7/10/2014 = IRS JUSTICE!

I slept in this fine Saturday morning in June.

Who knew it was Christmas??????

I got up this morning and what do I see before me in the very news first story I click?  The beautiful black visage of one Emmett Sullivan – THE FEDERAL JUDGE WHO WILL PUT LERNER, HOLDER, AND GOD-WILLING, OBAMA IN HANDCUFFS!!!!!  Long story short:  via a PRIVATELY fought lawsuit in the District over those “missing” emails, the case will come before Judge Sullivan on July 10th.  Judge Sullivan, educated at Howard fercryingoutloud, appointed by Clinton, and because he has that beautiful black skin & pedigree UTTERLY ABOVE ACCUSATIONS of… wait for it… “RAAAAAAACIST”… can appoint… wait for it… A SPECIAL PROSECTOR!!!!!! to HOUND THOSE BASTARDS STRAIGHT INTO THE TONGS OF THE HOT HELL THEY SO RICHLY DESERVE!!!!!!!! I am so RIDICULOUSLY happy about this I can’t even describe it.  And to top it all off, my husband and I are going out on a date tonight to a new Mexican place! AND, just as a bonus, Judge Sullivan will scare the living daylights out of that tribe of scum July 10th, one day before my birthday!!!!!

Life is very, very, very, good!

See the good news in its entirety via The New York Observer below!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

BREAKING: Meet Emmet Sullivan, IRS Judge Who Once Sicced a Special Prosecutor on DOJ

Lerner, Holder, Obama: Are You Packing Your Bags?
Americans are appalled over the false testimony of four consecutive IRS Commissioners, Lois Lerner’s countless acts of malfeasance, and the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups and specific individuals, among them Senator Grassley. The ultimate outrage came over the lame, intellectually insulting assertions that all of the most relevant emails have gone missing from multiple IRS computers at the same time.

Today, Judicial Watch found a federal judge who has the integrity and fortitude to seek Justice—and this isn’t his first whack at the Department of Justice either. Enter Emmet G. Sullivan, United States District Judge for the District of Columbia. Mark July 10 in RED on your calendars.

Now, “Internal Revenue Service officials will have to explain to a federal judge July 10 why the tax agency didn’t inform the court that Lois Lerner’s emails had been lost,” the Washington Examiner reports.

Earlier today, attorneys for Judicial Watch sought a courtroom status conference “as soon as possible to discuss the IRS’s failure to fulfill its duties to this court under the law, as well as other ramifications of this lawsuit.” It took Judge Sullivan just a few hours to grant the hearing.

Now the IRS will have to talk to Judge Sullivan about all this—and he has the power to do something about it.

Judge Sullivan is the judge who held federal prosecutors in contempt, dismissed an unjust indictment against a United States Senator, and publicly excoriated the Department of Justice. He also had the moral conviction, courage and gumption to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the Justice Department and the individual prosecutors.

The IRS, the White House, and the DOJ have a lot of explaining to do (and some emails to locate). The Washington Examiner reports that “No mention was made in that production of the lost Lerner emails, even though the original Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit filed in May 2013 specifically sought them. Judicial Watch further noted that ‘although IRS had knowledge of the missing Lois Lerner emails and of the other IRS officials, it materially omitted any mention of the missing records’ in an April 30 status update on its document production.”

Emmet G. Sullivan, a graduate of Howard University and Howard Law who was appointed by President Clinton, is one of the heroes of my new book, Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice. Judge Sullivan ordered an independent investigation of the Department of Justice, which revealed its corrupted prosecution of United States Senator Ted Stevens.

In the book, I write, “An experienced trial judge, Sullivan was a distinguished man and widely held in high regard. He was no ordinary federal judge; he had worked hard all his life on several different courts and had been appointed by three presidents representing both political parties. . . . He had great respect for the rule of law and strived to apply it equally and fairly in all cases in his courtroom.”

In the Stevens case, Judge Sullivan publicly upbraided the government lawyers before an overflow courtroom, “In nearly 25 years on the bench, I’ve never seen anything approaching the mishandling and misconduct that I’ve seen in this case. . . . When the government does not meet its obligations to turn over evidence, the system falters.”

Judge Sullivan was taking the extraordinary step of appointing a special prosecutor. He chose highly respected DC attorney Henry Schuelke III to investigate the prosecutors for possible criminal charges. The judge ordered the department to preserve all of its files, electronic correspondence—everything—and cooperate fully in the investigation, including providing Schuelke access to investigative files and all witnesses.

Yesterday, Lois Lerner’s troubles seemed so far away, goes the old song. Now it looks as though they’re here to stay. . . .

Emmet G. Sullivan is one judge who knows a cover-up when he sees one. He has seen this movie before. On July 10, someone should sell admission to the courtroom and set up concession booths outside.

Sidney Powell worked in the Department of Justice for 10 years and was lead counsel in more than 500 federal appeals. She served nine US Attorneys from both political parties and is the author of  Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice.

DEMOCRAT on IRS: If truth comes out “Obama’s finished”

Fast forward to about 11:20 on this video of Fox News’ Special Report On-Line from last night. It’s the web-only show after the show that Bret Baier does every Wednesday. They were having a discussion about the virtual media black-out of all things IRS. It was an excellent discussion I recommend you take-in in-full, but the money-quote on why it’s happening is from Democrat Kirsten Powers; I’m paraphrasing but she says ‘If this goes where we think it goes, OBAMA’S FINISHED.’

I can’t remember if anyone hinted at this or not; they may have, but I’ve long been of the opinion that nobody will pursue this because nobody wants to be the one who brought down America’s first black president. Quite apart from all the threats and abuse inquisitive reporters have endured, which have by now been well documented, I really think it’s the race thing. These people are so thoroughly indoctrinated and corrupt they can simultaneously admire Woodward & Bernstein, want to be invited to the same cocktail parties they are invited to, but are utterly lacking in the courage it took them to do the work that makes them A-list cocktail party guests all because the president is… black.

BTW: BIG props to Kirsten for HER courage. It can’t be very pleasant in the circles she runs in right now.  She’s one of the last, few, SANE Democrats left. Still VERY liberal, but willing to give a hairy eye-ball to her own party when it needs it.  Sometimes she can’t see through the growth (!) but I give her a LOT of credit for not being one of the herd.

UPDATE: Random Thoughts…

MON 06/23/2014

IRS:  Issa is having the full Oversight committee grill Koskinen in prime time tonight!  How cool is that?  I just saw him on Fox say he’d sent a list of 50 questions he’d like him prepared to answer in front of the committee, including who had the genius idea to destroy evidence – names, names please.

This should be fun.  7pm tonight.  And should last 3 to 4 hours.  Guess I’ll be up late, as the best questions usually come from the newest members (those not yet corrupt) and since they question in order of seniority, it will be a late night.  Happy to be bleary-eyed.

I am convinced that the only reason some enterprising reporter hasn’t run this down for a Pulitzer is that they will be responsible for bringing down the first black President.  I’m not being hyperbolic.  This is CLEARLY a conspiracy at the HIGHEST levels and you’d have to be be brain-damaged not to know it.  Hell, even the Chicago Tribune, Obama’s hometown newspaper, the former employer of one of Obama’s chief henchman, David Axelrod, and a paper which endorsed him twice, put up an editorial calling for a Special Prosecutor!

I mean… Please… When you’ve lost the C-H-I-C-A-G-O Tribune…

You know what?  Here it is.  Read it below:

June 22, 2014

~More Smoke at the IRS — And Not Only From the Hard Drives

~This 13-month refusal to name a special prosecutor has become its own curiosity

“It’s inexcusable, and Americans are right to be angry about it, and I am angry about it. I will not tolerate this kind of behavior in any agency, but especially in the IRS, given the power that it has and the reach that it has into all of our lives. … I’ll do everything in my power to make sure nothing like this happens again by holding the responsible parties accountable. …”

— President Barack Obama condemning “misconduct” at the Internal Revenue Service, May 15, 2013.

With each plot twist in “The Internal Revenue Service and its Keen Attention to Conservative Groups,” political partisans scurry to their bunkers. Flying spittle! Battle stations! Raise the long guns!

Not us. We calmly re-read President Obama’s reassurance of 13 months ago, especially that phrase about holding the responsible parties accountable. Because consequences can’t occur until all of us learn the who, what, when, where and why. It was around the same time, Carl M. Cannon of RealClearPolitics reported Friday, that the president told reporters aboard Air Force One that the IRS misconduct was the work of rogue agents in Ohio — “two Dilberts in Cincinnati.”

But, like the rest of us, the president has since read news accounts establishing that IRS officials in Washington were communicating extensively about the agency’s scrutiny of conservative groups. We also now know that several Democratic senators, including Dick Durbin of Illinois, had urged the IRS to look into some of these groups. And we know that, in 2012, top IRS officials repeatedly misled Congress by not disclosing — in response to highly specific questions — that the agency was giving extraordinary attention to conservative groups.

Are those data points connected? Or are they mere coincidences? None of us yet knows the origins, motivations and scope of the agency’s actions. In May 2013 we wrote that with their stonewalling, claimed ignorance and convenient amnesia, IRS officials were making it difficult for Americans to evaluate the depth, but also the official awareness, of the agency’s evident assault on free speech.

At the time we didn’t know that the agency would resist congressional demands for full disclosures. Nor did we know that seven IRS workers — including Lois Lerner, former director of the agency’s tax-exempt organizations division — would report losing emails that congressional investigators wanted to examine.

On a matter this serious, the administration can’t adequately investigate itself. Given the amount of smoke now rising from the IRS, many Americans won’t be much interested in what one arm of the administration concludes about other arms, including the IRS, the Treasury Department of which it’s part, and possibly the White House.

That’s why we’ve urged Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint a special prosecutor — a phrase that, like “customer support” or “designated hitter,” provokes Pavlovian suspicions. We’ve been skeptical of some special prosecutors and their tendency toward mission creep. But we’ve also seen situations where only a special prosecutor has the independence and credibility to resolve a case that drips with politics, as when then-U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald of Chicago investigated (and convicted of perjury and other offenses) I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, who had been Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff.

