Conservative Blogger
Monday, October 26, 2015
Christie has to leave Amtrak 'quiet' car after talking on cell phone
GOP presidential candidate and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie had to leave an Amtrak “quiet” car for talking on his cellphone Sunday morning, shortly after boarding a north-bound train from Washington, D.C.
A fellow passenger told the website Gawker that Christie boarded the 9:55 a.m. train at the last minute and had a loud discussion with his two-man security detail about seating, then had an “intense” talk on his cellphone before being approached by a conductor.
The conductor purportedly asked Christie, known for his bombastic manner, to either concluded the call or move to a talking-permissible car.
Campaign official Samantha Smith acknowledged the incident but said Christie mistakenly sat in the no-talking car “on a very full train” and apologized for the mistake and inconveniencing fellow passengers
“After breaking the cardinal rule of the quiet car, the governor promptly left once he realized the serious nature of his mistake and enjoyed the rest of his time on the train from the cafe car,” Smith said in a statement. “Sincere apologies to all the patrons of the quiet car that were offended.”
She also said Christie wasn't asked to leave and referred FoxNews.com to a Twitter feed of a purported female passenger who said the conductor only pointed out to Christie that he was in a quiet car.
The passenger also told Gawker that Christie was drinking a McDonald’s strawberry smoothie and kept repeating into his phone: “This is frickin’ ridiculous” and “seriously?”
Amtrak conductors generally urge passengers to maintain a "library-like atmosphere" in the quiet car. It's not uncommon for conductors to ask noisier passengers to change cars.
The Republican presidential hopeful had appeared on CBS's "Face the Nation" earlier in the morning.
Ryan gets more, key support ahead of big vote this week to become next GOP House speaker
 |
| Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan |
Wisconsin GOP Rep. Paul Ryan got added support Sunday from a key part of the chamber’s Republican conference when the leader of the House Freedom Caucus said he was the “right guy” to be the next speaker.
“We think Paul has the kind of vision and is the kind of messenger our party needs to accomplish the things we told the voters we’re going to accomplish,” group Chairman Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan said on "Fox News Sunday."
Ryan, House Ways and Means Committee chairman and 2012 vice presidential candidate, was recruited by Capitol Hill Republicans to become the next House speaker.
Ryan agreed to run for the post after talking last week with members of the Freedom Caucus -- part of the chamber’s most conservative wing, which largely forced House Speaker John Boehner to resign in late-September.
“He didn’t quite get the endorsement threshold we have in our group, but a super majority of our members said we think Paul Ryan is the right guy at the right time to lead our conference,” Jordan also said Sunday.
The small-but-powerful wing continuously disagreed with Boehner and members of the leadership team, accusing them of not digging in hard enough on spending cuts, repealing ObamaCare and other important conservative issues.
Ryan in talking with the caucus members reportedly agreed to address their concerns including committee leadership assignments and legislation from rank-and-file members not getting more consideration.
The speaker vote is expected later this week.
“We have a commitment from Paul to work on changing the rules and we may even get a change before the vote this coming Wednesday and Thursday,” Jordan said.
Ryan was recruited after a couple of wild weeks after Boehner’s resignation. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, the second-in-command, dropped out of the race after suggesting the House Select Committee on Benghazi was responsible for damaging the campaign of Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton. And South Carolina GOP Rep. Trey Gowdy, chairman of the Benghazi committee, was mentioned for the job, but he quickly and emphatically declined.
Ryan needs 218 votes from the chamber’s 434 members, including 246 Republicans.
He has made clear he doesn't want to squeak by in the vote. Last week, he got support from the Republican Study Committee and the Tuesday Group, two key groups that should help him get enough votes.
NYPD union calls for boycott of Quentin Tarantino films after director's anti-cop protest
The head of the New York Police Department's union has called for a boycott of Quentin Tarantino's films after the director took part in an anti-police protest Saturday, four days after one of New York's Finest was murdered by a suspect he was pursuing.
Tarantino, whose oeuvre includes the notoriously violent films "Reservoir Dogs", "Pulp Fiction", and "Django Unchained", flew in from California to take part in the event with hundreds of other demonstrators.
"I'm a human being with a conscience," Tarantino said. "And if you believe there's murder going on then you need to rise up and stand up against it. I'm here to say I'm on the side of the murdered."
"It’s no surprise that someone who makes a living glorifying crime and violence is a cop-hater, too," Patrick Lynch, president of the Patrolman's Benevolent Association, said Sunday in response to Tarantino. "The police officers that Quentin Tarantino calls ‘murderers’ aren’t living in one of his depraved big-screen fantasies — they’re risking and sometimes sacrificing their lives to protect communities from real crime and mayhem."
Saturday's rally, which gathered in Manhattan's Greenwich Village neighborhood at Washington Square Park before marching about 2 miles along Sixth Avenue, came in the wake of the shooting death of 33-year-old Officer Randolph Holder. Holder was shot to death in the city's East Harlem neighborhood while pursuing a bicycle thief. A suspect has been charged with murder and robbery in the case.
"I think it’s very disrespectful,” Holder's cousin Shauntel Abrams told the Post. "Everyone forgets that behind the uniform is a person."
The New York Post reported that Tarantino acknowledged the timing of Saturday's rally was "unfortunate." But the director, whose latest film "The Hateful Eight," is due out early next year, said the rally had to go ahead because people had traveled long distances to attend.
Biden opted out on 2016 Dem race because he 'couldn't win'
WASHINGTON – Vice President Joe Biden says he decided against running for president because he "couldn't win," not because he would have had too little time to get a campaign up and running.
