Cheryl Mills is one of the people who had an email account on Hillary's server and whose emails would be very relevant to any investigation of Hillary's conduct, particularly in the absence of an impartial record of Hillary's own emails.
Lerner wanted to audit group based on payment to Bristol Palin
So, in other words, Lerner -- who once claimed IRS targeting was something that only happened in Cincinatti -- was reading the news at her desk one day and ran across an article about a non-profit group trying to reduce teen pregnancy paying Bristol Palin to work as a celebrity spokeswoman for their issue. As you may have noticed, celebrities do this sort of thing all the time, and regardless of whether you think it's a good way to spend their money, it seems far too commonplace for an IRS official to single the group out for audit based on that. At least, it does until you consider the official in question has a clear animus against Republicans in general, and anyone who was paying attention during Sarah Palin's VP run knows exactly how much animus the Democrats were directing her way at the time.
About the only way this could be more politically motivated would be for Lerner to add in the email "Lets get those nasty Republicans and win the election for Obama!"
And it lends dramatic weight to the various anecdotal accounts of prominent individuals who spoke out against Obama or Obamacare and then found themselves facing IRS audits. Who knows how many other IRS officials and employees were surfing political news sites during 2010-2013 and writing emails to suggest audits based on what names showed up in the news cycle?
We know already that similar things happened to Joe the Plumber, Christine O'Donnell, and many others. This is just the first behind-the-scenes glimpse we've gotten into how the process happens within the IRS.
DOJ investigates and clears itself of targeting in Operation Choke Point
Note that they are issuing a lot of denials related to payday lenders and subpoenas. They aren't denying much related to gun stores, pawn shops with FFLs, or applying unofficial pressure to financial institutions.
Rolf lays out the options for dealing with our debt
That's Joe from Boomershoot Rolf from Joe's blog, not Joe Biden.
To summarize: 1) Balance the budget, then cut spending so there is a surplus. and pay down debt. 2) Raise taxes and hope this produces more tax revenue. 3) Keep borrowing and ignore the problem; hope it blows up later. 4) Devalue the currency.
The government is already doing 3 and 4. Even Republicans are starting to talk about 2. No one at all inside government is talking about 1.
The problem is that option 1 is absolutely necessary for any of the other options to work. Before anything can solve the problem, we have to stop making it worse.
And no one in government is prepared to do that, which makes the end of American civilization inevitable.
We'll have to hope for better luck next time, assuming there is a next time.
And that neatly explains why post-apocalyptic movies and videos games are so popular nowadays. The American collective unconscious knows tough times are coming, and we want to be prepared.
Given that there has been no measurable global warming for almost 20 years, climate change does in fact remain a problem for another generation -- that is, the last generation, whose obsession with it came as much from manipulated data and chicken little hysteria as real science.
But Obama is right about one thing.
With his new restrictions on generating the energy required to run a modern economy, we will all be suffering the problems caused by climate change hysteria.
When Obama says "carbon pollution", he means carbon dioxide, which is not harmful, is a natural component of our atmosphere, is needed by plants as they grow and produce oxygen, and has many natural sources (and drains, for that matter) entirely outside of human control.
He's calling it "pollution" because that's a term that sells well to low-information voters who don't understand chemistry or science.
You don't want to be a low-information voter ignorant of science, do you?
Saving the children is mandatory for politicians, even when those children are at no risk whatsoever. Saving the children convinces low-information mommy voters to vote Democrat. You don't want to be a low-information mommy voter who destroys her children's economic future by voting for a Democrat, do you?
Hillary email investigation is definitely criminal
And if I am reading the situation correctly, Hillary will remain under criminal investigation as long as she remains the presumed nominee, but she will be able to make the investigations go away by dropping out of the race.
I post these things because my America is a tolerant place where people are pretty much left alone to practice their sexuality without interference, whatever it may be. I wish the same were true for people practicing everything else.
Like it or not, the agenda of the modern left -- the millenials, the social justice warriors -- is based on hate even as they march in lockstep under the banner of tolerance. They hate "us" -- conservatives, gamers, gun owners, people who have fun wrong -- because they have been told that disagreement is hatred, and we disagree.
Apparently, disagreeing with them but letting them live their lives unmolested is not enough of an ego boost. They need us to hate them, and if we won't oblige, well by God they will do it themselves and collect on the insurance too.
Fourth Circuit rules warrant required for cell-site data
The ruling is obviously correct, despite the other circuit rulings. The circuit split may prod the Supreme Court to take the case, which could be good or bad. As with the Heller case, though, at some point it's necessary to fish or cut bait; the Supreme Court can't duck ruling on these espionage tactics forever.
