obama’s Justice Department.

Here’s Kelly breaking the news:

And here she is discussing the legal aspects to the DOJ’s recent actions:

Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

(H/T: NRO).

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. (Getty Images)

Potential donors to a nonprofit group committed to promoting the Affordable Care Act are supposedly second-guessing whether they want to associate their money with Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ “scandalous” fundraising efforts.

“Would-be givers are ‘gun-shy’ after reports that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius called on private industry executives to contribute to Enroll America, a nonprofit that is encouraging Americans to sign up for health care markets tied to the Affordable Care Act,” the Washington Times reports.

It’s true: HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius earlier this month asked companies in an industry that she has an enormous amount of influence over to donate money to help implement Obamacare.

The Washington Post reports:

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has gone, hat in hand, to health industry officials, asking them to make large financial donations to help with the effort to implement President Obama’s landmark health-care law, two people familiar with the outreach said.

Her unusual fundraising push comes after Congress repeatedly rejected the Obama administration’s requests for additional funds to set up the Affordable Care Act, leaving HHS to implement the president’s signature legislative accomplishment on what officials have described as a shoestring budget.

Over the past three months, Sebelius has made multiple phone calls to health industry executives, community organizations and church groups and asked that they contribute whatever they can to nonprofit groups that are working to enroll uninsured Americans and increase awareness of the law, according to an HHS official and an industry person familiar with the secretary’s activities. Both spoke on the condition of anonymity to talk openly about private discussions.

Considering Sebelius’ power and sway over the health care industry, her fundraising efforts have raised a few eyebrows.

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) told TheBlaze that the house energy and commerce committee will be looking into the allegations that HHS Secretary is raising funds from companies she also regulates.

“She should not be out asking for contributions from people they regulate and oversee and that she’s going to be regulating through this Obamacare process,” she said.

Blackburn said many people have made comparisons to the Iran-Contra affair, in which an end-run around Congress was made. “It sounds worse to me,” she said of the current allegations.

Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) also expressed concern that the HHS secretary might be raising funds from people she regulates and passing that on to a private entity in an end-run around Congress, similar to the Iran-Contra affair.

Enroll America “to do what Congress refused to do.” Alexander said he and several other senators have asked the Government Accountability Office to investigate the details and provide facts.

Sen. Alexander said it sounds like the secretary is “doing what Congress refused to do” by using private donations and a non-government entity, Enroll America.

“If Congress says no and you go ahead and do it anyway, then that’s illegal,” he added.

Meanwhile, a few bloggers have voiced their concerns in — less diplomatic terms.

“I’m sure people who decline her generous invitation to pay up won’t suffer and negative consequences,” the Ace of Spades HQ blog notes.

It’s not like the Obama administration “used the IRS to target conservatives. Oh, right. And naturally there won’t be a little something extra in the regulations for those that pony up,” the site adds.

Still, despite the backlash against Sebelius’ behavior, the department stands by her efforts, “noting aspects of the Public Health Service Act allow the secretary to engage with nonprofits to promote the president’s agenda,” the Times reports.

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image Getty Images.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

42% think the Justice Department’s actions were chiefly an effort to intimidate the media. But nearly as many (38%) think Justice was primarily acting out of a concern for national security. Twenty percent (20%) are not sure.

It’s worth noting that this poll was taken before news broke Monday that a Fox News reporter also had his emails, phone records and whereabouts tracked by the Justice Department.

@eScarry

Follow Eddie Scarry on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

After news broke last week that the Justice Department in 2012 secretly seized the phone records of Associated Press staffers, MMFA curiously didn’t cover it at all on its website. Except to post a set of talking points that made the case for the administration.

Then Monday morning the Washington Post reported that the DOJ had also trace a Fox News reporter’s phone calls and whereabouts. What did Media Matters say about that one?

As of now, nothing. There’s nothing on the website about that one either.

MMFA’s spokeswoman Jess Levin has not returned three separate requests for comment (sent to her email, office phone and cell phone).