Why Holder won’t act is a mystery he’s inviting Americans to resolve, uncharitably, in their own minds.

Whatever any one of us thinks about this scandal — from “Republican grandstanding” to “another Watergate” — all of us can agree that it’s slathered in hot politics. Remember the context:

In the 2010 congressional election, well-funded conservative groups led a sea-to-sea GOP victory march. At both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, Democrats forcefully complained that some of the groups were engaged in political activity that their tax-exempt status didn’t allow.

Democrats worried that the 2012 presidential election would be a repeat. In June 2012, five months before that election, an inspector general told top Treasury officials that he was investigating IRS targeting of tax-exempt groups. So:

Did that juicy news, with its potential to capsize a presidential campaign, travel beyond Treasury? Beats us. But anyone who isn’t curious about the answer to that question probably bivouacs in one of those bunkers discussed at the top of this editorial.

President Obama was right. Given the reach that it has into all of our lives, none of us can ignore the IRS and questions about its conduct.

And now there’s one more question ascendant: This 13-month refusal to name a special prosecutor has become its own curiosity.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

SUN 06/22/2014

Random thoughts:

BIRTHER STUFF:  I am convinced we will find out Obama’s stated birthday is wrong.  I believe he is at least a year, possibly 18 months older than he says he is.  This would account for two things: that his  mother was not yet 18 and Hawaii was not yet a state.  That would answer why he’s so secretive about his nativity.  If she’s not legal and neither is Hawaii, he’s his father’s son, legally, which means he’s not a natural born American citizen .  I believe he was born in Hawaii – that is to say – on that plot of land in the middle of the Pacific – but I think there are serious problems with his legal ability to hold the Office he holds, either because of the aforementioned theory and/or adoption in Indonesia.  I’ve seen some writing that even an adoption in Indonesia would not be problematic for “natural born” status, but I don’t know enough about it to offer any kind of informed opinion.  And for you skeptics: please keep in mind there are differences among the various classifications of “citizen” – i.e. “naturalized” vs. “natural born”, ‘k?  They may all be American citizens, but they are not all equal in the eyes of the constitutional law which requires “natural born” for President.  Further, just to show how reasonable I can be, I don’t believe Ted Cruz – whom I LOVE – is eligible!  He was born in CANADA for crying out loud!  You know – BRITISH KINGDOM.  The clam-bake WE BLEW.  The VERY monarchy we threw off.  Hello?  I don’t care WHO his mother was.  She could have been America’s First Lady. HE WAS BORN IN CANADA.  His mother was American but his FATHER WAS CUBAN.  I don’t think there’s any doubt that the framers intended TWO AMERICAN PARENTS on AMERICAN SOIL = natural born.  It’s not yet been fully fleshed out at SCOTUS but I just don’t see, having perused the Federalist papers, you can come away with any other conclusion.  We fought a revolution for crying out loud.  They were a little sensitive about infiltrators, you know?

IRS:  You’d have to be deaf, dumb, and blind not to see MASSIVE corruption, collusion, and the virtual weaponization of IRS via DOJ and The White House.

C’mon.

This is awful.  Just awful.  If Democrats don’t step up they will rue the day.  I’m convinced.  This just cannot stand.  It’s a cancer on the Republic and it must be stopped or we will lose it.

More later…

Between Lawlessness & Impeachment

You can’t count that high; the number of barrels of ink spilled, trees felled, fingers cramped on the digital highway of thought regarding President Obama’s failure to take care that laws be faithfully executed. Boil it down and it is this: impeachment is a populist political remedy to a provably lawless Executive; i.e. you must have the popular WILL to be right. Being right, merely legally correct, that a President has broken the law is not enough. You can be right all day long, every day, for two long terms of lawlessness but unless the ball-less wonders on the Hill have the wind at their back – you – holding torches and pitchforks, they will lay down like a Victorian bride and think of England.

So what to do? The Founders, remarkable in their vision for the Republic and the flaws of man, never envisioned an electorate so supine, a Hill so willing to be neutered, that they would need some remedy between lawlessness and removal. They figured, rightly until now, that the electorate wouldn’t stand for it (40 years ago popular will was drummed up to a fever pitch by a nascently liberal press to oust Republican Nixon) and that the Legislative Branch wouldn’t stand and cheer, as they did recently, when the Executive stood before them and announced he would go around them! It was a truly stunning moment for the Republic. What happened to these people? When did the species stand and cheer to have their balls cut off? How did this happen?

How we got here is a conversation for another day, but George Will has an excellent column on the state of affairs as they stand now & a possible solution somewhere between laying down and taking it and impeachment and I recommend the entire thing to you, but here, brilliantly, is his last paragraph, and thus, mine:

“Advocates of extreme judicial quietism to punish the supine people leave the people’s representatives no recourse short of the extreme and disproportionate “self help” of impeachment. Surely courts should not encourage this. The cumbersome and divisive blunderbuss process of impeachment should be a rare recourse. Furthermore, it would punish a president for anti-constitutional behavior but would not correct the injury done to the rule of law.”