Ben Johnson, Floyd Reports

One of the president’s aims in his address last night was to clean up his image as the community-organizer-in-chief, the president who refuses to wear a flag pin on his lapel or put his hand over his heart for the national anthem. He attempted to boost his patriotism by rhetorically hitching himself to George W. Bush In his address last night, Barack Obama said:

This afternoon, I spoke to former President George W. Bush. It’s well known that he and I disagreed about the war from its outset. Yet no one can doubt President Bush’s support for our troops, or his love of country and commitment to our security. As I’ve said, there were patriots who supported this war, and patriots who opposed it. And all of us are united in appreciation for our servicemen and women, and our hopes for Iraqis’ future. (Emphasis in original.)

The emphasis was deliberate. Obama intended to put himself on the same level as President Bush, who regularly got misty in the presence of the military and sobbed openly with those who had lost family members. Obama’s speech made it sound as though Bush’s patriotism were being questioned.

Left-wingers display unmatched outrage when they believe anyone “questions” their patriotism. (They spend the rest of their time telling us how much America sucks.) If President Obama wants to enjoy the respect of patriotic Americans, he should do it the old fashioned way: he should earn it.

Even as this is being written, thousands of military men are threatened with being disenfranchised in the midterm elections. And the Obama administration seems to be going out of its way to make sure their votes do not count.

Read more.

The Washington Times

The Cuyahoga County, Ohio, Board of Elections today can stare down the increasingly rogue voting rights section of the U.S. Department of Justice, which continues to play ethnic politics nationwide. The state of Georgia recently forced the department to back off from its bullying tactics, and this Buckeye county should do the same.

Justice officials have threatened legal action against the county board unless it prints all its ballots in bilingual fashion. “With additional requirements for translators, community outreach, additional staffing and printing, the demand potentially would double the county’s election costs,” board member Rob Frost told Jennifer Rubin of the Weekly Standard. “The Justice attorneys said they were authorized to sue the county. …”

The Justice Department’s position is wrongheaded on several levels. First, the department bases its demand on Section 4(e) of the Voting Rights Act, which is meant to ensure ballot access for Puerto Rican natives who never learned English. Nothing in 4(e) requires that every ballot in a jurisdiction be printed in Spanish – but only that those Puerto Rican voters not be denied the right to vote due to an inability “to read, write, understand or interpret any matter in the English language.” There’s no reason to find the county noncompliant if most of its ballots are English-only, as long as its Spanish speakers have access to Spanish ballots upon request.

Read more.

Ben Johnson, Floyd Reports

In the past, conservative uprisings have been put out when Republicans came to power. Bill Clinton’s first term — loaded with a broken promise to cut taxes, a tax increase, gays in the military, HillaryCare, Jocelyn Elders, Lani Guinier, Paula Jones, and Whitewater (to name a few scandals) — enraged most of the country. But after Republicans came to power in 1994, the nation simmered down — even when the Republican leadership backed down on Clinton’s well-deserved impeachment.

Politico has a revealing new story that, if Republicans retake Congress after the midterm elections, they intend to investigate a wide variety of Obama’s misdeeds, some of them grounds for impeachment. The story lists a few of the cases under investigation:

Jobgate. The most serious allegations on the list were raised by two Democrats: Joe Sestak and Andrew Romanoff. Both have said the Obama administration offered them jobs or other incentives to drop out of hotly contested U.S. Senate races in Pennsylvania and Colorado, respectively. The White House believed their primary opponents stood a better chance of winning, so they attempted to bribe these two, according to the candidates. If the allegations are true, they likely meet the definition of “impeachable offenses.” Former President Bill Clinton has contradicted the Obama administration’s story on the Sestak offer already. Rep. Darrell Issa, R-CA, has responded to the denials with calls for further investigation.

Bailouts. Republicans want to look into Obama’s endless bailouts. Investigators should pay close attention to the administration’s tactics in taking over General Motors on behalf of Big Labor, a move certainly unconstitutional, as his Chicago-style, backdoor arm-twisting could easily have crossed the line. Despite his promises to have the most transparent administration in history, much of Obama’s dealings remain hidden. As Obama said on the campaign trail, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.”

The New Black Panthers Case. Politico calls this scandal “microscopic”; readers outside the Beltway know it is anything but. It is perhaps the most explosive issue facing the Obama administration. In addition to letting off a pair of radical activists who threatened Republican voters with clubs, there is the broader allegation raised by J. Christian Adams that Barack Obama and Eric Holder have decided to drop all cases against minorities. That kind of blanket discrimination makes a mockery of the idea of “blind justice” and undermines one of the key pillars of our government.

ACORN. Despite its defunding, ACORN continues its dubious voter registration schemes under another name. In addition to presidential funding, the committee should investigate ACORN’s role in the Obama ‘08 campaign to determine the extent of coordination the president had with this often-indicted organization.

The article lists a few other, in some cases local scandals. May I suggest a few more to Rep. Issa, et. al.?

