Islam Cartoon

GOP candidate Ben Carson goes after Muslim advocacy group's tax status

Republican Ben Carson has started a petition calling on the IRS to target the nation's largest Muslim advocacy group. 
The retired neurosurgeon accused the Council on American-Islamic Relations on Thursday of violating its nonprofit tax status in a Facebook message. Carson said the organization "brazenly violated IRS rules" when it called last month for him to leave the 2016 presidential race.
"Under the Obama administration, the IRS has systematically targeted conservative nonprofit groups for politically motivated audits and harassment," Carson wrote. "The agency should now properly do its job and punish the real violators of America's laws and regulations."
The Council on American-Islamic Relations lashed out at Carson after he said he would not support a Muslim president.
Carson's fortunes were on the rise before he made the remark and continued to surge afterward. Campaign manager Barry Bennett said Carson raised roughly $700,000 in the 36 hours after he made the comment.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations denied any wrongdoing.
"We find it interesting that Dr. Carson seeks to use a federal government agency to silence his critics and wonder if that tactic would be used to suppress First Amendment freedoms should he become president," spokesman Ibrahim Hooper said.

Jeb shifts attacks to Rubio

JEB SHIFTS ATTACKS TO RUBIO
Under pressure, Jeb Bush is hitting harder than ever against Sen. Marco Rubio, as Bush’s one time protégé surpasses him in the polls.

On the trail in New Hampshire Wednesday, Bush compared Rubio’s campaign message to that of President Obama and warned of a similar result if Rubio was elected. Pressed on his comments today in an interview with MSNBC, Bush went further.

Bush said Rubio lacked the “leadership skills” and said that Rubio would not be able to “fix things” in Washington.

It comes at a difficult moment for Bush as Russian strongman Vladimir Putin has, ahem, “reset” the 2016 presidential race.

Russia’s offensive in Syria is a threshold moment that history will long record. Rather than just the ongoing efforts to reestablish “Great Russia” through the subduction of weak neighbor states and veiled (if thinly) military maneuvers, this is open aggression in a contested territory in the worst neighborhood in the world.

And Putin’s military began the operations by targeting American-backed forces. When Moscow targets American proxies in a Third World hellhole, you know we’re all the way back to the bad old days.

But as history collides with the venality of the 2016 presidential contests, it means particular problems for certain candidates, Bush among them. While he has recently embraced the idea that he is best situated to lead U.S. foreign affairs because he is “a Bush,” sorting out his brother’s Middle East legacy has proved, so far, intractable.

As Bush comes to closer embrace his brother’s foreign policy, discussing how best to escalate a ground war in the region is a huge problem.

Painting Rubio as unready and unsteady won’t be an easy task for Bush, though. He’s on the record from 2012 explicitly saying Rubio was more experienced than Obama and pushed Rubio as Mitt Romney’s running mate.

But Bush’s shift from trying to engage with frontrunner Donald Trump to fourth-place Rubio is likely necessary given the worries that Bush’s early backers may abandon him for the ascendant Rubio.

McCarthy says he never meant to imply Benghazi panel was political

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, in an interview with Fox News on Thursday, walked back comments on the Benghazi committee that have caused a political storm for his caucus and led to renewed Democratic calls for it to be disbanded.
McCarthy, the leading candidate for House speaker, earlier this week was accused by Democrats of implying the committee was created to politically damage Hillary Clinton, after he linked its work to her dropping poll numbers. On Thursday, some Republicans also criticized him, and urged him to clarify his remarks.
Speaking with Fox News’ Bret Baier  in a "Special Report" exclusive interview, McCarthy said he “never meant to imply" that the Benghazi committee has any political motivations.
"This committee was set up for one sole purpose - to find the truth on behalf of the families for four dead Americans," McCarthy said. "Now, I did not intend to imply in any way that work is political."
House Speaker John Boehner staunchly defended McCarthy on Thursday after senior Democrats called for the Benghazi investigation committee to be disbanded, claiming Boehner's top deputy -- and the favorite to step into the speaker's shoes -- implied in an interview the panel was created to politically damage Clinton.
The comments gave Democrats an opening to reprise allegations the committee is merely a political tool. Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the chamber's top Democrat, said Thursday that the investigation is "unethical" and the panel should be shut down. Pelosi also questioned whether the panel violates House rules forbidding spending taxpayer dollars for political purposes.
But Boehner, without mentioning McCarthy's remarks, fired back and issued a statement saying the panel would keep working.
"This investigation has never been about former Secretary of State Clinton and never will be," he said. "... The members of this committee have worked diligently and professionally to fulfill this important mission and they will continue to do so.”
"The American people deserve the truth about what happened in Benghazi. That's always been our focus, and that's going to remain our focus."
McCarthy made the comments in an interview Tuesday night with Fox News' Sean Hannity. Describing how he would be different as speaker, McCarthy said he'd be a "conservative speaker that takes a conservative Congress that puts a strategy to fight and win."
He added: "And let me give you one example. Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she's un-trustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened had we not  ..."
Democrats swiftly suggested his comments undermine claims by the committee's leader and other Republicans that the panel is only seeking the truth about the deadly 2012 attacks at a U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya.
"I appreciate Rep. McCarthy finally coming clean and admitting what we have all known all along: that the Benghazi Select Committee was designed and created as a political attack tool to damage a potential Democratic presidential nominee," Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., a Benghazi committee member and top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said in a statement.
Some Republicans also suggested this week that McCarthy's comments could damage the credibility of the committee and it's chairman, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-SC.
"I think it's a total mischaracterization of the good work that's been done on the Benghazi committee," Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah,  said of McCarthy's comments in an interview with the Associated Press.
Chaffetz, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said he told McCarthy privately Wednesday that he still supported his bid to become speaker but considered his comments untrue.
“To discredit the committee and its purpose was wrong and he should walk back those statements," Chaffetz told the AP.
Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., expressed similar sentiments to Chaffetz on Thursday, saying, "I think he should apologize to the families because his statement jeopardizes the committee's work and trivializes it."
McCarthy said Thursday he’s spoken with Gowdy on how he never meant to imply the committee was political.
"I talked to Trey, and I told him, I regret that this has ever taken place, it is never my intention," McCarthy told Fox News’ Brett Baier, "and Trey goes, 'I know it's not your intention, because you know it's not political.'"
Though he acknowledged his comments were a "setback," McCarthy also brushed off suggestions that his words could affect his push to replace outgoing House Speaker John Boehner.
"We're going to be able to win this race," he said.
But his comments are getting mixed reviews from Republicans as he approaches an initial test vote to succeed House Speaker John Boehner.
“Nobody has 218 today for Speaker,” said Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kan. “Those comments were not helpful. I don’t think that got him one vote.”
“Kevin (McCarthy) is dealing with some very thin margins on the floor (in the Speakership vote),” said Rep. David Jolly, R-Fla,. “He has had to backpedal. It’s took it toll. It was regretful.”
The remarks by Huelskamp and Jolly suggest that since McCarthy can’t get to 218 votes, he can’t afford to waste any vote. Any sort of bump in the road may have negative consequences for McCarthy.
“I don’t think the leader meant to say what this is being construed as,” said Rep. Brian Babin. R-Texas.“It certainly was something that was unfortunate.”

'Filled with hate': Witnesses say Oregon gunman targeted Christians in community college shooting

The gunman in Thursday's mass shooting at an Oregon community college specifically targeted Christians, three witnesses said, while online accounts linked to the shooter expressed disdain for organized religion. 
Authorities say Christopher Harper Mercer killed at least nine people and wounded at least seven others at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg before he was killed in an exchange of gunfire with police.
Investigators have shed very little light publicly on Mercer's possible motive for the shooting. However, reports indicated they were examining Mercer's online presence very closely. One law enforcement official described Mercer to The New York Times as appearing to be "an angry young man who was very filled with hate." Another official said investigators were poring over what he described as "hateful"writings by Mercer. Oregon's top federal prosecutor told The Oregonian newspaper that authorities had heard rumors that the gunman had issued "some sort of race-related manifesto" before the shooting.
Kortney Moore, 18, told the Roseburg News-Review that she was in a Writing 115 class when one shot came through the window. Moore said she saw her teacher get shot in the head. The shooter then reportedly told the students to get on the ground before asking people to stand up and state their religion. He then began firing. Moore said she was lying on the ground with people who had been shot.
Twitter user @bodhilooney posted a statement on the social network claiming that her grandmother was inside the classroom.

More on this...

• Former Columbine principal reacts to Oregon shooting

• The mass murder in Oregon

• Multiple fatalities and injuries in Oregon mass shooting

Janet Willis told the Los Angeles Times that her 18-year-old granddaughter, Ana Boylan, had been shot in the back and was airlifted to a hospital in Eugene. Willis said Boylan told her that the gunman asked others in the classroom to rise and state their religion.
"If they said they were Christians, they were shot again," Willis said. "[Boylan and another wounded girl] just laid on the ground and pretended they were dead."
The Daily Beast reported that a MySpace page bearing Mercer's name featured an image of him holding a gun, as well as images of Irish Republican Army propaganda. The website also reported that Mercer created an online dating profile that listed "organized religion" as one of his "dislikes". The profile also described Mercer's political views as "conservative, republican."
The New York Post identified the dating site as SpiritualPassions.com and reported that Harper used the screen name "Ironcross45," a possible reference to a WWII decoration awarded to Nazi soldiers.
The Beast reported that the MySpace page is registered to Torrance, Calif., where law enforcement officials said Mercer lived before moving to Oregon.
Federal law enforcement officials told The New York Times they were examining an online conversation on the anonymous message board 4chan that was posted the night before the shooting. In that conversation, one writer says ""Some of you guys are all right [sic][. Don't go to school tomorrow if you are in the northwest."
The post made no mention of a shooting, Umpqua Community College, or Roseburg, but did include a photo of a crudely drawn frog with a gun used regularly in Internet memes. The messages that followed spoke of mass shootings, with some egging on and even offering tips to the original poster.

Trump Cartoon

Taking on Trump: The elite media Are now trying to decipher the Donald

After a long summer of denial and disparagement, even the most elite precincts of the media establishment are trying to come to grips with Donald Trump.
First it was the cable news networks, which instantly realized that Trump was good box office, followed by the network morning shows. Then some of the columnists who had dismissed him as a sideshow began to grapple with his rising poll numbers, even those who continued to hammer him.
That was followed by a series of faulty predictions that Trump was about to implode because of this or that corrosive comment, to the point that some talking heads simply announced that they were getting out of the forecasting business.
Trump even scored a “60 Minutes” profile on Sunday for the season opener--drawing 15 million viewers--and later declared that CBS anchor Scott Pelley had been fair to him.
Now some other upscale outlets, rather late to the party, are joining in the dark arts of psychoanalysis: What makes Donald Trump tick, and how has he managed to completely upend the rituals and decorum of a presidential campaign and play by his own set of rules?
What does it say about the electorate that he has struck such a deep chord—and, I would add, what does it say about the media and political insiders who suddenly seemed so clueless?
The New York Times Magazine has just posted its profile by Mark Leibovich, the author of “This Town.” And he begins with an extensive mea culpa:
“Initially, I dismissed him as a nativist clown, a chief perpetrator of the false notion that President Obama was not born in the United States — the ‘birther’ movement. And I was, of course, way too incredibly serious and high-­minded to ever sully myself by getting so close to Donald Trump.
“I initially doubted that he would even run. I assumed that his serial and public flirtations with the idea over several election cycles were just another facet of his existential publicity sustenance. I figured that even if Trump did run, his conspiracy-­mongering, reality-­show orientations and garish tabloid sensibilities would make him unacceptable to the polite company of American politics and mainstream media. It would render him a fringe player. So I decided not to write about him, and I felt proud and honorable about my decision.”
A good confession by Leibovich, who seemed charmed by the generous access after negotiating with Hillary Clinton’s staff over, for example, whether any depiction of her campaign office itself would be off the record.
Unlike overly programmed politicians, he writes, “Trump understands and appreciates that reporters like to be given the time of day. It’s symbiotic in his case because he does in fact pay obsessive attention to what is said and written and tweeted about him. Trump is always saying that so-and-so TV pundit ‘spoke very nicely’ about him on some morning show and that some other writer ‘who used to kill me’ has now come around to ‘loving me.’’’
This is an important point: Journalists not only love that Trump is available, but that he knows how to stir the pot and make news—even at the risk that he will rip them afterward. There are few things more frustrating than landing an interview with a presidential candidate and getting the same canned sound bites we’ve all heard before.
So, a scene from the Trump jet:
“He kept flipping between Fox News, CNN and MSNBC, sampling the commentary in tiny snippets. Whenever a new talking head came on screen, Trump offered a scouting report based on the overriding factor of how he or she had treated him. ‘This guy’s been great to me,’ he said when Bill O’Reilly of Fox appeared (less so O’Reilly’s guest, Brit Hume, also of Fox). Kevin Madden of CNN, a Republican strategist, was a ‘pure Romney guy,’ while Ana Navarro, a Republican media consultant and Jeb Bush supporter, was ‘so bad, so pathetic, awful — I don’t know why she’s on television.’ Click to Fox News. Jeb Bush was saying something in Spanish. Click to MSNBC. Hillary Clinton was saying she wished Trump would start ‘respecting women’ rather than ‘cherishing women.’ (‘She speaks so poorly, I think she’s in trouble,’ Trump said.) Click to CNN. It showed a graphic reporting that 70 percent of Latinos had a negative view of Trump. Click to Fox News. Trump asked for another plate of au gratin.”
The Donald, never unplugged.
Another major piece appears in New York Magazine by Frank Rich, the former Times columnist, unabashed liberal and consultant on “Veep” who doesn’t hide his disdain for Trump. He writes, for instance, of “the quest to explain” how “the billionaire’s runaway clown car went into overdrive.”
But Rich feels compelled to give Trump his due, even as a flawed messenger: “It’s possible that his buffoonery poses no lasting danger. Quite the contrary: His unexpected monopoly of center stage may well be the best thing to happen to our politics since the arrival of Barack Obama.”
Trump, he argues, “has performed a public service by exposing, however crudely and at times inadvertently, the posturings of both the Republicans and the Democrats and the foolishness and obsolescence of much of the political culture they share. He is, as many say, making a mockery of the entire political process with his bull-in-a-china-shop antics. But the mockery in this case may be overdue, highly warranted, and ultimately a spur to reform…By calling attention to that sorry state of affairs 24/7, Trump’s impersonation of a crypto-fascist clown is delivering the most persuasively bipartisan message of 2016.”
While allowing that Trump commits heresy on such matters as taxing hedge-fund guys, Rich ultimately blames the Republican culture: “On the matters of race, women, and immigration that threaten the GOP’s future viability in nonwhite, non-male America, he is at one with his party’s base. What he does so rudely is call the GOP’s bluff by saying loudly, unambiguously, and repeatedly the ugly things that other Republican politicians try to camouflage in innuendo, focus-group-tested euphemisms, and consultantspeak.”
This is the last line of defense for the anti-Trump contingent: The problem is not The Donald, it’s the way he caters to the dark passions of conservative Republicans. But many Democrats are also fed up with politics as usual, which is why socialist Bernie Sanders has improbably pulled close to Hillary in the polls.
With his new tax-cut proposal, Trump has kicked off the second phase of his campaign, one in which he’s offering policy as well as persona. Asked by Matt Lauer yesterday what he would do if his poll numbers sink, Trump said: "If I think for some reason it's not going to work, then I'd go back to my business." But there's no indication he's going anywhere for the foreseeable future.
And if other candidates spoke as openly and frequently with the media as Trump does, we’d have a better campaign.

Planned Parenthood boss clashes with lawmakers over taxpayer $$, videos

The head of Planned Parenthood clashed with congressional Republicans on Capitol Hill Tuesday over the group's taxpayer funding, while using her appearance to attack the group behind a series of disturbing videos showing her organization's workers discussing fetal tissue harvesting. 
Cecile Richards, speaking before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, claimed the videos were "deceptively edited" and "heavily doctored."
Yet just minutes before the hearing started, a forensic analysis said the videos "are authentic and show no evidence of manipulation or editing." The analysis was conducted for the anti-abortion group Center for Medical Progress.
Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, also seemed to brush off the claims of doctoring as he excoriated Planned Parenthood for its allegedly "insatiable" desire for taxpayer dollars. He pointedly cited the millions the group has spent on travel and parties and "fairly exorbitant salaries" even while cutting back, he said, on certain health care services.
"Their desire for more of taxpayer dollars is just insatiable," Chaffetz said.
Chaffetz argued that Planned Parenthood "doesn't need a federal subsidy." Chaffetz, in emotional opening remarks, recalled his late mother's fight with breast cancer, and said much of Planned Parenthood's budget is not going "to women's health care."

More on this...

• Planned Parenthood: The Hidden Harvest

Under questioning from Chaffetz, Richards acknowledged her annual compensation is $520,000. (Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., later criticized Chaffetz for the line of questioning, accusing him of "beating up on a woman ... for making a good salary.")
Richards, meanwhile, adamantly defended Planned Parenthood, saying she's "proud to be here" and stressing that their clinics largely provide birth control, cancer screenings and other health care services.
The videos showing conversations on fetal tissue harvesting, she said, were part of a "smear campaign" to "entrap" doctors into breaking the law.
"Once again, our opponents failed," she said.
She said less than 1 percent of their clinics facilitate donations for fetal tissue research, and they do so legally.
Richards won some support from Democrats on the committee. Top Democrat, Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, blasted CMP for having "misled and essentially conned Planned Parenthood employees."
But Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, called the scenes in the videos "barbaric and repulsive."
A question looming over the hearing was whether any of the footage was in fact altered. Democrats repeatedly suggested that important passages were missing.
But the Alliance Defending Freedom engaged cybersecurity and forensic analysis company Coalfire Systems to examine the 10 "full-footage videos" put out by CMP.
According to their review, the videos were not manipulated. The report said any missing footage was of "non-pertinent" events like meals and bathroom breaks.
"The Coalfire forensic analysis removes any doubt that the full length undercover videos released by Center for Medical Progress are authentic and have not been manipulated," ADF Senior Counsel Casey Mattox said in a statement.
"Analysts scrutinized every second of video recorded during the investigation and released by CMP to date and found only bathroom breaks and other non-pertinent footage had been removed. Planned Parenthood can no longer hide behind a smokescreen of false accusations and should now answer for what appear to be the very real crimes revealed by the CMP investigation."
The 10 videos released so far capture Planned Parenthood officials casually describing how they sometimes obtain tissue from aborted fetuses for researchers. In one video, a doctor for a Planned Parenthood tissue harvesting partner appears to admit a baby's "heart actually is still beating" at times following abortions and an ex-procurement tech gives a first-person account of watching a baby's heart beat before she dissects its brain.
Planned Parenthood foes say the videos show the group breaks federal laws barring for-profit fetal tissue sales and altering abortion procedures to obtain usable organs. Planned Parenthood and its defenders say it's done nothing illegal and says that CMP Project Lead David Daleiden dishonestly edited the videos to distort what was said.
In written testimony, Richards fired back at Daleiden, calling for him to be investigated after she says he "tried unsuccessfully to entrap Planned Parenthood physicians and staff for nearly three years." Daleiden obtained the videos after posing as an executive of a nonexistent firm that buys fetal tissue for scientists.
So far, the most damage inflicted on Planned Parenthood by the videos is the insensitive way some of its officials discuss the procedures. That has drawn apologies from Planned Parenthood and bitter criticism from Republicans.
Most Democrats have rallied behind the group, and President Obama has threatened to veto GOP legislation cutting its federal money. Public opinion polls show majorities oppose blocking Planned Parenthood's taxpayer dollars. Departing House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., fearing voter anger, have rebuffed conservatives who would shut down the government if Obama doesn't agree to halt Planned Parenthood's money.
The organization receives about a third of its $1.3 billion annual budget, around $450 million, from federal coffers, chiefly reimbursements for treating Medicaid's low-income patients.
Democrats have used a Senate filibuster to block GOP legislation halting Planned Parenthood's federal payments. So two House committees plan to approve filibuster-proof legislation shifting Planned Parenthood's Medicaid funds -- about $350 million -- to community health centers.
The bill would also keep a promise made during this spring's budget debate to repeal key elements of Obama's signature health care law. Panel votes are expected Tuesday and Wednesday.
In addition to the four congressional committee investigations of Planned Parenthood, Boehner has said he will also appoint a special committee to probe the group.