"I'll be very blunt. If I thought we could've put together the campaign ... that our supporters deserve and our contributors deserved, ... I would have done it," he said in an interview aired Sunday on CBS's "60 Minutes."
In the wide-ranging interview, in which Biden took questions for a time joined by his wife, Jill, the vice president also said he would not have gotten into the race just to stop Democratic front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton.
"I've said from the beginning, 'Look, I like Hillary. Hillary and I get along together," he said. "The only reason to run is because ... I still think I could do a better job than anybody else could do."
He used the interview to play down suggestions his announcement not to run, made at the White House Wednesday with President Barack Obama standing at his side, included a jab at Clinton.
At the White House event, Biden lamented partisan bickering in Washington politics and said, "I don't think we should look at Republicans as our enemies." Clinton had made a statement to that effect during the Democratic presidential debate earlier this month.
"That wasn't directed at Hillary," Biden told "60 Minutes."
"That was a reference to Washington, all of Washington," he said.
The 72-year-old Biden also sought in the interview to dispel recurrent rumors that his late son Beau, who died earlier this year at age 46 of brain cancer, had made a last-minute plea to his father to run for president.
Biden said there was no such "Hollywood moment ... Nothing like that ever, ever happened," he said. "Beau all along thought that I should run and I could win."
"But there was not what was sort of made out as kind of this Hollywood-esque thing that, at the last minute, Beau grabbed my hand and said, 'Dad, you've got to run,' like win one for the Gipper," Biden said.
The vice president did say he wants to continue to have a voice in party affairs and will speak up whenever he wishes. He has not endorsed a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination.
"I will make no bones about that," he said. "I don't want the party walking away from what Barack and I did."
Clinton, Sen. Bernie Sanders and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley are still in the race.
Sunday, October 25, 2015
Judge who signed off on treatment deal for suspected cop killer says she is ‘truly sorry’
 | |||
| Cop Killer |
 |
| Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Patricia Nuñez, accessory after the fact. |
One of the New York judges who helped send a suspected cop killer to rehab instead of jail five months ago said Friday that the deadly shooting "breaks her heart" and that she is "truly sorry."
Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Patricia Nuñez told The New York Post that she will address the issue further at a Nov. 12 court date for the suspect, Tyrone Howard. The paper reported that Howard was freed despite a history of three felony sale convictions and the urging of prosecutors in the drug case.
Officer Randolph Holder's killing Tuesday has raised questions about the risks and potential shortcomings of drug courts, or drug diversion programs, which have been embraced nationwide as a way to ease jail overcrowding and reduce crime by attacking it at one of its sources: drug abuse.
New York's mayor and police commissioner have branded Howard a career criminal who had once been arrested in a 2009 gunfight on an East Harlem basketball court and should not have been out on the streets.
"He would have been the last person in New York City I would've wanted to see in the diversion program," Police Commissioner William Bratton said.
Yet another judge who handled the case said Howard — a longtime PCP user who despite his long rap sheet had no convictions for violent crimes — was a compelling candidate for drug court.
"He would have been the last person in New York City I would've wanted to see in the diversion program"He also said he was never made aware of the 2009 shooting case, which records show ultimately wasn't prosecuted against Howard. A law enforcement official who is familiar with the prosecution of the other defendant in that shooting, and who wasn't authorized to discuss the case publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity, said there was no eyewitness testimony placing Howard as the shooter.
- Police Commissioner William Bratton
Since their start in Miami in 1989, drug diversion programs have multiplied to 2,500 courts across the country, together handling about 120,000 cases a year, according to the federal National Office of Drug Control Policy.
The agency calls the programs "a proven tool for improving public health and public safety." President Obama mentioned them approvingly in a July speech, saying such programs can save taxpayer dollars.
Drug courts generally target nonviolent offenders who commit crimes to feed their addictions. The courts use treatment, drug testing, incentives and penalties to try to get defendants sober and straightened out.
"Drug courts are the most effective intervention in the justice system for individuals with substance abuse histories," Carson Fox, executive director of the National Association of Drug Court Professionals, said Wednesday.
Studies have credited drug courts with reducing recidivism and drug-use relapses. Some research estimates those reductions save society more money than the treatment costs, though some studies have found the opposite, according to a 2011 congressional report.
But some research has also found drug-court dropout rates of 60 percent, said David Lilley, a criminal justice professor at the University of Toledo.
And some prosecutors and police fear diversion sometimes ends up giving breaks to drug dealers who claim they're addicts to avoid prison.
"It's critically important that you get the right people" into drug court, said Jim Pasco, executive director of the national Fraternal Order of Police. "You're making life-changing decisions for the subject and potentially life-threatening decisions for the public."
At 30, Howard has been arrested more than two dozen times since he was 13 and sentenced to state prison twice since 2007 for drug possession and sale. One term came after he tried unsuccessfully for drug court in a 2011 case charging him with smoking PCP while carrying 22 bags of crack cocaine. Howard eventually pleaded guilty to drug possession.
In October 2014, he was charged with selling crack to an undercover officer. He was swept up as part of a larger drug case. Prosecutors sought six years behind bars.
But after reviewing Howard's record, troubled home life and longtime addiction, McLaughlin agreed to refer his case for evaluation for drug court, where another judge OK'd Howard for the program.
McLaughlin said he didn't learn about the 2009 gunbattle until this week. Howard was believed to have shot and wounded another man, Dan Evans, according to court papers. Evans was eventually convicted in the wounding of two bystanders, plus a 2006 murder.
The record doesn't explain why the case against Howard was dropped, and the district attorney's office hasn't commented. But the law enforcement official said no one identified Howard as a shooter except Evans, the defendant.