@eScarry

Follow Eddie Scarry on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

IRS Scandal – Over the past week, it has become clear that the IRS targeting of conservative groups was orchestrated by high ranking officials and was going on from quite some time.  Now we are discovering that Obama met with the head of the anti-Tea Party IRS union on March 31, 2010, the day before the targeting began in earnest. The likelihood that he knew about the targeting, or even orchestrated it, is evident by the fact that White House chief council, Kathryn Ruemmler, knew about the scandal at least three weeks before the White House claims the president found out about it (which was when the media broke the scandal).

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee will hold a hearing on the scandal this Wednesday. There is a coordinated attempt on the part of the media to dissuade Republicans from “overplaying their hand” on the scandal.  Republicans must pursue this with every tool at their disposal.  Abuse at the hands of the IRS is something that resonates with every American, even the low-information voters.  This is also an opportune time for Republicans to begin making the case why we should abolish the current tax system, which grants too much authority to these corrupt bureaucrats.

Farm Bill – Last week the House and Senate passed their respective farm bills out of committee.  The Senate bill costs $955 billion over 10 years and creates a new shallow loss program covering up to 90% of a farmer’s income – on the taxpayer dime.  Most of the bill is nothing more than locking in Obama’s record baseline of food stamp spending.  The bill also contains numerous green energy programs, conservation programs and mandates, deleterious sugar subsidies, a Soviet-style dairy price fixing program, and a program to pay Brazilian cotton growers.

This week, the Senate will be debating a number of amendments on the bill (S. 954).  It is weeks like this where we will be able to gauge how many senators place parochial interests over the free market.

Student Loans – Last July, as part of the highway omnibus bill, Congress passed a one-year extension of the 2007 law that reduced interest on government subsidized Stafford loans from 6.8% to 3.4%.  The total cost was $6 billion.  Now Republicans are preparing a bill, H.R. 1911, which would require interest rates for all federal student loans to be pegged to the 10-year Treasury note plus 2.5 percent for undergraduate degrees and 4.5 percent for graduate degrees.  While this sounds somewhat better than a clean extension of the rate increase, this bill does nothing to end the circuitous cycle of government-induced subsidization and inflation of the Big Education bubble.  With current rates hovering around 1.9%, the student loan interest rates would rise modestly to 4.4%, still well below the 6.8% level.  The 10-year Treasury note is expected to remain low for the foreseeable future.

Instead of debating how to adjust the rate of interest, Republicans should articulate the case for phasing out this unlimited subsidization of higher education. Since the Department of Education was created, the cost of college tuition has increased over 439% adjusted for inflation!  The rate of increase is almost exactly commensurate with the rate of growth of DOE subsidization.  Conservatives cannot support continued government intervention in higher education to benefit Big Education cronies at the expense of the rest of us.  The bill is expected to come to the floor on Thursday.

Immigration – Last Thursday, the bipartisan group of open borders Republicans announced that they came to “an agreement of principle” with their Democrat counterparts on the gang of 8.  While the details of the deal were not released to the public, it is clear that the “principles” established in the deal closely resemble the framework of the Senate bill.  There will be an immediate broad amnesty for almost everyone here illegally, and deportations will be suspended after a “plan” is established to secure the border.  The only difference is that the House deal would delay citizenship for an extra 2 years, something that is unlikely to happen once the legalization train gets rolling.

Meanwhile, the House Judiciary Committee will push forward with a bill that will create a massive guest worker program for Agriculture.  The program will allow in a whopping 500,000 new Ag workers, including amnesty for those already here illegally and working in the field.  While there are some good aspects of the program, such as barring spouses and children from coming over and withholding wages in escrow until the worker leaves the country, now is not the time for a guest worker program.  Bob Goodlatte and the Judiciary Committee need to focus on protecting America first, which includes border and interior enforcement, along with measures to screen out people who come here from countries that represent a security risk.  Only after such measures are in place would it make sense to talk about a guest worker program and any amnesty for those already here.

