Racists are coming out of the woodwork now!

Terry family attorney Pat McGroder on Wednesday released the following statement from Terry’s parents Josephine Terry and Kent Terry Sr.: “Attorney General Eric Holder’s refusal to fully disclose the documents associated with Operation Fast and Furious and President Obama’s assertion of executive privilege serves to compound this tragedy. It denies the Terry family and the American people the truth.”

The Terrys said that their son “was killed by members of a Mexican drug cartel armed with weapons from this failed Justice Department gun trafficking investigation. For more than 18 months we have been asking our federal government for justice and accountability. The documents sought by the House Oversight Committee and associated with Operation Fast and Furious should be produced and turned over to the committee. Our son lost his life protecting this nation, and it is very disappointing that we are now faced with an administration that seems more concerned with protecting themselves rather than revealing the truth behind Operation Fast and Furious.”

And the Zapata family.

n an interview last November, Zapata's family told CBS News they feel that US law enforcement could have stopped the sale of a gun used to kill their son. CBS News obtained law enforcement records that show the gun that killed Zapata came from the US, and the suspects who allegedly trafficked it had been under law enforcement's watch for months in Dallas but weren't arrested.

In February, CBS News learned a second weapon used in the Zapata attack was also linked to an ongoing case under the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

The Justice Department has said ATF "was not aware of" the suspect's purchase of the gun that killed Zapata when it happened, and that answering further questions would jeopardize the investigation.

The investigation is apparently some kind of "Guess How Many People Will Get Killed By This Operation" contest at the DoJ. Like jellybeans, except the jellybeans are human, and also dead.

Posted by: Ace at 01:24 PM | Comments (179)
Post contains 365 words, total size 3 kb.

And they're still highballing it. From the NYT:

Fed officials said they now expected the economy to expand between 1.9 percent and 2.4 percent this year, down from an April forecast of 2.4 percent to 2.9 percent.

The economic forecast, released separately, reflected reduced prospects for 2013 as well. The Fed estimated growth of between 2.2 percent and 2.8 percent, down from 2.7 percent and 3.1 percent in the April forecast.

Why do I say they're highballing it? Well, for one thing, they've consistently highballed it. Q1's initial reading came in at 2.2%, later revised down to 1.9%.

Now, the first quarter's GDP annualized growth rate was 1.9%, and Q2 seems to be falling even further.

So, Q3 and Q4 would have to come in at something like 3% to pull the average for the year up to "1.9% to 2.4%."

Does it seem likely? Is anyone feeling a sudden surge coming in the economy?

I don't. Europe is about to tank, for one thing. And our own "recovery" was weak, at best, even before any pulldown from the European toilet-swirl.

Posted by: Ace at 01:10 PM | Comments (81)
Post contains 199 words, total size 1 kb.

And by that I mean they voted out a contempt finding against Holder, which now goes to the entire House for consideration.

"How can the president assert executive privilege if there was no White House involvement?" Grassley said in a statement. "How can the president exert executive privilege over documents he's supposedly never seen? Is something very big being hidden to go to this extreme?"

BTW: If this is all Bush's doing, per the very distinguished Congressthing Sheila Jackson Lee, why not disclose all the documents?

Let's finally get Bush for what he did.

Or no?

Obvious, But Worth Saying Again: Executive privilege can be invoked to protect national security secrets and, to a lesser extent, confidential advice given to the president.

It cannot be used to protect strategizing about how to lie to Congress.

But there is at least one helpful development in HolderÂ’s request that the President invoke executive privilege to shield these documents: The President now owns the consequences of further stonewalling. There is no ongoing DOJ prosecution or investigation to protect. There is no obvious reason why the President canÂ’t waive even what legitimately privileged documents there are (which is probably far fewer than the 1,300 pages being withheld).

Most of Issa's requests are about how a patently false, and now "inoperable," memo was drafted, and who authorized it, and sent the perjurious document to Congress.

Are they claiming Executive Privilege shields them from disclosing how they contrived to lie?

That dog won't hunt.

Posted by: Ace at 12:34 PM | Comments (253)
Post contains 282 words, total size 2 kb.

I know they love this line, but all I can say is live by the sword, die by the sword.

“I don’t want to start too much forest fire here but it is my instinct: is this ethnic?” Matthews asked San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown last night. “It smells like it to me and I think there is a disdain on the part of some Republicans . . . that do talk down to the president and his friends,” Matthews added.