After being approved for drug court, Howard was released on $35,000 bail in February and pleaded guilty to the drug charge in May.
He started missing monthly status meetings and various court dates in August, then became a suspect in a Sept. 1 shooting. An arrest warrant was issued Sept. 17, and police tried 10 times to locate him, authorities said.
Then, on Tuesday, Holder and his partner caught up with him while chasing after a bicycle thief, police said. Holder, 33, was shot in the head; Howard was wounded in the leg as police returned fire.
Howard's lawyer, Brian Kennedy, has said there are "a lot of missing details" in the case.
Trailing in Iowa, Trump now battling like a true outsider
 |
| Jeb Bush |
 | ||
| Ben Carson |
New polls show Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is trailing in first-voting state Iowa but his strategy so far appears unchanged -- touting his outsider status and attacking rivals like a scrappy up-and-comer.
Trump on Friday attacked primary rival Ben Carson, whom he described as “super low energy” but who leads him in Iowa, according to the polls.
“The press was going crazy,” Trump said at an event in Miami. “We have a ‘breaking story,’ Donald Trump has fallen to second place to Ben Carson. We informed Ben, but he was sleeping.”
The remark repeats a familiar Trump complaint that the news media doesn’t like him and included his signature tagline for political opponents whom he bashes, “But I think he’s a nice guy.”
The New York real estate mogul and first-time candidate still leads in national polls.
However, a Des Moines Register/Bloomberg Politics poll released Friday shows Trump now trailing Carson by 9 percentage points. And a Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday shows him trailing Carson, a retired pediatric neurosurgeon and social conservative, by 8 percentage points among Iowa Republican voters.
Trump also argued that he was “very, very surprised” by the poll numbers, considering the large and enthusiastic crowds he’s drawing in Iowa.
After continuously rising in the polls despite a series of controversial remarks, Trump is now in the unusual position of dropping and having what political and campaign reporters deem “a bad week.”
Jeb Bush, the GOP establishment candidate and once-presumptive party frontrunner, is also having a tough week.
Amid sluggish poll and fundraising numbers, the Bush campaign on Friday announced several reductions including payroll cuts of roughly 40 percent.
The Iowa primary is now about just three months away. The Quinnipiac poll has Bush tied for sixth place in Iowa with 5 percent of the vote.
Trump’s so-called bad week began in part with a story Sunday in The Washington Post about a super PAC with ties to his campaign, a problem considering his opposition to such groups, criticizes for having too much money and influence in elections.
On Thursday, he issued a statement calling for pro-Trump super PACs to disband and reiterating that his self-funded campaign, unlike others, will not be controlled by lobbyists, special interest groups and others, according to The Wall Street Journal.
“We don’t want super PACs,” Trump also said in Miami. “Close them up ideally, hopefully to give money back.”
Obama calls for less standardized testing in schools, addressing nationwide concerns
President Obama on Saturday called for limiting the amount of standardized educational testing to two percent of classroom time, addressing the growing concern across the county about an over emphasis on test taking.
The president called on a wide range of Americans -- from state officials to parents and teacher -- to help ensure that the country’s school systems haven’t become mired in standardized test taking.
"Learning is about so much more than just filling in the right bubble," Obama said in a video released on Facebook. "So we're going to work with states, school districts, teachers and parents to make sure that we're not obsessing about testing."
Obama and outgoing Education Secretary Arne Duncan plan an Oval Office meeting Monday with teachers and school officials who are working to reduce testing time.
Mandatory testing as an effort to make teachers accountable and to help students improve and keep pace with their foreign counterparts dates back most recently to the Bush administration with “No Child Left Behind,” then the Obama administration’s “Race to the Top.”
Support or opposition to the recent major initiative known as Common Core has essentially become a conservative litmus-test question for Republicans in the 2016 presidential race.
Democratic presidential contender Hillary Clinton embraced the principles laid out by Obama on Saturday.
"We should be ruthless in looking at tests and eliminating them if they do not actually help us move our kids forward," she said in a statement.
The vast majority of states agreed to the Common Core standards when they were released in 2010, with the backing of the National Governors Association. However, there has since been a growing criticism among Republicans and Democrats that the federal government is now too involved in what should be state- and local-level educational decisions.
Students spend about 20 to 25 hours a school year taking standardized tests, according to a study of the nation's 66 largest school districts that was released Saturday by the Council of Great City Schools.
In all, between pre-K and 12th grade, students take about 112 standardized exams, according to the council report. It said testing amounts to 2.3 percent of classroom time for the average 8th-grader.
Obama’s efforts should be welcome news for teachers and their powerful and largely pro-Democrat unions that say educators’ performance evaluations shouldn’t be tied to standardized test scores.
Among parents with children in public schools, 63 percent were opposed to linking teacher evaluations to their students' test scores in a recent Gallup Poll.
Still, the president’s effort is also being met with doubt and skepticism.
"How much constitutes too much (testing) time is really difficult to answer," said Michael Casserly, the council's executive director.
Obama cannot force states or districts to limit testing, which has drawn consternation from parents and teachers. But he directed the Education Department to make it easier for states to satisfy federal testing mandates and he urged states and districts to use factors beyond testing to assess student performance.
In addition, The New York Times reports Obama will ask Congress make his plan into legislation.
The administration said it still supports standardized tests as a necessary assessment tool, and there are no signs they are going away soon.
Both the House and Senate versions of an update to No Child Left Behind would preserve annual reading and math exams, although the House version would diminish their significance in determining whether schools are up to par. The legislation is in limbo while House and Senate negotiators figure out how to reconcile the competing versions.
Administration officials said that in many cases, testing is redundant, poorly aligned with curriculum or simply overkill. They said the administration supports legislative proposals to cap testing time on a federal level, but wanted to offer states a model for how to cut down on testing absent congressional action.
"There's just a lot of testing going on, and it's not always terribly useful," Cecilia Munoz, the director of the White House's Domestic Policy Council, said in an interview. "In the worst case, it can sap the joy and fun out of the classroom for students and for teachers."
Casserly said his group found examples of testing redundancy that could be cut to create more instructional time. For example, some states and school districts were requiring both end-of-year tests and end-of-course tests in the same subjects in the same grade.
To ease the testing burden, the administration will provide states with guidance about how they can satisfy federal testing requirements in less time or in more creative ways, including federal waivers to No Child Left Behind that the Education Department readily has handed out.
For example, some 8th-grade students who take high school-level coursework currently take both 8th-grade and high school assessments, but the administration will allow them to opt out of the 8th-grade tests.
The value of standardized tests taps into the national debate about the federal government's role in local schools; both political parties generally support scaling back Washington's reach.
Central to that debate is Common Core. The federal government doesn't require Common Core, but the administration has backed it with financial incentives. About 12 million students last spring took tests based on the curriculum.
Missing Money? Report questions how states spent ObamaCare funds
Obama Care
Oh Well, it's only taxpayer money.
But, according to a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, much of that money has not been accounted for – and yet not returned, either.
So where did those taxpayer dollars go?
That’s the billion-dollar question.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) required the establishment of health insurance exchanges – known as marketplaces – to help small employers and consumers compare and purchase insurance plans. States opted to either develop their own state-based exchanges or hand authority to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). And between 2010 and 2014, CMS awarded federal grants mostly to states setting up their own marketplaces, to help them get started.
About $4.6 billion was given to these 17 recipients, including California, New York, Washington state and Kentucky.
But the GAO report found that so far, just $1.4 billion of that has been spent on IT projects, and a total of $3 billion has been “spent or drawn down,” though not all the spending is detailed.
That, then, leaves at least $1.6 billion unaccounted for. Yet only three states returned any portion of the money – a total of just over $1 million was given back.
“[T]he specific amount spent on marketplace-related projects was uncertain, as only a selected number of states reported to GAO that they tracked or estimated this information,” the report said.
Even though states were supposed to set up their marketplaces by the end of last year, they are not yet legally required to return unused funds.
Chuck Young, with the GAO, explained that the grants also could have covered non-IT costs not addressed in the study, and the funding devoted to IT projects will generally remain available for states’ use until December – albeit with restrictions. “CMS said that, since March 2015, states may have spent additional grant funds for IT projects, re-purposed those funds for non-IT costs, or returned funds,” he said, adding that the office expects to conduct a follow-up to this report.
But in an article on the GAO report by the American Spectator, health care adviser and contributor to the publication David Catron highlighted the monetary discrepancy and raised the question of whether Democratic officials improperly diverted or spent more than $3 billion in taxpayer grant money.
“It’s hard to know with any degree of certainty where the money went,” he told FoxNews.com. “So all we know with any confidence is how much was awarded, how much went to IT and what the difference is.”
Catron pointed out that 85 percent of federal funds went to Democrat-controlled states, and that only three states returned any money to CMS while the remaining 13 states and D.C. have yet to return any funds.
The spending is different from state to state. Oregon has withdrawn just over $293 million of its $305 million and spent almost all of the $78.5 million authorized for its IT expenses – but based on the report, has not returned any leftover funds. California was given over $1 billion and spent $709 million. GAO found that less than a half-million dollars has been returned to the federal government.
Representatives for the Department of Health in Oregon told FoxNews.com that the IT funds listed on the report were only one part of setting up the exchange, implying that remaining funding was directed elsewhere. A spokesperson for the ObamaCare marketplace Covered California said that when they released the 2015-2016 budget in June, there was approximately $100 million in federal funds left and carried it over thanks to an extension by the federal government; they now have until the end of December to draw on the funds for the program.
A representative for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services insisted that if any funds are misallocated the CMS “will work to recover the funds using remedies available under law and regulation.”
“To safeguard taxpayer funds, HHS has also put in place additional program integrity regulations and has implemented, or is in the process of implementing, the GAO’s recommendations,” said HHS senior adviser Meaghan Smith.
In examining how states have used federal funds for IT projects and CMS’s role in overseeing them, the non-partisan GAO found that marketplaces reported spending nearly 89 percent of the funds on “IT contracts,” but that the CMS is still trying to track states’ IT spending in more detail.
The GAO urged CMS to improve its existing oversight roles and responsibilities and ensure that senior executives adequately review and approve funding decisions.
And despite all the money issued to states specifically for IT use, the GAO underscored an array of problems – from poor system performance to software and hardware problems – plaguing the state-based and federally run marketplaces.
According to Dennis Santiago, risk analyst and director of the Bank Monitor Division for Total Bank Solutions, the uncertainty doesn’t necessarily mean the money was misused.
“What is missing is the proof that diversions did or did not occur, and if so where,” he said. “IT costs are only part of the process. It could be legitimate, classic pocket lining at work – or some of both.”
Saturday, October 24, 2015
Univision Crew Booted From Donald Trump Campaign Event
Univision crews were ordered to leave Donald Trump’s campaign event at the Trump National Doral hotel in Florida on Friday.
Univision said crews from both the network and local affiliate were asked to leave Trump’s event, according to Doral’s Local 10 News.
The station was reportedly cleared to cover the event, but crew members
were told upon arrival by someone who appeared to be an off-duty police
officer that they were not allowed on the property, which is owned by
Trump, according to Local 10 News.