On Wednesday, the House Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on the Senate amnesty bill.  Now is the time for Chairman Goodlatte and the other members to stand up for conservative principles and highlight all the egregious flaws in the bill.  It is especially noteworthy that yet another union of immigration officers has now come out with a scathing critique of the bill.

On the Senate side, the Judiciary Committee will likely pass the bill out of committee this week with the support of Jeff Flake, Lindsey Graham, and possibly Orrin Hatch.  Conservatives must be prepared for a massive floor fight over the bill in June.  For those who believe that mass amnesty will be a disaster for the country, now is the time to be heard.

Stay informed at TheMadisonProject.com

Follow Daniel Horowitz on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Yeah, this guy actually said that…

(Image: sodahead.com)

Via Politico:

“One of the things you’ve learned over the last four years is there’s no longer any room for excuses,” he told the Atlanta college’s 500 male graduates, in a rare speech on what he sees as the obligations that young black men have to themselves, their families and their communities.

“We’ve got no time for excuses – not because the bitter legacies of slavery and segregation have vanished entirely; they haven’t,” he said. “It’s not because racism and discrimination no longer exist; that’s still out there. It’s just that in today’s hyperconnected, hypercompetitive world, with a billion young people from China and India and Brazil entering the global workforce alongside you, nobody is going to give you anything you haven’t earned.”

And, he said, while being black may sometimes pose obstacles, “whatever hardships you may experience because of your race … pale in comparison to the hardships previous generations endured – and overcame.”

See the video after the jump…

Follow Meredith Jessup on Twitter

Follow Meredith Jessup on Facebook

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

Rubin and Current TV’s David Shuster on CNN’s “Reliable Sources” got into a bit of a heated back-and-forth Sunday morning after Shuster suggested that the White House’s Benghazi email dump last week proves that Republicans and journalists, most especially ABC News’ Jonathan Karl, were wrong to have insisted that the administration has been hiding something.

Rubin explained that Karl’s attribution was incorrect but that his story was, for the most part, correct.

Shuster disagreed.

“It was wrong,” the Current TV journalist said. “Because the overall Republican point here was that the Obama administration was trying to protect the State Department — the Obama administration was trying to protect the State Department — and that the White House was somehow trying to characterize the talking points or change the talking points in order to minimize political damage. That Republican idea is just flat out wrong!”

“Very nice to have the Media Matters talking points recited out of David’s lips,” Rubin shot back.

“What are you talking about?” Shuster asked. “I haven’t talked to anybody from Media Matters.”

Shuster continued, prompting Rubin to turn to Howard Kurtz, the show’s host, and say, “Howard, if you want to hear me that’s fine, if you don’t, you should mute him.”

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

(H/T: Mediaite). Featured image screen grab.

Follow Becket Adams on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

James Taranto, opinion editor for the Wall Street Journal, stops just short of saying President Obama stole the 2012 election.

Regarding the IRS scandal, in which it’s been discovered that the agency unfairly targeted politically conservative groups for scrutiny last year, Taranto writes:

No one can deny that Lance Armstrong and Mark McGwire were highly skilled athletes. But their accomplishments are forever tainted by their use of banned performance-enhancing drugs. The use of the Internal Revenue Service’s coercive power to suppress dissent against Obama is the political equivalent of steroids. The history books should record Obama’s re-election with an asterisk to indicate that it was achieved with the help of illicit means.

@eScarry

Follow Eddie Scarry on Twitter

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint

President Obama shaking hands with students in the White House East Room after delivering a speech on student loans in June 2012 (AP Photo)

As millions of students and their parents are preparing for life after commencement, they’re also preparing to deal with massive student loans. Increasingly, people are concerned about the student debt situation brewing on college campuses. The present state of student debt is not a pretty picture.

According to a report published by the New York Federal Reserve Bank, college students are borrowing more than ever and debt delinquency is on the rise. Student debt almost tripled between 2004 and 2012 and is now just over $1 trillion. In fact, student debt is the only kind of household debt to rise during the Great Recession and is now second only to mortgage debt in magnitude. At the same time, for all age groups the share of borrowers who are more than 90 days delinquent on their student loan repayment has almost doubled.

Some, like Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, claim that student debt is not inflating a higher education bubble that will cause a financial crisis, because the vast majority of student loans are backed by the U.S. government. The taxpayers are on the hook and not the banks, so banks will not be in financial distress if students default.

Bernanke’s claim is revealing. It’s clear that he thinks that the financial system is the economy. It seems that if the financial system is afloat, everything is okay. Such reasoning ignores that what helps people achieve their ends is not money per se but the actual producer and consumer goods that are produced throughout the social economy.

Alas, investment made possible by subsidized loans of newly created money contributes to an unproductive use of resources. Thus the economic problem with government-guaranteed student loans. Consider:

In the first place, it is not at all clear that the educational payoff matches the expense. According to data from the Collegiate Learning Assessment, 45 percent of students demonstrated no significant learning in their first two years of college and 36 percent demonstrated no learning in four years. According to the National Assessment of Adult Literacy, from 1992 to 2003, literacy among college graduates declined at about the same rate that enrollment grew; all the while government grants and guaranteed student loans significantly increased.

This dismal educational payoff is largely because much of increased subsidized tuition payments have beenabsorbed by increases in personnel. For example, in 2007, colleges utilized 13.1 percent more employees to educate the same number of students than they did in 1993. The vast majority of growth has been in administrative staff. From 1976 to 2005, the number of administrative staff per student more than doubled; from 3 per 100 students to more than 6 per 100 students. The financial effect of administrative bloat is magnified by the fact that the average mid-level and senior-level administrative salaries are noticeably higher that the average faculty salary. Between 1993 and 2007, while expenditures per student for instruction increased 39.3 percent, expenditures per student for administration increased by 61.2 percent

Making the college experience available requires using many resources—land, labor, buildings, desks, computers, energy, and all sorts of amenities. These are all resources that have alternative uses. If they are being allocated to provide education merely due to government subsidies, it is likely they would be more valued in other uses.

That student debt is fueling malinvestment is indicated by the rising debt delinquencies. Like the old gray mare, the college wage premium ain’t what she used to be. Increasing default rates prove this. What matters is not only the level of a post-college salary, but the level of that salary relative to the cost of college. As higher salaries fail to keep pace with college tuition, an increasing number of students are put at risk of not paying off their loans.

Additionally, many students who have borrowed money for college do not complete college. Six-year college completion rates at public four-year institutions have remained just below 55 percent for a decade. At the same time, the four-year rate has been stuck around 30 percent.

Colleges, universities, and their students are caught in a costly game of leap frog. The perceived need for financial aid and loans results in more government subsidies. More debt results in more demand for college schooling and consequently higher tuition. Higher tuition increases the perceived need for more debt. More student debt increases the demand for college which increases tuition price. On it goes.

The only solution is to get government out of the business of subsidizing student debt. Then, at least decisions of students to borrow and banks to lend—and colleges to set tuition—will be based on economic reality rather than the shifting sand of monetary inflation.

Follow Dr. Shawn Ritenour on Facebook

Read more stories from TheBlaze

Shock Video Surfaces: Meat Cleaver-Wielding Man Shouts ‘You People Will Never Be Safe!’ Moments After Gruesome London Attack

Why Were DHS Agents Seemingly Monitoring Multiple Tea Party IRS Protests Across the Country on Tuesday?

Confusion Erupts in IRS Hearing After Lois Lerner Tries to Plead the 5th — Watch It All Unfold

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Has Awkward Moment With Okla. Tornado Survivor After Asking If She ‘Thanked the Lord’

The Tense Exchange Between Rep. Trey Gowdy and the Former IRS Head You’ve Been Waiting for…and It Doesn’t Disappoint