Thursday, January 22, 2015
Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, January 22, 2015
Well... finished watching the first season of Marco Polo on Netflix!
I loved it!
Interestingly... the reviews were more thumbs down than thumbs up. I can explain, though!
MOST PEOPLE ARE FRIGGIN' IDIOTS! IGNORANT! IMPATIENT! LACKING IN APPRECIATION! DEMANDING OF SIMPLISTIC "ACTION" AND TO HELL WITH THE STORY!
Yes.. as usual... BILL KNOWS BEST.
(*WINK*)
And, now... on to newsbiting!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/report-65-secret-service-agents-hand-hillary-clintons-paid-speech-canada_824237.html
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave a couple of paid speeches in Canada yesterday.
She was reportedly accompanied by 65 agents of the United States Secret Service to at least one of the events.
The agents were presumably on hand to help keep the former first lady safe.
The news of Clinton's large Secret Service contingent was reported by CJME News Talk 980, a co-sponsor of the event.
"One of the most influential women in U.S. politics will be speaking in Saskatoon Wednesday night," the outlet reported in advance of one of Clinton's address. "Hillary Rodham Clinton will be speaking at TCU Place ... Her speech will be part of the Global Perspectives series, which is sponsored by CIBC."
In advance of her appearance, TCU Place security services supervisor Marty Gilley said they've been working with RCMP and the U.S. Secret Service for the past week "to source out the site, inspect all kinds of potential hazards from bomb threats to smoke bombs that could be put in intakes into our building to make the event go south."
"The day of the show, the rest of the Secret Service fly in from other points of the United States of America. A full deployment is approximately 65 agents that will be in the house for the event," Gilley continued.
It's unclear what part, if any, of the security tab was picked up by Clinton and what part was paid for by U.S. taxpayers.
It's also unclear how much Clinton was paid for the speeches, though the Associated Press confirms she was compensated for her gig.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/notable-quotable-what-recovery-1421885594
What should be a recovery on steroids — after all, it has had six years to get in shape — is still not up to speed.
If there were as many people in the labor force now, as there were when President Obama came into office, the unemployment rate would be close to 10%.
And... the spirit of entrepreneurship has dimmed to the point that, as Gallup finds: “The U.S. now ranks not first, not second, not third, but 12th among developed nations in terms of business startup activity. Countries such as Hungary, Denmark, Finland, New Zealand, Sweden, Israel and Italy all have higher startup rates than America does. We are behind in starting new firms per capita, and this is our single most serious economic problem.”
And the worst of it is that: “. . . for the first time in 35 years, American business deaths now outnumber business births.”
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://www.wsj.com/articles/book-review-a-nation-wholly-free-by-carl-lane-1421886470
At the height of the 2012 election campaign, Barack Obama was interviewed on the “Late Show With David Letterman.”
(*ROLLING MY EYES*)
His host expressed concern about the national debt and asked the president how much it was when he took office. Mr. Obama said he could not remember “precisely.”
(*SNORT*)
(The debt was in fact $10 trillion and had grown to $16 trillion by the time of the interview.)
The president assured Letterman that “we don’t have to worry about it short-term” but that "it could become a long-term problem." Further, he suggested Americans need not be alarmed since “a lot of it we owe to ourselves,” not foreign creditors.
Carl Lane is not as complacent about our predicament. He characterizes the nation’s now $18 trillion in debt...
(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)
...as one of “extraordinary magnitude” that “invites calamity.”
Still, Lane hopes that a little-known episode in American history may show that the problem can be overcome.
“A Nation Wholly Free” is Mr. Lane’s fascinating exploration of what led to the brief interlude of 1835-37, the only time in its existence when the United States had no debt.
The American Revolution had left the young nation saddled with financial obligations. In subsequent years, the Louisiana Purchase and the War of 1812 added to the debt load, and by 1816 the country owed a then-colossal $127 million.
Rapid economic growth was improving the fiscal trajectory, however, and late that year President James Madison reported to Congress with “great gratification” that, because of the revival of commerce and burgeoning tariff revenues, the government would enjoy a surplus and could plan for a long-term debt pay-down.
Thomas Hart Benton, a Missouri senator, would later describe the choice before the republic: “whether a national debt could be paid and extinguished in a season of peace, leaving a nation wholly free from that encumbrance; or whether it was to go on increasing, a burden in itself,” consuming the public treasury “to eternity.”