Brown, earlier in the segment, had already accused Issa of “leading a lynch-like mob” against Holder.

Holder made the same accusation in December. “This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him,” Holder told the New York Times, “both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both African-American.”

A lot of people on Twitter are pretty sure it's racist, too.

I've talked to independent-type people. This constant claim of racism? Eye Roll City, baby.

They understand it's the desperate defense of last resort. They are not fooled.

I forgot who said it, but failure and incompetence and corruption and dishonesty are not "races."

A lot of people affirmatively voted for Obama because he was black, or at least the idea of a black president appealed to them. (It is, in fact, appealing-- as long as we're not talking about Obama.)

They tended to discount questions about his qualifications to overcompensate for possible racism, their own or others.

I assure you, they will not be doing so again.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 12:14 PM | Comments (167)
Post contains 359 words, total size 3 kb.

Lawrence O'Donnell, for example, raps Romeny for saying Ann is the athlete in the family. Athlete? he sniffs. She just bought a horse.

But Romney didn't say that.

Even in his own presented clip, he didn't say that.

LAWRENCE OÂ’DONNELL, HOST: In tonight's Rewrite, Mitt Romney rewrites the definition of an Olympic athlete.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BOB SCHIEFFER, HOST OF “FACE THE NATION”: I hear you've got an Olympic athlete in the family.

MITT ROMNEY: Isn't that something? Yeah, it's not me. It's my wife, of course. She's the athlete, but in this case, it's not her personally, but she along with two other people purchased a horse and have trained it up.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

OÂ’DONNELL: She's the athlete. That's what Mitt Romney just said. She's the athlete.

Romney pretty much specified exactly what happened.

O'Donnell goes on to claim that there's no such thing as Therapeutic Riding (Ann Romney began riding horses to combat MS). Newsbusters then goes to town:

*****Update: I received a very interesting email message from NB reader Jeffrey Peters who is a volunteer to Maryland Special Olympics and 4H (with permission):

Dressage is a very common technique to help many types of disabilities, and is one of the few that tends to work for many problems that lack effective treatment. Therapeutic Riding is a major event and is a fundamental component of the Special Olympics. In Maryland, over 100 riders participated in the Special Olympics Therapeutic Riding event earlier in June. Dressage is not for "rich people." Most of the Special Olympians are from lower income families. Most participants are just honest people who enjoy a very popular sport. This is a part of the matter that is so often ignored. It is honestly upsetting to see such hate against an event that helps so many special needs adults and children.

One such facility is the Maryland Therapeutic Riding center:

Maryland Therapeutic Riding (MTR) is a non-profit organization located between Baltimore and Annapolis, Maryland on a beautiful 25-acre farm. Utilizing certified instructors, licensed therapists, volunteers and specially-trained horses, we offer high-quality horseback riding programs to open new pathways of healing for children and adults with a wide range of physical, mental, and emotional challenges.

Therapeutic Riding is a treatment for rehabilitating a range of physical, mental, and emotional disabilities. PATH certified instructors use the horse as an instructional tool to teach riding skills and reach individualized goals and objectives. Conditions served include: cerebral palsy, spina bifida, neuromuscular disorders, post-traumatic brain injury, autism, ADHD, and cognitive disorders. Riders see an overall improvement in their quality of life. They experience improved self-confidence, strength, balance, coordination, attention span, and language and social skills.

Seems a lot of people seem to believe Therapeutic Riding is a real thing.

On the other hand, Lawrence O'Donnell doesn't, so that settles it.

This is a good example of something I see going on on left-wing blogs, and left-wing blogs on television, as MSNBC is. It actually doesn't happen much on the right.

It's not just that they rush out with ill-founded conclusions without checking. It's that I have the strong sense they either have checked, and know what they're saying is false, or don't bother checking, because they strongly suspect that if they'd checked they'd find out what they're saying is false.

So they don't.

Sexton did a good piece on this. The Atlantic rushed to claim that Romney's story concerned a simple change of address form, despite the fact he clearly said the change of address concerned an optometrist changing address for purposes of Medicare or Medicaid billing. I mean, Jesus, it was right in the clip.

The shameless hack Tommy Christopher, who sneers "lie" about everything, claimed such forms are only 2 pages long, not 33 pages as Romney's optometrist-supporter told him, without bothering to, say, check beyond the first google entry.

t should be clear, especially to someone who was there listening, that Romney was not talking about a simple US Post Office change of address form. He's talking about changing an address on file with the federal government for purposes of issuing payments. Based on the description Romney gives ("services he provides for the poor and seniors") this is probably a Medicare form. In fact, it might even be this form, CMS 855I.

Under "Who Should Complete This Application" the CMS 855I form lists several categories of people who should fill it out including those "Currently enrolled in Medicare and need to make changes to your enrollment information (e.g., you have added or changed a practice location)." The pdf version of the form is 27 pages long, not the precise length Romney claimed but close. This similar form (CMS 855B) for changing the address of an entire clinic or group practice is 48 pages long. Maybe it's not either one of these forms or maybe the optometrist's printer was off a bit, but we're definitely in the neighborhood.

Tommy Christopher is refusing to correct -- as usual; remember, this is the sneering Roger Chillingsworth of the Internet, handing out Scarlet L's like he's got a quota to fill -- and Fallows offers this baffling Mea Non Cupla:

After I mentioned this part of Romney's speech, to explain how he was making his case about public/private differences, many people wrote in to make a point I hadn't: that in fact it's very easy to make a USPS change.

So I went back to see the tape. It is possible though not spelled-out that the optometrist had been talking about getting the Medicare and Medicare systems to change his registered billing address, which could well be more complex

It was extremely spelled-out, asshole. Romney said:

I met an optometrist this morning... He wanted to change his billing address... He got a form, from the government. This is so he could get reimbursement from the federal government for the services he performs for the poor and seniors.

He then spoke of the delays in having this simple change of address completed, during which time he didn't get his "checks from the government" for the services he was providing.

Um, which part of that quote is hard for you to parse, Fallows? "Reimbursement" from the "government" for "services" for "poor and seniors"?

He didn't "spell it out" for you, sufficiently? If he didn't spell it out for you sufficiently, is that a problem with his mouth or a problem with your feeble brain?

But Fallows claims that he didn't err-- Romney just didn't speak plainly enough.

How is it that everyone else in the world understood he was talking about Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements except you?

I have a theory: You're lying when you said you listened to the tape. There is no way to listen to the tape and come away from it believing the optometrist was talking about a simple residential USPS change-of-address form. Romney spelled out what it was.

So you didn't listen to the tape -- you just assumed what was said -- you assumed the lie itself-- and rushed to post without checking. Now, embarrassed, you actually do listen to the tape, but claim it wasn't "spelled out" enough for your brain to comprehend.

Protip: When a doctor speaks of "reimbursements" from the "federal government" for "services rendered" to the "poor and seniors," he's talking about Medicaid and Medicare.

He's not talking about getting his subscription to Dwell forwarded to his new residential address.

Now that's a lie, Tommy Christopher. I'm sure you'll be right on top of that.

Question: Why doesn't Tommy Christopher just call this optometrist? I'm pretty sure the Romney people could find him, for him.

Or Fallows.

Answer: Because they know they wouldn't like the answer. It is far safer to spin falsehoods when you can always pretend ignorance of the facts.

If you got in touch with this guy... gee, he might tell you that Sexton's 27 page form was the one he filled out, plus another form for Medicare. Then your silly games would be well and truly done, eh?

Posted by: Ace at 11:15 AM | Comments (313)
Post contains 1366 words, total size 9 kb.

It's amusing that the one additional page of information they released today concerns the Bush-era "Wide Receiver" program.

Grassley released this memo:

To: Reporters and Editors

Re: Second retraction of Fast and Furious Assertions

Da: Wednesday, June 20, 2012

The Justice Department has retracted a second statement made to the Senate Judiciary Committee. During a hearing last week, Attorney General Eric Holder claimed that his predecessor, then-Attorney General Michael Mukasey, had been briefed about gunwalking in Operation Wide Receiver. Now, the Department is retracting that statement and claiming Holder "inadvertently" made that claim to the Committee. The Department's letter failed to apologize to former Attorney General Mukasey for the false accusation. This is the second major retraction the Justice Department has made in the last seven months. In December 2011, the Department retracted its claim that the ATF had not allowed illegally purchased guns to be trafficked to Mexico. Sen. Chuck Grassley's letter and the Department's response can be viewed here-1.

In addition, the Justice Department released only one page of additional material prior to the Attorney General's meeting on Capitol Hill on Tuesday. It is a page of handwritten notes by a public affairs specialist for the Deputy Attorney General, which the Department says it "just recently discovered." The notes indicate that when Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jason Weinstein met with senior ATF officials on April 28, 2010, regarding the problem of gunwalking in Wide Receiver, the Deputy Attorney General's public affairs specialist also attended the meeting. These notes can be viewed here-2.

The notes indicate that Fast and Furious was also a topic discussed at the meeting, in addition to Wide Receiver. These notes further corroborate contemporaneous emails in 2010 that show Criminal Division Chief Lanny Breuer and Weinstein seemed to have been more concerned about the press implications of gunwalking than they were about making sure ATF ended the practice. (These emails can be viewed here-3.) The notes also undermine the claim that senior DOJ officials failed to "make the connection" between the gunwalking in Wide Receiver--which Breuer admitted to knowing about--and gunwalking in Fast and Furious. In fact, both cases were discussed by senior Department leadership and senior ATF leadership.

"There's Been A Tendency of this Administration To... Hide Behind Executive Privilege, Whenever Something Shakey Is Taking Place... They'd Be Best Served By Coming Clean."

Yeah, you said it, buddy.

Wait -- you said that?!
more...

Posted by: Ace at 09:50 AM | Comments (480)
Post contains 423 words, total size 3 kb.

I turned on my TV and this greeted me. Scared the hell out of me.

He's speaking to the Democrats core constituency...public sector union "workers". Watch it all the way through to see who Biden and Obama think are the heart of America.

No Slow Joe, taxpayers provide all of those things. People who go to work, who start businesses who pay the bill for those things, make them possible.

The Democrats simply look at the private sector as a piggy bank to rob to pay off their supporters and in turn those supporters fund Democratic campaigns.

Biden thinks we should thank these workers for that privilege.

Romney should be all over this.

Posted by: DrewM at 08:22 AM | Comments (177)
Post contains 135 words, total size 1 kb.

The hearing is just getting underway but the fireworks before hand is that Holder asked Obama to assert Executive Privilege over the documents the Oversight Committee wants and he has.

Seems we have ourselves a good old fashioned constitutional showdown.

So, the coverup of Fast And Furious now officially goes all the way to Obama.

Good news/Bad news on this development. The MBM now has to cover the story. Bad news: They will go into full "Protect Obama" mode.

The usual suspects are already pushing the "But Bush started it" line. Short version...no it didn't.

There's been more talk of Fast And Furious on CNN and MSNBC in the last 5 minutes than in the last year and half. All 9 of their viewers must be confused as to what this is all about and why it's so important.

Kind of sucks when the cocoon breaks, huh?

The hearing is late getting started, presumably Issa and team are trying to figure out what the assertion of Executive Privilege means to the process but it sounds like the contempt vote is still on.

Here's the letter from Holder to Obama on documents.

With today's development, does anyone (other than liberal apologists) have any doubt that Obama and/ or top level people were deeply involved in Fast and Furious?

Posted by: DrewM at 06:01 AM | Comments (982)
Post contains 261 words, total size 2 kb.

Happy Wednesday.

Something something something in contempt.

April jobs openings had their biggest drop---down 325,000---since September 2008. However, economists---the little dreamers---seem hesitant to say that this is important. No, really.

Wikiwanker Assange is hiding out in Ecuador's London embassy, begging for asylum. He really, really doesn't want to go to trial on those rape charges, huh?

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 02:57 AM | Comments (315)
Post contains 64 words, total size 1 kb.

What America Spends On Groceries

Well the good news is that we're spending a lot less than we did 30 years ago - from 13% of our income in 1982 to only 8% today. Which for normal people is a Good Thing - but of course must be a very terrible thing on the hand-wringing left.

And the biggest reason we spend less is because most food - especially meat and dairy products - is far, far cheaper these days. In fact I'm pretty sure I could create a whole new diet craze based just on these newly cheap foods - Delicious AND Cheap!

But, but, but doesn't this just mean that the ignorant sheeple American people aren't spending as much on fruits and vegetables today?! </concerned hand-wringing>

Nope - the percentage of food money spent on fruits and vegetables is virtually unchanged at 14.5%.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 06:26 PM | Comments (732)
Post contains 1037 words, total size 11 kb.