Government Propaganda. Darrell Issa has led the way on the Obama administration’s funding of covert propaganda. His committee drafted a 36-page report of Obama’s potential crimes, many of which your tax dollars finance. He made a compelling case at least some of these cross the line into illegality. Now, let him prosecute it.

Invasion of Privacy. The Fourth Amendment forbids the government from searching Americans without a warrant. However, a recent court case has found the government does not need a warrant to attach a GPS to your car while it is parked in your driveway. Forbes has reported full-body-scanning vans now prowl the streets, as well. Does the administration obtain a warrant to scan (and thus see naked) everyone monitored? If not, does it retain the images of people not covered by warrant? Does it act on information it finds without a warrant?

Politico quotes some Republicans who want to curtail all talk of silly things like upholding the Constitution or following the rule of law. Let’s hope this time any potential investigations are not short-circuited from within.

Ben Johnson, Floyd Reports

The Obama administration has decided to get tough on illegal immigration…enforcement. The Washington Post reports today that Eric Holder is threatening to sue America’s toughest sheriff, Joe Arpaio if the sheriff does not help the administration continue a second frivolous lawsuit against him:

Justice Department officials in Washington have issued a rare threat to sue Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio if he doesn’t cooperate by Tuesday with their investigation into whether he discriminates against Hispanics…a federal grand jury in Phoenix is examining whether Arpaio has used his power to investigate and intimidate political opponents and whether his office misappropriated government funds, sources said.

That sounds serious. It’s not. Apparently “civil rights groups accuse the 78-year-old lawman of racial profiling,” as they do everyone else. (The Department of Homeland Security has estimated that 62 percent of all illegal immigrants are from Mexico, and even more from other Latin American nations. This suggests a potential profile.) In addition, “some Maricopa County officials say Arpaio has launched meritless corruption investigations against officials who have criticized his policies or opposed his requests” — so they’re launching a meritless investigation of Arpaio.

The Attorney General is demanding compliance even as his Justice Dept. is stonewalling an investigation into charges levied by a former employee that the department turns a blind eye to black crimes.

Left-leaning prosecutors do not see any merit in the case against Arpaio. Former Justice Dept. prosecutor Peter Zeidenberg, who helped prosecute Scooter Libby and donated $1,400 to Barack Obama in 2008,  said, “I don’t know what a charge would be…I’m not aware of any federal statute that would fit.”

Even the Post couldn’t help but notice the odd timing: “The standoff comes just weeks after the Justice Department sued Arizona and Gov. Jan Brewer (R) over the state’s new immigration law, heightening tensions over the issue ahead of November’s midterm elections.” This is merely a second front in the administration’s crackdown on its own citizens (on behalf of non-citizens).

Although it is unclear how he could win or hope to keep his case from being laughed out of court, Holder said he expects his case to “produce results.”

That phrase reveals everything. The intention is not justice but harassment. This threatened lawsuit is simply the latest bout of federal thuggery, extortion, and intimidation against the Obama administration’s critics.

This prosecution of those who uphold the law on behalf of those who transgress the law represents Barack Obama and the Washington Democrat’’s modus operandi: every decision they make is 180-degrees from reality.

Obama will not enforce federal immigration law but is suing a state that offered to help Washington pick up the slack.

Although Obama does not want to investigate the funding of the Ground Zero mosque, Nancy Pelosi said yesterday she will “join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded.”

The president would not comment on the “wisdom” of putting a mosque on the site of the worst act of Muslim terrorism on U.S. soil (so far), but he has called police officers stupid for arresting a hostile suspect and auto officials avaricious for refusing a hostile union takeover.

He refuses to prosecute members of the New Black Panther Party (who voted for Obama) for threatening to beat white voters (who have voted against him), but instructed his Dept. of Homeland Security to spy on housewives and veterans who oppose abortion or gay marriage (or, yes, illegal immigration).

Michael Reagan points out in his column today that Obama has no time for Boy Scouts or the National Prayer Breakfast but he has hosted an Iftar dinner surrounded by Muslims. (He also held a Seder that reportedly commemorated the struggle for socialized medicine.)

This is the logical outcome of an administration that believes we must tax our way into prosperity, “spend money to keep from going bankrupt,” cower our way into respect, expand health care by reducing the number of doctors, bow our way into dominance, and balkanize our way to unity.

By Kevin “Coach” Collins

Apparently there are no limits to the depths to which Eric Holder will sink. This fraud is willing to allow Black thugs to threaten peaceful Whites trying to vote, and completely ignore the outrage over this miscarriage of justice. Now he is engaging in full fledged extortion.

According to the federal criminal Statues, Mr. Holder is sworn to enforce, his new policy for assessing and keeping funds from defendants in discrimination lawsuits is a violation of the Hobbs Act.

Extortion as defined in the  Hobbs Act is “the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right.” It is 18 U.S.C. S 1951(b) (2) of the federal criminal code. How things should work The Department of Justice (DoJ) has been turned into a criminal cabal whose purpose has become collecting money from those unlucky enough to fall prey to its clutches.

Holder has turned the purposes of the DoJ Civil Rights Division upside down.