It was Andrew Jackson who finally, forcefully, embraced the goal of debt repayment and ensured its achievement through disciplined prioritization of surplus revenues and vetoes of new spending.
For Mr. Lane, it is essential to view America’s early finances in a broad context. Concern about the debt, he believes, was not just rooted in fiscal prudence but was inextricable from beliefs about the proper role of government and the scope of federal powers under the Constitution.
“Internal improvements” that required substantial borrowing — such as roads and canals — were highly controversial. Many in the founding generation held “an ideological bias against public debt because it corrupted those who were entrusted to exercise power responsibly.”
Expensive projects within individual states were viewed as we would now view congressional “earmarks” — tending to lead to waste and vote buying.
Debt was not just a fiscal danger but a path to moral decline.
* HEAR! HEAR!
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
Relying on congressional records, Treasury reports and personal diaries, Mr. Lane vividly illustrates how these budgetary debates played out under three presidents: James Monroe (who, in 1825, committed to “discharge” all debt within 10 years), John Quincy Adams (who was far more interested in an array of spending initiatives) and, finally, "ol Hickory himself - Andrew Jackson.
As is the case today, monetary affairs were inseparable from fiscal ones, and not always for the good. Jackson had determined to close the Second Bank of the United States — the quasi-central bank of the day — on constitutional, fiscal and even social grounds. In 1832, Nicholas Biddle, head of the bank, initiated a retaliatory plot to undermine Jackson’s efforts to redeem public debt.
(Suffice it to say that the plot’s brazenness and complexity make today’s conspiracy theories about the shadowy intentions of the Federal Reserve seem tame.)
Notwithstanding this and other challenges, Jackson’s Treasury secretary, Levi Woodbury, could report in 1835 that the last $443.25 of debt was about to be repaid and that the United States would enjoy the “unprecedented spectacle” of being a nation free of debt.
In an epilogue on the modern implications of this episode, Mr. Lane turns stridently partisan, blaming only Republicans for our debt “quagmire” while hailing President Obama’s “leadership” and “steadfastness” in addressing it.
* IS LANE... INSANE...???
This is quite surprising because, in marked contrast to the president’s evident nonchalance, Mr. Lane urgently warns that “anything might trigger” a loss of confidence in U.S. creditworthiness at any time - the aftermath of which could be “widespread misery, civil disorder, and the possible collapse of our institutions.”
Also, given the extent of our foreign debt, he says we should take “little solace” from the dismissive “quip” that we “owe the debt to ourselves.”
Mr. Lane does not offer any specific solutions other than the need for "bold leadership;" he says that the keys to President Jackson’s achievement were never taking “his eye off the ball” and a willingness to make politically difficult decisions for the “greater good.”
Unlike Americans of the early 19th century, we face a situation in which the magnitude of our accumulated liabilities makes full debt repayment an impossible task for the foreseeable future. Mr. Lane cites estimates that the debt relative to the size of the economy in 1816 was only 11%. Today it is more than 100%.
* AND THAT'S ALL YOU REALLY NEED TO KNOW, FOLKS...
Even the most hawkish budget plans call for continuing deficits...
* NOT MINE!
...and thus increasing debt, for at least the next decade.
* BUT AS TO THE DEMS AND RINOs... YES... UNFORTUNATELY LANE WRITES THE TRUTH.
With this backdrop, the best we might do...
* REVOLT! BURN WASHINGTON TO THE GROUND WITH THE POLITICIANS LOCKED WITHIN THE BUILDINGS!
* TOO MUCH...???
(*GUFFAW*)
http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/21/bombshell-irs-has-active-contract-for-millions-with-company-hhs-fired-over-botched-healthcare-gov/
Seven months after federal officials fired CGI Federal for its botched work on ObamaCare website Healthcare.gov, the IRS awarded the same company a $4.5 million IT contract for its new ObamaCare tax program.
* FOLKS... YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS $HIT UP!
CGI is a $10.5 billion Montreal-based company that has forever been etched into the public’s mind as the company behind the bungled ObamaCare main website.
* HEY... IT'S THE AGE OF OBAMA... NOT ENOUGH AWARD FEDERAL CONTRACTS TO FOREIGN FIRMS... THEY'VE GOTTA BE INCOMPETENT FOREIGN FIRMS!
After facing a year of embarrassing failures, federal officials finally pulled the plug on the company and terminated CGI’s contract in January 2014. Yet on Aug. 11, seven months later, IRS officials signed a new contract with CGI to provide “critical functions” and “management support” for its ObamaCare tax program, according to the Federal Procurement Data System, a federal government procurement database.
Prior to terminating CGI’s contract, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told Congress, “I am as frustrated and angry as anyone with the flawed launch of HealthCare.gov.”
She called the CGI-designed website a “debacle.”
A joint Senate Finance and Judiciary Committee staff report in June 2014 found that Turning Point Global Solutions, hired by HHS to review CGI’s performance on Healthcare.gov, reported they found 21,000 lines of defective software code inserted by CGI.
(*MIGRAINE HEADACHE*)
Scott Amey, the general counsel for the non-profit Project on Government Oversight, which reviews government contracting, examined the IRS contract with CGI. “CGI was the poster child for government failure,” he told The Daily Caller. “I am shocked that the IRS has turned around and is using them for Obamacare IT work.”
* NOT ME! PAR FOR THE COURSE! THIS... IS... THE... AGE... OF... OBAMA...!!!
About 7 million ObamaCare policyholders and about 20 million Americans who don’t have healthcare coverage will depend this year on the proper IRS processing of their 2014 income tax returns.
Improper processing of health information could cause some Americans to receive smaller tax refunds, or even pay more out-of-pocket for their government-issued healthcare policies.
A September 2013 audit by the IRS inspector general criticized the tax agency’s software and computer systems aimed to process ObamaCare tax return forms. Michael E. McKenney, the acting deputy inspector general, found many problems with the IRS software, including lax security and fraud controls. Government auditors found “Many of the vulnerabilities in information systems can be traced to software flaws and misconfigurations of system components.”
The IRS did not reply to numerous inquiries to the agency about the CGI contract.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150122/us--measles-california-e44d40c0ac.html
* AND SOME OF YOU FOLKS REFUSE TO BELIEVE WE'RE GOING BACKWARDS AS A SOCIETY...???
A measles outbreak traced to Disney theme parks in California led to warnings against visiting the happiest place on Earth if tourists or their children have not been vaccinated against the highly contagious respiratory disease that has sickened 70 people.
New infections linked to the theme parks emerged Wednesday in the outbreak that has spread to five U.S. states and Mexico, though the vast majority — 62 — occurred in California.
People who have not received the measles-mumps-rubella, or MMR, vaccine are susceptible to contracting the highly contagious illness and should avoid Disney "for the time being," state epidemiologist Gil Chavez said.
The same holds true for crowded places with a high concentration of international travelers, such as airports, Chavez said. People who are vaccinated don't need to take such precautions, he said.
Disneyland Resorts spokeswoman Suzi Brown said officials agreed with the advice that "it's absolutely safe to visit if you're vaccinated."
The people who have been infected range in age from 7 months to 70 years old. The vast majority had not been vaccinated, and a quarter had to be hospitalized.
Among those sickened were five Disney employees, three of whom have since returned to work. The company previously said park employees who may have been in contact with infected people were asked to show proof of vaccination or have a blood test to show immunity against measles. Those with pending results were put on paid leave. Vaccinations are also being offered to all employees.
Measles has hit California hard recently, where four to 60 measles cases a year are typical. "We are off to a bad start in 2015," Chavez said.
Since the outbreak, two dozen unvaccinated students at an Orange County high school were sent home for three weeks after an infected student showed up.
Measles can spread by air through coughing or sneezing. Symptoms include fever followed by cough, runny nose and a blotchy rash. Though the virus has been eradicated in the U.S. since 2000, it can still enter the country through an infected traveler.
While health officials said they likely may never find "patient zero," or the trigger of the outbreak, they believe it was either a resident from a country where measles is widespread or a Californian who went abroad and brought home the virus.
People at highest risk are those who are unvaccinated, pregnant women, infants under 6 months old, and those with weakened immune systems.
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://www.city-journal.org/2015/eon0121sm.html
Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis called the states the “laboratories of democracy.”
President Barack Obama ought to be glad that a handful of states are governed by Republicans doing lab work very different from his own.
The economic gains registered in some of those states have played a significant part in pulling America out of its economic doldrums, allowing Obama, after six years in office, to give a State of the Union speech in which he could assert with some validity that the state of the union is “strong.”
(*ROLLING MY EYES*)
* FOLKS... UNDERSTAND... THE AUTHOR IS EXAGGERATING IN AN ATTEMPT TO "PUSH" REPUBLICAN POLICIES. YES. REPUBLICAN POLICIES ARE BY AND LARGE BETTER THAN DEMOCRAT POLICIES. YES. THE PREMISE OF THIS ESSAY IS BASICALLY ACCURATE. BUT, NO... THE STATE OF THE UNION IS NOT "STRONG." JUST LOOK AROUND YOU.
In his address on Tuesday night, the president “took credit,” as the Washington Post observed, for America’s recent robust economic gains. Obama framed the country’s growth — which he characterized as outpacing other leading economies in Europe and Asia — largely around two areas, our “bustling industry, and booming energy production.” He didn’t explain why American companies are suddenly hiring workers and making products here again, or why energy production has ramped up — perhaps because the revival of these sectors represents an inconvenient truth for the president.
Take manufacturing. The president noted that, since 2010, the sector has added 800,000 jobs (though official Bureau of Labor figures put the increase at 614,000 jobs).
(*ROLLING MY EYES*)
That represents a gain of somewhere between 5.3% and 6.9%, depending on which numbers you accept. Yet in truth, manufacturing job growth has been highly concentrated in a few states; many others have seen little or no gains, and a few continue to lose industrial jobs. The biggest winners have been states that emphasize a pro-growth agenda, not a redistributionist one like the president preaches. Michigan, with a 19% increase in industrial jobs, and Indiana, with a 14% gain, have seen the greatest manufacturing job growth (on a percentage basis). Texas, meanwhile, with 71,000 new jobs, has led the way in creating the largest number of new industrial positions.
* FOLKS... KEEP LOOKING AT THOSE "MADE IN" LABELS. I'LL TAKE WHAT I CAN GET IN TERMS OF AMERICAN MANUFACTURING JOBS... BUT, PLEASE... KEEP LOOKING AT THOSE LABELS AND TELL ME WHAT THEY SAY!
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)
Employment in Michigan and Indiana got a boost in 2012 when both states passed right-to-work laws letting individuals decide whether or not to join a union. Obama opposed those laws... Since adopting right-to-work, Michigan and Indiana have each added about 28,000 industrial jobs, some of them coming back from overseas in a process known as reshoring. The jobs wind up in right-to-work states, because they allow American companies to be competitive on labor costs with goods made overseas.
Still, labor law alone doesn’t account for all the industrial growth in Indiana and Michigan. Both states have emphasized keeping taxes low and reforming corporate levies to make them fairer. Michigan governor Rick Snyder eliminated the state’s ineffective Michigan Business Tax and replaced it with a flat corporate tax. This year, the state voted to kill a tax on business equipment. Indiana, ranked by the trade magazine Area Development as the seventh-best state for doing business (and the best in the Midwest), has kept its corporate taxes among the lowest in the nation.
Texas, meanwhile, retains one of the most favorable business climates — with low taxes, a sensible state regulatory regime, and access to decent affordable housing for workers. For ten years in a row, business leaders in Chief Executive Magazine’s annual poll have voted the Lone Star State the nation’s best place to do business. As one executive told the magazine, “The education and quality of eligible employees is excellent right now. Business is booming and growing quicker and more rapidly in 2014 than any other year. It’s an exciting time in Texas.”
In the midst of the manufacturing revival, seven states — Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York — have lost industrial jobs. Virtually all except Arkansas are blue states...
(*SHRUG*)
(*SIGH*)
In his speech, the president linked industrial growth to the booming energy sector.
* BOOMING IN SPITE OF THE PRESIDENT AND HIS POLICIES - NOT BECAUSE OF HIM AND THEM!
President Obama has had little to do with America’s energy success and has often gotten in the way of it. In a recent open letter to the president, Brookings Institution energy expert Charles K. Ebinger noted that the country is indeed experiencing energy abundance, but complained that President Obama was hampering even greater gains. He criticized the administration for failing to allow permits for the construction of new natural gas facilities, blocking the Keystone XL pipeline, and failing to lift bans on exporting U.S. crude oil. “You have allowed your environmental constituency to guide your inaction,” noted Ebinger. “I am a lifelong Democrat who voted for you twice, but I join a growing group of those who are tired of protectionist policies that keep this nation from moving our energy strategy forward.”
Fortunately, leaders in states like Texas, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Colorado, and Oklahoma have allowed sensible exploration and extraction of oil and gas.
Meanwhile, solidly Democratic states like New York and California, sitting on vast energy reserves, have declined to allow fracking — resulting in lost jobs and production.
(America’s economic fortunes would look far different right now had the country followed the path outlined by those two states.)
President Obama ended his State of the Union address by observing, “We have picked ourselves up, dusted ourselves off, and begun again the work of remaking America.” A lot of that work, however, is being led by people who don’t share the president’s views.
* FOUR PARTER... (Part 1 of 4)
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/396904/attkisson-file-scott-w-johnson
Sharyl Attkisson was one of the most distinguished investigative journalists in television news, covering everything from the dangers of certain prescription drugs to mismanagement at the Red Cross to TARP to K Street. Over a career that spanned more than 20 years at CBS News, she received numerous awards for her work, including multiple Emmys.
In her memoir Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama’s Washington, Attkisson looks back on the final years of her network career. One concludes from her book that Attkisson encountered more difficulty practicing her profession at CBS News during Obama’s tenure than at any other time. She reached an agreement for her departure from CBS News in March 2014, well before her contract was to expire.
The book’s subtitle refers to the difficulties Attkisson encountered in “Obama’s Washington.” The term is in part a euphemism for the Obama administration, but it also reflects the support for the administration within CBS News. The head of CBS News is David Rhodes, brother of Obama national-security adviser Ben Rhodes.
Attkisson is a dogged reporter, and Stonewalled is a gripping book, organized around the Obama-administration scandals she covered at CBS News. With the exception of the IRS scandal, she covered just about all of them: Fast and Furious, green-energy crony capitalism, Benghazi, and Obamacare. Attkisson devotes a chapter to her work on each one.
Each of the scandals falls into a larger pattern of scandal management practiced by the Obama White House. (The reader can infer how the IRS scandal fits the pattern precisely to a T.) Her book is invaluable for how it analyzes and exposes this pattern, combining her reportage and her behind-the-scenes work at CBS News.
The pattern begins with blatant denials — bald lies — and stonewalling. Attkisson deftly articulates one of the bona fide occupational qualifications for service as a spokesperson in the Obama administration. Referring specifically to HHS spokeswoman Joanne Peters, whom Attkisson had caught lying to her, she writes: “It takes a certain kind of person to be untruthful and then display utter lack of contrition when caught.”
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONTINUING... (Part 2 of 4)
Next in the pattern, when the lies fail, comes the attribution of responsibility to the lowest level of bureaucrat.
Rather than responding to straightforward inquiries, administration spokesmen pump reporters for the information they have so they can undermine it. Attkisson calls this technique “pump and mine.” The administration then plants slanted leaks to friendly bloggers and reporters; next, it characterizes any advances in the story as “old news.”
Attkisson also shows how the administration, using a technique she calls “controversialization,” disparages any sources and reporters who move the story forward. As she recounts in the book, Attkisson has extensive personal experience being at the receiving end of this technique.
She singles out Media Matters as the main outlet that moves administration spin into the mainstream media. As Attkisson demonstrates, however, the power of Media Matters derives from the complicity and cooperation of its many allies in the [mainstream] media, i.e., the many Obama allies in the [mainstream] media.
She writes:
Perhaps the greatest PR coup of all is that the administration’s expert spinners successfully lead the media by the nose down the path of concluding there’s no true controversy unless there’s a paper trail that lays blame directly on the president’s desk. Time and again, with each scandal and each damaging fact, Democrats and the White House read from the script that says, “there’s no evidence President Obama knew” or “there’s no evidence of direct White House involvement.” Anything short of a signed confession from the president is deemed a phony Republican scandal, and those who dare to ask questions are crazies, partisans, or conspiracy theorists. . . .
Under President Obama, the press dutifully regurgitates the line “no evidence of White House involvement,” ignoring the fact that if any proof exists, it would be difficult to come by under an administration that fails to properly respond to Freedom of Information Act requests, routinely withholds documents from Congress, and claims executive privilege to keep documents secret.
(*END QUOTE*)
Stonewalled covers two kinds of scandal: first, the various scandals within the Obama administration; second, the scandalous treatment of these White House scandals by CBS News. With each White House scandal, Attkisson demonstrates the success, more or less, of the Obama administration’s scandal management inside the newsroom at CBS.
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONTINUING... (Part 3 of 4)
Her account of CBS’s journalistic dereliction culminates in her description of how CBS suppressed a portion of the September 12, 2012, 60 Minutes interview with President Obama — the precise portion in which Obama clearly explained why he did not characterize Benghazi as a “terrorist” attack.
(*PURSED LIPS*)
The release of this interview might have been of interest, shall we say, in the aftermath of the second Obama–Romney debate, during which Obama successfully promulgated the line — the lie — that he had very quickly characterized Benghazi as a “terrorist” attack, with a timely assist from CNN moderator Candy Crowley, who broke with debate-moderator protocol and backed up Obama’s lie. It was only after Attkisson and others inside CBS News belatedly discovered the relevant portion of the 60 Minutes interview, and after they kicked up some dust about it, that CBS News posted the segment, online only, the weekend before the election — far too late to matter.
(*NOD*)
Attkisson bookends her accounts of the Obama administration scandals she covered with the story of what she describes as coordinated intrusions into her telephones and computers.
* YEP... YOU READ THAT RIGHT...
She was working on the Benghazi story when a friendly source “connected to a three-letter agency” offered a surprising observation: “The administration is likely monitoring you based on your reporting.”
(She had, in fact, been having troubles with her phones and computers, which were behaving oddly.)
Three sets of experts — including experts hired by CBS — examined her computers. All reached the same conclusion: She was the victim of computer intrusion and monitoring.
One expert found classified government documents secreted in her hard drive, though she had not placed them there and had nothing to do with them.
(She believes that they were placed there by the intruders for use against her at an appropriate time.)
CBS issued this statement on the intrusions:
Attkisson’s computer was accessed by an unauthorized, external, unknown party on multiple occasions in late 2012. . . . [F]orensic analysis revealed an intruder had executed commands that appeared to involve search and exfiltration of data. The party also used sophisticated methods to remove all possible indications of unauthorized activity, and alter system times to cause further confusion.
(*END QUOTE*)
* TO BE CONTINUED...
* CONCLUDING... (Part 4 of 4)
The experts retained by Attkisson concluded that the intrusion into her computers was probably perpetrated by a government agency with highly sophisticated software that is proprietary to the government.
The Department of Justice has issued two statements on Attkisson’s case. In response to Attkisson’s first public mention of her experience, in the course of a radio interview, the Department of Justice said: "To our knowledge, the Justice Department has never “compromised” Ms. Attkisson’s computers, or otherwise sought any information from or concerning any telephone, computer, or other media device she may own or use.
Attkisson has called this Justice Department statement “a quasi-denial.”
Who is the “we” encompassed in “our?" she asks.
She continues: "The entire Justice Department? Did officials really, in the blink of an eye, conduct an investigation and question 113,543 Justice Department employees? That’s impressive! I’m still waiting for answers to Freedom of Information Act requests that I filed with them years ago, but they’re able to provide this semi-definitive statement within minutes of the question being posed."
(*PURSED LIPS*)
Oklahoma senator Tom Coburn, just retired, sent Attorney General Holder a letter making broad inquiries on behalf of Attkisson.
Attkisson quotes the response submitted to him by the DOJ: "Your letter asks whether the Department is responsible for incidents in 2012 in which the computer of Sharyl Attkisson, a CBS reporter, was allegedly hacked by an unauthorized party. The Department is not. It also does not appear that CBS or Ms. Attkisson followed up with the Federal Bureau of Investigation for assistance with these incidents."
Coburn’s letter to Holder had sought information regarding actions taken “[d]uring your tenure as attorney general,” not during 2012. Attkisson drily observes: “Instead of answering the questions at hand, the administration had posed an entirely different question and chosen to answer that one.”
Coburn issued a follow-up letter to the Justice Department pointing out that none of his questions from the previous July had been answered in its December response.
The Justice Department has provided no further response.
Attkisson has not let the matter rest. In January, she filed an administrative claim against the government as a predicate to bringing a lawsuit under the Federal Tort Claims Act; separately, she also filed a lawsuit against the government for violation of her constitutional rights.
One does not need to be a seer to predict that the Obama administration will do its level best to ignore Attkisson and her complaints through Obama’s last day in office. Attkisson will no doubt have to await a new administration before she can obtain legal resolution, but perhaps it would not be amiss for Congress to look for answers right now.
Post a Comment