The
event at the Trump National Doral is being held near Univision’s South
Florida headquarters. Univision has battled publicly with Trump, the
leading candidate for the GOP presidential nomination, since July when
it pulled out of broadcasting the Trump-owned Miss USA beauty pageant
because of Trump’s disparaging comments about Mexican immigrants.
Trump
filed a $500 million lawsuit against Univision for backing out of the
five-year contract to carry the Miss Universe francise. That lawsuit was
the reason the Univision crews were turned away from the campaign
rally, according to Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks.
“Mr. Trump is suing Univision for $500 million and until that is resolved it is a conflict of interest,” she said.
Hours before the event, pro-immigration organizations and members of the South Florida Hispanic community showed up to protest.
Friday’s incident comes after Univision anchor Jorge Ramos was thrown out of another Trump event in August when he tried to ask the presidential hopeful a question.
Ramos
tweeted about Univision being booted out of Trump’s Friday event,
writing, “Journalists from Univision were not allowed to cover a Donald
Trump political event today in Doral, Florida.”
At
the time that Univision dropped the Miss USA pageant, Univision also
issued a ban on any of its employees conducting company business at
Trump-owned hotels or resorts, including the National Doral, which is
adjacent to Univision’s Florida headquarters.
At
the time, a Univision spokeswoman said the company’s “decision to end
our business relationship with Mr. Trump was influenced solely by our
responsibility to speak up for the community we serve.”
Justice Department: No criminal charges for Lerner, others in IRS scandal
The Justice Department announced Friday afternoon that it will not bring criminal charges against Lois Lerner or any other IRS official involved in the targeting of Tea Party groups, in a decision Republicans ripped as a "free pass."
In a letter to leaders of the House Judiciary Committee, the department said the investigation into the controversy will be closed -- and while they found "mismanagement, poor judgment and institutional inertia," they found "no evidence that would support a criminal prosecution."
"What occurred is disquieting and may necessitate corrective action -- but it does not warrant criminal prosecution," Assistant Attorney General Peter J. Kadzik wrote.
Republicans, who themselves have investigated the IRS scandal for years, fumed over Friday's DOJ decision.
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., said the move marks a "low point of accountability" for the Obama administration.
"Giving Lois Lerner a free pass only reinforces the idea that government officials are above the law and that there is no consequence for wrongdoing," Issa said in a statement.
Some Republicans had called for a special counsel to be assigned to the case, complaining that the investigation was led by a Democratic donor. Among them, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., on Friday warned that "politicization continues to go unchecked by this Administration and a Justice Department charged with pursuing wrongdoing."
Mark Meckler, co-founder of Tea Party Patriots and leader of Citizens for Self Governance which is suing the IRS, called the DOJ letter a "whitewash and miscarriage of justice."
But Democrats held up the findings as evidence that Republicans were on a witch hunt, with Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., ripping GOP colleagues for spending money on "all kinds of investigative rabbit holes."
The IRS firestorm erupted more than two years ago with an inspector general's audit that said IRS agents had improperly singled out Tea Party and other conservative groups for extra scrutiny when they applied for tax-exempt status during the 2010 and 2012 elections.
The disclosure set off investigations by the Justice Department and multiple congressional committees, which focused in large part on former official Lerner's role.
The House voted to hold Lerner in contempt of Congress last year after she refused to answer questions at two House Oversight hearings. She has since retired.
The investigations into Lerner featured many unusual twists and turns, including a controversy over an apparent hard drive crash that sent investigators scrambling to recover messages and the release of emails that showed Lerner making disparaging comments about Republicans.
The DOJ letter sent Friday said Lerner used "poor judgment" in using her IRS email account to send personal messages voicing "political views," but said they found no evidence that she exercised her official authority at the IRS in a "partisan manner generally" or that political views influenced her actions with regard to the tax-exempt applications.
The letter further said they found "no evidence" that any IRS official acted based on political or other motives that would support criminal prosecution.
Rather, the DOJ said they found a "disconnect" between employees at the Cincinnati office, where IRS workers vetted the applications, and those in Washington, D.C. The letter said "no one person" was responsible, pinning the blame for the "ill-advised" and "burdensome" process instead on "discrete mistakes by line-level revenue agents" and others -- whose mistakes, according to the DOJ, were "exacerbated" by leadership lapses in D.C.
Missing Money? Report questions how states spent ObamaCare funds
The federal government awarded over $5 billion to help states set up ObamaCare exchanges, with the vast majority – $4.6 billion – going to 16 states and Washington, D.C.
But, according to a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, much of that money has not been accounted for – and yet not returned, either.
So where did those taxpayer dollars go?
That’s the billion-dollar question.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) required the establishment of health insurance exchanges – known as marketplaces – to help small employers and consumers compare and purchase insurance plans. States opted to either develop their own state-based exchanges or hand authority to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). And between 2010 and 2014, CMS awarded federal grants mostly to states setting up their own marketplaces, to help them get started.
About $4.6 billion was given to these 17 recipients, including California, New York, Washington state and Kentucky.
But the GAO report found that so far, just $1.4 billion of that has been spent on IT projects, and a total of $3 billion has been “spent or drawn down,” though not all the spending is detailed.
That, then, leaves at least $1.6 billion unaccounted for. Yet only three states returned any portion of the money – a total of just over $1 million was given back.
“[T]he specific amount spent on marketplace-related projects was uncertain, as only a selected number of states reported to GAO that they tracked or estimated this information,” the report said.
Even though states were supposed to set up their marketplaces by the end of last year, they are not yet legally required to return unused funds.
Chuck Young, with the GAO, explained that the grants also could have covered non-IT costs not addressed in the study, and the funding devoted to IT projects will generally remain available for states’ use until December – albeit with restrictions. “CMS said that, since March 2015, states may have spent additional grant funds for IT projects, re-purposed those funds for non-IT costs, or returned funds,” he said, adding that the office expects to conduct a follow-up to this report.
But in an article on the GAO report by the American Spectator, health care adviser and contributor to the publication David Catron highlighted the monetary discrepancy and raised the question of whether Democratic officials improperly diverted or spent more than $3 billion in taxpayer grant money.
“It’s hard to know with any degree of certainty where the money went,” he told FoxNews.com. “So all we know with any confidence is how much was awarded, how much went to IT and what the difference is.”
Catron pointed out that 85 percent of federal funds went to Democrat-controlled states, and that only three states returned any money to CMS while the remaining 13 states and D.C. have yet to return any funds.
The spending is different from state to state. Oregon has withdrawn just over $293 million of its $305 million and spent almost all of the $78.5 million authorized for its IT expenses – but based on the report, has not returned any leftover funds. California was given over $1 billion and spent $709 million. GAO found that less than a half-million dollars has been returned to the federal government.
Representatives for the Department of Health in Oregon told FoxNews.com that the IT funds listed on the report were only one part of setting up the exchange, implying that remaining funding was directed elsewhere. A spokesperson for the ObamaCare marketplace Covered California said that when they released the 2015-2016 budget in June, there was approximately $100 million in federal funds left and carried it over thanks to an extension by the federal government; they now have until the end of December to draw on the funds for the program.
A representative for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services insisted that if any funds are misallocated the CMS “will work to recover the funds using remedies available under law and regulation.”
“To safeguard taxpayer funds, HHS has also put in place additional program integrity regulations and has implemented, or is in the process of implementing, the GAO’s recommendations,” said HHS senior adviser Meaghan Smith.
In examining how states have used federal funds for IT projects and CMS’s role in overseeing them, the non-partisan GAO found that marketplaces reported spending nearly 89 percent of the funds on “IT contracts,” but that the CMS is still trying to track states’ IT spending in more detail.
The GAO urged CMS to improve its existing oversight roles and responsibilities and ensure that senior executives adequately review and approve funding decisions.
And despite all the money issued to states specifically for IT use, the GAO underscored an array of problems – from poor system performance to software and hardware problems – plaguing the state-based and federally run marketplaces.
According to Dennis Santiago, risk analyst and director of the Bank Monitor Division for Total Bank Solutions, the uncertainty doesn’t necessarily mean the money was misused.
“What is missing is the proof that diversions did or did not occur, and if so where,” he said. “IT costs are only part of the process. It could be legitimate, classic pocket lining at work – or some of both.”
'Serial liar': Families of Benghazi victims blast Clinton on Benghazi
Michael Ingmire watched as Hillary Clinton was grilled for 11 hours Thursday about the 2012 attack in Benghazi that left his nephew and three other Americans dead and saw not a future president, but a "serial liar."
As a congressional panel pressed the former Secretary of State over the attack on the consulate facility in the Libyan city, Ingmire, uncle of Sean Smith, and relatives of former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty watched from their homes, hoping Clinton's testimony would yield answers about why additional security was not granted and why she initially blamed the attack on a YouTube video instead of a coordinated act of terrorism.
"The thing that was shocking – one of the pinnacle moments – was the revelation she told her family there was a terrorist attack while she told America something else," Smith's uncle, Michael Ingmire, told FoxNews.com. "Mrs. Clinton is a serial liar."
"Mrs. Clinton is a serial liar."Smith, an information officer, and Woods, a former Navy SEAL, died along with Doherty and U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens when Islamic militants stormed the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi and set it ablaze before attacking a nearby CIA compound with machine guns and rockets.
- Michael Ingmire, uncle of Sean Smith
Stevens, the first U.S. Ambassador killed in the line of duty since 1979, had repeatedly asked the State Department for increased security at the consulate prior to the attack but his requests were not granted.
In the hours following the attacks, the Obama administration learned they were carefully planned assaults by Al Qaeda-related militants but Clinton and others would go on to tell a different tale: an anti-Muslim YouTube video caused spontaneous protests and angry mobs were to blame for the attacks.
"So if there's no evidence for a video-inspired protest, then where did the false narrative start?" Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan asked Clinton during the hearing Thursday.
"It started with you, Madam Secretary," he said. "You could live with a protest about a video, that won't hurt you, but a terror attack would."
Clinton rejected Jordan's claim, describing the situation in the hours after the attack as "fluid" and the details unclear.
"I am sorry that it doesn't fit your narrative congressman, I can only tell you what the facts are," Clinton said.
During the marathon hours of questioning -- which Democrats claim was a partisan attack on the Democratic presidential frontrunner -- Clinton said Stevens understood the risks involved and that his requests for additional security never crossed her desk.
"Those requests for security were rightly reviewed by the security professionals," Clinton told the committee. "I did not see them. I did not approve them. I did not deny them."
Clinton also described Stevens as a friend, saying the 52-year-old ambassador "understood that most people in Libya or anywhere reject the extremists' argument that violence can ever be a path to dignity or justice."
"I knew and admired Chris Stevens," she said in her opening remarks Thursday. "He was one of our nation's most accomplished diplomats. Chris' mother liked to say he had 'sand in his shoes,' because he was always moving, always working, especially in the Middle East that he came to know so well."
But Clinton's closeness to Stevens was called into question by Rep Susan Brooks, R-Ill., who asked: "Did you ever personally speak to him after you swore him in in May? Yes or no please."
"Yes, I believe I did," Clinton replied. "I don't recall."
Ingmire described Clinton's choice of words about Stevens as jarring.
"How could she say 'Chris thought this' and 'Chris felt that' when she basically had nothing to do with him?" Ingmire said.
Tyrone Woods' father, Charles, recalled meeting Clinton when his son's body arrived at Andrews Air Force Base two days after the attacks.
"I gave Hillary a hug and shook her hand and she said, 'We are going to have the filmmaker arrested who was responsible for the death of your son," Woods said, reading the account from his journal.
"That was a complete bald-faced lie," he told FoxNews.com Friday. "The day after the attack, she was talking to the Prime Minister of Egypt and she said the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the video."
Smith's mother, Patricia, gave a similar account, saying she was told by the administration "it was a video when they knew it was not a video."
"They told me lies," she said Friday. "My son told me the night before that he has been asking for security and he hasn’t heard anything."
Friday, October 23, 2015
Obama vetoes $612 billion defense policy bill in rebuke to GOP
WASHINGTON – President Obama vetoed a sweeping $612 billion defense policy bill Wednesday in a rebuke to congressional Republicans, and insisted they send him a better version that doesn't tie his hands on some of his top priorities.
In an unusual veto ceremony, Obama praised the bill for ensuring the military stays funded and making improvements on military retirement and cybersecurity. Yet he pointedly accused Republicans of resorting to "gimmicks" and prohibiting other changes needed to address modern security threats.
"Unfortunately, it falls woefully short," Obama said. "I'm going to be sending it back to Congress, and my message to them is very simple: Let's do this right."
The rare presidential veto marked the latest wrinkle in the ongoing fight between Obama and Republicans who control Congress over whether to increase federal spending — and how.
Four years after Congress passed and Obama signed into law strict, across-the-board spending limits, both parties are eager to bust through the caps for defense spending. But Obama has insisted that spending on domestic programs be raised at the same time, setting off a budget clash with Republicans that has yet to be resolved.
To side-step the budget caps, known in Washington as sequestration, lawmakers added an extra $38.3 billion to a separate account for wartime operations that is immune to the spending limits. The White House has dismissed that approach as a "gimmick" that fails to deal with the broader problem or provide long-term budget certainty for the Pentagon.
Obama also rejects the bill as written due to provisions making it harder for him to transfer suspected terror detainees out of the military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, a key campaign promise that Obama is hard-pressed to fulfill before his term ends. The White House has also expressed concerns over provisions preventing military base closures and funding equipment beyond what the military says it needs.
But Republicans lambasted Obama for prioritizing the domestic spending he seeks over the security of U.S. troops and the nation they protect.
"This is the worst possible time for an American president to veto their national defense bill, and especially to do so for arbitrary partisan reasons," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said on the Senate floor.
The veto forces Congress to revise the bill or try to settle the larger budget dispute. Although Republicans have vowed to try to override Obama's veto, the White House insisted it was confident it had the votes to ensure Obama's veto stays in place.
Fruit fiasco: High school students face punishment for "racist" fruit basket
A Texas school district has its kumquats in a twist over a fruit basket they considered to be racially insensitive.
The Humble Independent School District’s fruit fiasco has resulted in investigations, punishments and national media coverage.
CLICK HERE TO JOIN TODD’S AMERICAN DISPATCH – A MUST-READ FOR CONSERVATIVES!
The hullabaloo started on Oct. 16 when the marching bands from Atascocita High School and Summer Creek High School exchanged gifts before a football game.
The youngsters from Atascocita gave their counterparts a Halloween basket that included canned pineapple, a whole coconut, a small watermelon and some candy. An adult sponsor for the band raised concerns and those concerns were forwarded to school administrators.“It is a tradition for student representatives of competing schools to exchange gifts on the field at varsity football games,” public information officer Robin McAdams said in an email to me.
The youngsters from Atascocita gave their counterparts a Halloween basket that included canned pineapple, a whole coconut, a small watermelon and some candy. An adult sponsor for the band raised concerns and those concerns were forwarded to school administrators.
“School Administrators conducted an investigation and after considering the totality of circumstances, determined that the gift was inappropriate and lacked good sportsmanship,” McAdams told me. “Atascocita High School will not tolerate racial insensitivity.”
My goodness – who knew the Piggy Wiggly produce aisle was wrought with such racial animus?
Several of the students involved told Houston-area television stations they did nothing wrong.
“I’m mixed race,” senior Alyssa Taylor told ABC13. “I don’t take offense to that. How can someone else take offense?”
There are reports that some of the students involved may be kicked out of the band and others may face In School Suspension.
“It’s just not fair, not fair,” parent Hector Andaverde told the television station.
The school district said their investigation determined a few of the students “discussed that the watermelon could be perceived as racially offensive and should not be included in the gift.”
The watermelon? Really? That’s the racially offensive fruit? My money was on the coconut.
Assistant Superintendent Trey Kraemer wrote in a letter to parents that Summer Creek’s band members were “confused by the nature of the exchange.”
“Typically, these gifts contain snacks such as crackers, candy and popcorn that can be readily shared among students and eaten during the game,” he wrote.
Quite frankly, I take offense at the assistant superintendent’s use of the word ‘cracker.’ I prefer to be called a Saltine-American.
School administrators say they are working to implement procedures to prevent future offensive fruit exchanges.
I’m hoping the school district will announce a blue ribbon panel to once and for all determine which fruit is racially acceptable.
Off hand, I’d be suspicious of pomegranate, kiwi and those dancing raisins in the Motown song, “Heard it Through the Grapevine.
And why stop at the produce aisle?