Unlike the Heller case, the plaintiffs aren't very sympathetic, having been arrested for one burglary and convicted of several others based on the cell data. On the plus side, there's no way for the government to claim national security.
Not comprehensive, just my thoughts listening in progress.
Rubio is lying to us about immigration against. He's got a three-point reform plan that doesn't include amnesty, and does include securing the border as well as reduced legal immigration, but he's just not trustworthy on this issue so the only thing to do is assume he's lying through his teeth. And he's lying about misuse of NSA surveillance information; he says there have been no examples of misuse, but we have seen many documented examples of abuse, none of which were prosecuted as he suggests.
Nobody else really said anything notable or stood out. That's not a bad thing necessarily.
Mainstream media only now catching up to folks in pajamas
I reported that Hillary's top staffers, including Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, and Phillip Reines, were using private email accounts. Reines claimed vigorously at the time that he had a private account but not on Hillary's private server. Huma and Cheryl do not appear to have denied it. Many other Obama administration officials with private accounts (presumably not on Hillary's server either) are also listed.
I reported that (and compiled the list from diverse news accounts) in March. So glad the professional reporters are catching up, or perhaps simply revealing how little attention they are paying.
Democracies last until 51% of the voters realize they can vote themselves the wealth of the other 49%. That's why the United States was designed as a constitutional republic, with protections for individual rights from mob rule, not a democracy.
Boehner couldn't find votes to retain Speaker role
On the one hand, "official" and "establishment" sources are claiming this was a fundraising trick with no chance of passing. On the other, if that was true, why not call the vote and embarass Meadows? Frankly, I don't care if Meadows fundraises off this: since Boehner has likely cut him off from "establishment" fundraising sources what other alternative does Meadows have?
That sounds like the optimistic take to me. But wouldn't it be nice if it turns out to be right?
$1.5 million to help Africans cook food efficiently
You can read the whole thing for Ace's take, but it amounts to sending researches to Africa to "measure cooking events" with and without a fancy new Anti-Global-Warming Carbon-Efficient stove.
Ace is right that the whole idea is pretty much stupid. But he's wrong about the intended purpose. It's not just about Conspicuous Concern. It's about keeping the global warming propaganda machine funded.
Those stoves will cost a tiny fraction of the $1.5 million grant. The rest of the grant will be spent on employing a "climate" scientist and a small collection of students for a year, flying them two and from Africa for a year, writing a paper and submitting to major journals, and probably produce enough work for one of the students to complete their PhD in something climate-sciency.
Remember, we on the right mostly want government to get out of our way so we can make a living. For those on the left, government is their living.
In a civilian court, surely this would get tossed out on self-defense grounds. I'm not quite so certain about a military court, but hopefully sanity will prevail.
UPDATE: In a weaselly-worded statement, the Navy is denying that charges have been filed.
The sourcing for this denial is pretty thin, but so was the sourcing for the original report. Notably, the denial is that any service member has been "charged"; that doesn't mean they won't be charged later or face a reprimand of some sort sort of actual charges or court martial.
Reposting, because it went longer than initially intended:
What publicola missed is that it's already happened to the vets. It started there with people who have a fiduciary managing their VA benefits. Moving from the VA to the SSA is the direction of travel, not the other way around.
I've been periodically reporting on stories about the VA doing this since early 2014 at least, and I noted in that story it wasn't the first time I had written about it.
The thing about Obama that's different from other anti-gun president is that that the others would run a gun ban or a crime bill or whatever up the flagpole and see who saluted it. If it failed that was pretty much spent; political capital gone, move on to other issues. It was more political than personal.
Obama, on the other hand, hates us with a flaming passion. He hates us personally, he thinks we are bigots and racists, and on top of that he hates us for being the only interest group to successfully defy him.
He's not making political gestures, he is taking every possible action to make our lives miserable that he can sneak through, and he will keep doing it until he is kicked out of office, and then he will probably dedicate his life to building an anti-gun political movement to continue screwing us (between golf games and vacations, though, so it won't amount to much).
Obama was never going to fire Koskinen. After all, if the IRS is truly innocent of targeting Obama's political opponents and made their best effort to turn over all relevant documents, firing Koskinen looks bad and tarnishes that innocence. And if Koskinen was a cover-up artist, if Obama fires him, Koskinen might be tempted to talk.
Obviously, I favor the latter explanation.
Now, we find out whether the House is in the habit of making empty threats, or whether they can actually impeach Koskinen.
In related news, a judge is threatening to hold Koskinen in contempt of court over failure to turn over Lois Lerner emails:
No one in this administration will take this matter seriously until some of them start going to jail.