Read More:

By Fred Dardick, Impeach Obama Contributor

Last week Rep. Michelle Bachmann was asked what Republicans had in mind should they retake the House of Representatives this November, she replied “I think that all we should do is issue subpoenas and have one hearing after another and expose all the nonsense that is going on.”

Considering the sheer volume of illegal and impeachable offences committed by Obama and his cohorts over the past couple of years, the House will be very busy indeed.

Putting aside Obama’s inept leadership, weakening of our national defenses and transparent attempt to socialize our great nation, there are a number of more practical crimes that once investigated could lead to Obama’s impeachment and perhaps even his well deserved imprisonment.

25 Obama Crimes the House Should Investigate in 2011

1. Convicted felon and Chicago real estate developer Tony Rezko’s purchase of land adjacent to Obama’s house

(more…)

Judicial Watch

Days after suing Arizona for “intruding” on the government’s authority by passing a state version of its immigration laws, the Obama Administration has revealed that it will also ignore violations of the federal statute.

A Justice Department official confirmed in a news report this week that the agency will not take any action against cities that defy a 14-year-old federal law by offering illegal immigrants sanctuary. The measure (Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act of 1996) specifically requires states and municipalities to cooperate with federal authorities when it comes to immigration enforcement.

For decades, dozens of local governments have provided illegal aliens with sanctuary by shielding them from the feds after arrests or criminal convictions and banning police from inquiring about suspects’ immigration status. Judicial Watch has sued several major police departments—including Los Angeles and Chicago—for their illegal don’t-ask-don’t tell immigration policies, which have enabled violent criminals to continue victimizing innocent Americans.

Numerous illegal immigrants with extensive criminal records have committed atrocious crimes because they were never deported, despite repeated encounters with local law enforcement agencies in sanctuary cities. Recent examples include…

Read More

By Jerry Markon, Washington Post

The Justice Department has decided to file suit against Arizona on the grounds that the state’s new immigration law illegally intrudes on federal prerogatives, law enforcement sources said Monday.

The lawsuit, which three sources said could be filed as early as Tuesday, will invoke for its main argument the legal doctrine of "preemption," which is based on the Constitution’s supremacy clause and says that federal law trumps state statutes. Justice Department officials believe that enforcing immigration laws is a federal responsibility, the sources said.

A federal lawsuit will dramatically escalate the legal and political battle over the Arizona law, which gives police the power to question anyone if they have a "reasonable suspicion" that the person is an illegal immigrant. The measure has drawn words of condemnation from President Obama and Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and opposition from civil rights groups. It also has prompted at least five other lawsuits. Arizona officials have urged the Obama administration not to sue.

Read More

By Jim Kouri, Canada Free Press

 Obama blasts Arizona’s anti-illegal immigration bill

On Friday, President Barack Obama revealed his disdain for a new law in Arizona that would require police in the state that borders Mexico to determine if people are in the United States illegally.

The law, signed by Governor Jan Brewer, requires state and local police to determine the status of people if there is “reasonable suspicion” that they are illegal immigrants and to arrest people who are unable to provide documents proving they are in the country legally
“If we continue to fail to act at a federal level, we will continue to see misguided efforts opening up around the country,” Obama said.

Obama also said that the Justice Department will monitor enforcement of this new law, a statement many believe is a threat aimed at Arizona cops.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs later said if the Arizona measure became law in that state, Obama has asked that the Justice Department look into any civil rights implications.

While the pleas from American citizens in Arizona and other states fell on deaf ears in Washington, DC, the violence and crime at the U.S.-Mexico border continued unabated.

In yet another example of violence spreading north of the border, a deadly Mexican gang is actively plotting to kill U.S. law enforcement officers and their families in Texas, according to a Department of Homeland Security alert that warns U.S. cops to wear body armor and vary routes to avoid being tracked.

Read More:

By BYRON YORK, Washington Examiner

Our Justice Department is hard at work

Attorney General Eric Holder says nine Obama appointees in the Justice Department have represented or advocated for terrorist detainees before joining the Justice Department. But he does not reveal any names beyond the two officials whose work has already been publicly reported. And all the lawyers, according to Holder, are eligible to work on general detainee matters, even if there are specific parts of some cases they cannot be involved in.

Holder’s admission comes in the form of an answer to a question posed last November by Republican Sen. Charles Grassley. Noting that one Obama appointee, Principal Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal, formerly represented Osama bin Laden’s driver, and another appointee, Jennifer Daskal, previously advocated for detainees at Human Rights Watch, Grassley asked Holder to give the Senate Judiciary Committee “the names of political appointees in your department who represent detainees or who work for organizations advocating on their behalf…the cases or projects that these appointees work with respect to detainee prior to joining the Justice Department…and the cases or projects relating to detainees that have worked on since joining the Justice Department.”

In his response, Holder has given Grassley almost nothing. He says nine Obama political appointees at the Justice Department have advocated on behalf of detainees, but did not identify any of the nine other than the two, Katyal and Daskal, whose names Grassley already knew. “To the best of our knowledge,” Holder writes.

Read More: