Conservative Happenings

Monday, June 22, 2015

CONFIRMED: WHITE HOUSE LIED ABOUT JONATHAN GRUBER’S ROLE IN DEVELOPING OBAMACARE

The Associated Press

President Obama’s dismissal of MIT’s Jonathan Gruber as just “some adviser” he barely remembers, rather than a key architect of ObamaCare, has always been one of the flimsiest and most transparent lies told by this profoundly dishonest White House.

Everyone knew Gruber was critical to ObamaCare, and when he was caught on tape high-fiving himself for helping to fool what he described as “stupid” American voters with the Affordable Care Act’s web of false promises and ludicrous projections, he was speaking from the Administration’s heart.

It’s still newsworthy that the House Oversight Committee has released emails to the Wall Street Journal showing Gruber had a far closer working relationship with the White House than it wanted to admit:

The emails show frequent consultations between Mr. Gruber and top Obama administration staffers and advisers in the White House and the Department of Health and Human Services on the Affordable Care Act. They show he informed HHS about interviews with reporters and discussions with lawmakers, and he consulted with HHS about how to publicly describe his role.

[…] “His proximity to HHS and the White House was a whole lot tighter than they admitted,” said

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT)

80%

(R., Utah), chairman of the House oversight committee. “There’s no doubt he was a much more integral part of this than they’ve said. He put up this facade he was an arm’s length away. It was a farce.”

Mr. Chaffetz on Sunday sent a letter to HHS Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell requesting information justifying the department’s sole-source contract with Mr. Gruber for his work on the health law.

Good luck with that, Rep. Chaffetz. At the rate this Administration responds to congressional and public inquiries, you’ll be getting the answer to your letter sometime in 2018.

Via: Breitbart

Charlie Daniels on Socialism: Do You Think This Can't Happen in America? by Charlie Daniels

The government of the United States of America was not formed and instituted for despots to rule over, spy on, dictate to, nor in any other way dominate its citizens. Rather, it was formed to protect and serve. It was created to patrol the borders, control the flow of immigrants and international commerce, insure the civil rights of its citizens and build and maintain infrastructure to keep the wheels of progress turning.

In the days since the inception of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society, much of America has come to perceive the federal government as an entity for all seasons, whose purview includes lifelong entitlements, health care and the guarantor of cradle-to-grave security.

In the broader sense, this is known as socialism. It has been tried in many corners of the world, and it has miserably failed in all of them. The reason being is that it discourages individual initiative, encourages sloth, laziness and total dependence on an outside source.

But there are other even more sinister fruits of socialism.

When a society becomes so dependent on government for every need, they begin to incrementally give up their freedom, to turn over more and more responsibility for their lives to their benevolent uncle and by the time they realize what is happening, every facet of their lives are observed, controlled and basically dominated by a government who has granted themselves a license to do anything they dang well please.

They can confiscate your land, claiming that it is needed for the greater good or put you in jail without any representation or outside contact. Has anybody heard anything from the guy the government arrested who supposedly produced the video they said started the boondoggle in Benghazi?

Did you know that there are pieces being put in place, having already begun with The Food Protection Act, that give the government the power to prevent you from planting a garden or keeping food animals because the pollination could "endanger the food chain”?

Via: CNS News

[VIDEO] EXCLUSIVE: Bolton: Everyone’s Underestimating Walker, And Here’s Where He’ll Hit Hillary

Republican presidential contender Gov. Scott Walker is seen as a top presidential pick with one big weakness: a lack of foreign policy experience. As a Midwestern governor critics say he hasn’t built the foreign policy chops necessary to lead in our tumultuous world, but former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton has one thing to say to those critics.

What do you think?

You’re underestimating him.

What do you think?

In a sit-down interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation, Bolton said some people assume Walker lacks foreign policy credibility, and Democratic favorite Hillary Clinton’s got a long tenure at State to hold over his head.

What do you think?

But not so fast.

“When it comes to foreign policy, Hillary has such a long string of notable failures and scandals, that what is often overlooked is … while she was at the State Department and the Obama Administration, the Middle East fell into turmoil, we alienated our close ally, Israel, Russia set the stage for war and expanding its influence in Europe, and China expanded their island building in international waters,” Bolton said.

What do you think?

Russia, Israel, China and the Middle East are at the very least four pretty big weaknesses to exploit, he said. Clinton, in Bolton’s view, lacks the ability to make the big, tough policy decisions.

What do you think?

“I think foreign policy, in many respects for many voters, is a surrogate for leadership,” Bolton told TheDCNF. “The voters are not going to get involved in the intricacies, they don’t care if somebody can name the prime minister of Uganda, that’s not really the test for them. They want to look at the candidates and say ‘I think that one can make the big decisions.'”

Via: Daily Caller

Continue Reading.....

California House committee expected to take up legislation to protect innocent property owners from abuse of federal law

The California House Public Safety Committee is expected to hold a hearing on June 30 to debate proposed civil asset forfeiture reforms that offer substantive protections for innocent property owners.

SB 443 is a long overdue bill that closes a concerning loophole in state law that allows state and local law enforcement to send seized property from people who may never be charged with a crime to the federal government for "adoption." After a civil judgment against the owner, up to 80 percent of the proceeds are then return to the local government from the Justice Department's Equal Equitable Sharing Program.

California has better civil asset forfeiture laws than most states, though that is not saying much. According to a recent FreedomWorks publication, Civil Asset Forfeiture: Grading the States, the Golden State received a "C+" for its current state laws, which, unlike most other states, puts the burden of proof on the government, rather than the property owner. The government must show "clear and convincing evidence" to forfeit property. Real property, such as a home, cannot be forfeited without a criminal conviction.

Because California's civil asset forfeiture laws offer more protections for innocent property owners, state and local law enforcement often circumvent them by using federal law, through "adoption" and the Equitable Sharing Program. Federal civil asset forfeiture laws do not offer protections for innocent property owners. Under federal law, seized property is considered guilty until proven innocent, even if the property owner is never charged with a crime. The process is often long and costly, causing many innocent property owners to walk away rather than fight the federal government in court.

SB 443 would close the federal loophole, allowing state and local law enforcement to receive proceeds from federal forfeiture only if a criminal conviction is obtained. The bill also offers new protections under state law by requiring a criminal conviction before cash and property worth more than $25,000 can be forfeited to the state.

During deliberations on SB 443 in the California Senate earlier this month, Sen. Holly Mitchell (D-Los Angeles), the primary sponsor of the bill, explained that changes are necessary to ensure that there is uniformity in state law. "This is a multi-pronged approach to a problem which has reached epic proportions in many California communities, requiring that, in most cases, a defendant be convicted of an underlying crime before cash or property can be permanently seized," said Mitchell. "It would require that more drug asset forfeiture cases be handled under state law rather than transferred to federal courts in order to ensure the stricter standards under California current law are followed."

Via: Freedom Works

CJ Pearson, 12 Year Old GA Conservative, Calls Out Obama Over Pathetic Response To #Charleston

Via: Weasel Zippers

[VIDEO] MIT Economist Jonathan Gruber Had Bigger Role in ObamaCare Than Previously Believed, Emails Show

The ObamaCare consultant who once mocked the “stupidity of the American voter” had a bigger impact on the healthcare law than previously known, The Wall Street Journal is reporting.

Jonathan Gruber frequently contacted Obama administration officials via email while crafting ObamaCare, according to the newspaper.

The Journal said that previously unreleased messages show that Gruber repeatedly messaged the White House and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) between January, 2009 and March, 2010.

He offered advice on healthcare policy and informed officials about media and lawmaker interviews concerning ObamaCare, the report added.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) told the newspaper that the communications disprove Gruber’s past assertions that he was a limited participant in creating the healthcare law.

The House Oversight Committee chairman added that his committee had obtained 20,000 pages emails after working with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where Gruber is an economist.

“His proximity to HHS and the White House was a whole lot tighter than they admitted,” Chaffetz said of Gruber’s relationship with the Obama administration, according to the Journal.

“There’s no doubt he was a much more integral part of this than they’ve said,” he added.

Chaffetz also said on Sunday he has sent HHS Secretary Sylvia Burwell a letter for additional information over Gruber’s contract with her agency.

Outrage erupted last year when video footage emerged of Gruber insulting the American electorate over ObamaCare.

He was filmed in 2013 reportedly praising “the stupidity of the American voter” for helping pass President Obama’s sweeping healthcare reform law.

Via: The Hill

Washington fears losing Greece to Moscow

©Reuters

Throughout the prolonged showdown between Greece and its creditors, the Obama administration has largely sat on the sidelines, issuing the occasional warning about the potential economic impact of a default.

Russian President Vladimir Putin (R) shakes hands with Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras during a meeting at the Kremlin in Moscow, April 8, 2015. Tsipras began talks with Putin on Wednesday as his indebted country scrambles for funds, but officials said Athens had not asked for money from Moscow. REUTERS/Alexander Zemlianichenko/Pool

But with Greece now on the verge of bankruptcy, the US is also beginning to worry about the political fallout from a deeper crisis and the potential for Russia to gain increased influence over a Nato member.

As Washington tries to maintain a united western front in support of sanctions on Russia over Ukraine, a Greek default could provide Moscow an opportunity to sow new divisions among America’s European allies.

“You can easily see how geopolitically this would be a gift to Russia,” says Sebastian Mallaby at the Council on Foreign Relations. “You do not want Europe to have to deal with a Greece that is a member of Nato but which all of a sudden hates the west and is cosying up to Russia.”

Greece was regarded as a frontline state against the advance of Soviet-backed communism during the cold war. Its EU accession in 1981 is one factor that cemented its identity as a western democracy, something that was deepened 20 years later with the adoption of the euro.

For some months, the administration of President Barack Obama has been quietly urging Germany and other EU members to try to find a way to resolve the stand-off with Greece. While economic considerations have been at the forefront, diplomats say the EU’s position on Ukraine has also been part of the conversation.

The visit by Greek prime minister Alexis Tsipras to St Petersburg late last week served as a reminder of the current Greek government’s political ties to President Vladimir Putin’s Russia and showed its willingness to look towards Moscow at moments when the dispute with international creditors is at its most intense.

Via: Financial Times

A handful of states could set up ACA Exchanges after King v. Burwell

It’s been difficult not to notice that a lot of states are having terrible experiences with their ObamaCare exchanges. In fact, a recent Washington Post article reports that “Nearly half of the 17 insurance marketplaces set up by the states and the District under President Obama’s health law are struggling financially.”

In a previous post, we mentioned that this fact should hinder attempts from state officials to establish a state exchange in the event that King v. Burwell eliminates the federal subsidies.

Regardless of the Supreme Court’s decision, nothing will change for the 16 states already running their own exchange. Also, Arizona recently passed legislation prohibiting the establishment of an exchange, so that 17 states will not be directly affected by King.

Thus, 33 states would lose federal subsidies if the Supreme Court rules in favor of the plaintiffs. At least 16 of these states appear to be led by officials who will make a strong push to establish an exchange in order to retain the subsidies.

If you happen to live in one of these states, it may be in your interest to contact state officials and tell them not to establish an ObamaCare exchange, even if King strikes down the federal subsidies.

After all, this is a problem the federal government created. It would be irresponsible to call on state governments to clean up a mess they didn't create. If state leaders end up caving into the pressure to establish an exchange, then ObamaCare repeal will become an even more arduous mission than it already is.

Via: Freedom Works

Federal Judge Asks IRS for Update on Lois Lerner's Emails

A District of Columbia federal judge has ordered the IRS to give him a status update on the release of Lois Lerner's emails, as well as those by other IRS officials.

U.S District Judge Emmet Sullivan said in a June 18 order that he wants a status of the recovery and release of the emails recovered by the IRS watchdog agency, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA), sent to the court by June 29, Judicial Watch said in a statement. In addition, Sullivan set a hearing and a scheduling of a status conference for July 1.

"[F]ile a supplemental report, setting forth any new information regarding: (1) TIGTA’s recovery of emails from the backup tapes; (2) TIGTA’s production of emails to the IRS; (3) the IRS’s review of emails and production to the plaintiff; and (4) the status of the TIGTA investigation. This report shall be filed by no later than June 29, 2015," he wrote.

The judge issued an order on June 4 telling the IRS to give answers about Lerner's emails, which were once declared lost, by June 12, which the federal agency complied with. The order came after Judicial Watch asked the court if all emails that TIGTA had recovered had been turned over.

On June 12, the IRS said that it was in "the process of conducting further manual deduplication of the 6,400" emails. Although Judicial Watch has noted that the IRS watchdog already said previously that it had gone through the process of identifying and removing duplicate emails.

The IRS has yet to turn over any of the emails by the former IRS official that were requested by Judicial Watch in its Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request that it filed in October 2013.

Judicial Watch asked Sullivan in a court filing it sent on June 15 that the IRS be kept from "stonewalling" any further and turn over the documents it asked for in the FOIA request once and for all.

Via: NewsMax

Continue Reading....