It’s possible that some LGBT students might take offense at a box of Fruity Pebbles. Hispanic band kids could take offense at being served salsa. And what greater insult is there than to serve lactose intolerant kids a bowl of Blue Bell Ice Cream?
This is indeed an issue that must be addressed – lest we offend this perpetually offended generation and their fragile psyches.
Todd Starnes is host of Fox News & Commentary, heard on hundreds of radio stations. His latest book is "God Less America: Real Stories From the Front Lines of the Attack on Traditional Values." Follow Todd on Twitter@ToddStarnes and find him on Facebook.
Clinton seeks to turn page on Benghazi after testimony – but can she?
Hillary Clinton, after a grueling day of testimony before the congressional Benghazi committee, made clear she hopes to at last move beyond the controversy that has dogged her presidential campaign.
The former secretary of state -- no doubt looking to avoid missteps that could reverberate on the trail -- was visibly measured Thursday as she spent 11 hours defending her role before, during and after the attacks. And she repeatedly cited past investigations, suggesting there’s little more to uncover.
Whether Clinton gets her wish remains to be seen.
Ultimately, analysts suggested the hearing might not move the dial much either way – Republican critics continued to voice frustration Thursday at her responses, while congressional Democrats spent the better part of the day defending her.
"In the short-term, this has probably not changed the minds of anyone watching the proceedings,” Republican strategist Ron Bonjean said.
That may have been all Clinton could hope for.
She entered the committee room Thursday at the end of an important week for the campaign – a day earlier, Vice President Biden, who had been considering a 2016 bid and could have posed the biggest primary threat to her candidacy, announced he would not run. This came after she delivered what was widely regarded as a strong debate performance last week.
But even if her testimony doesn’t change many minds, the former secretary of state’s detractors likely will find plenty of fodder in her hearing responses.
Though Democrats complained the hearing turned up nothing new, Clinton did acknowledge Thursday that, even as she received frequent emails from friend Sidney Blumenthal, the late Ambassador Chris Stevens did not have her personal email address.
Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, also said that as the administration was blaming an anti-Islam video for motivating the attackers, Clinton was telling the Egyptian prime minister they knew the attack was “planned” and had “nothing to do with the film.”
Retired Gen. Jack Keane, a Fox News analyst and former Army vice chief of staff, cited that exchange and said “that’s news that obviously she didn’t believe that the film was part of the motivation for the attack.”
The hearing, though, only muddied the public understanding of what Clinton believes to this day. While Clinton blamed the “fog of war” for confusion in Benghazi, on Thursday she also continued to assert that the video may have motivated some attackers.
Related Image
Democratic
presidential candidate, former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham
Clinton testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Oct. 22,
2015, before the House Benghazi Committee. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
Clinton testified to the Benghazi committee that the security requests were handled by security professionals in the department and not her.
"I did not see them. I did not approve them. I did not deny them," she said.
Clinton acknowledged some of his requests were approved, and others were not. But she said Stevens emailed regularly with her close aides and “did not raise security with the members of my staff.”
Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee swiped at Clinton on Twitter as she rebuffed accusations before the committee.
“.@HillaryClinton coming clean to #BenghaziCommittee seeming abt as likely as me getting a Che Guevara tattoo on small of my back! #Benghazi,” he tweeted.
Clinton, though, tried to walk a fine line. Even as she denied responsibility for the rejected security requests, she said she’s assumed responsibility in a general sense and tried to make changes at the department before she left.
And she challenged the notion that she was out of touch with the situation on the ground.
“I’ve lost more sleep than all of you put together” over Benghazi, she said.
Notable is that while Clinton and her campaign used the run-up to Thursday’s hearing to accuse the panel of being a Republican partisan tool, Clinton mostly avoided a confrontational tone during her testimony.
Instead, she sat back as Democratic and Republican members battled – at times shouted at – each other over the credibility of the committee itself.
Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., the committee's top Democrat, said the panel was only formed because Republicans "did not like the answers" from prior investigations. So, he said, they established the committee and "set them loose, Madam Secretary, because you're running for president." Cummings called it an "abusive effort to derail" her campaign.
But Chairman Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., denied this. Of allegations that the investigation is all about Clinton, Gowdy said Thursday, "Let me assure you it is not."
When asked by reporters at the end of the 11-hour hearing if Clinton's testimony helped reach a conclusion, Gowdy said the work of the congressional Benghazi committee is not yet over.
"I don't draw conclusions till the end, and there are more witnesses to talk to," he said.
‘Obvious flight risk’: Toddler's brutal beating prompts call to withhold bail from illegal immigrants
When Francisco Javier Chavez posted bail on charges of beating a California toddler within an inch of her life in late July, there was little reason to expect the illegal immigrant, who has spent much of his adult life hopping back and forth across the Mexican border, would return to face justice.
Two weeks later, at his scheduled arraignment on Aug. 13, Chavez was a no-show. The 27-year-old career criminal had put up $10,000, or 10 percent of the amount set for his alleged crimes by California's bail schedule. His disappearance is hardly a surprise to critics who believe violent illegal immigrants are, by definition, flight risks who should be denied bail in such serious cases. They say judges, especially in border states plagued by illegal immigrant crime, are naive or worse if they expect suspects who regularly cross in and out of Mexico to take the U.S. justice system seriously.
“Frankly, judges grant bail in cases like these because they are being foolish,” said Hans A. von Spakovsky, a former Justice Department lawyer now at The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. “The judge can consider bail for you when you are charged with a crime, but does not have to let you out on bail. If the state can show you are a flight risk, you should not get bail. If the state can show you are a danger to the public because of a history of violence, you should not get bail.”
“Frankly, judges grant bail in cases like these because they are being foolish.”While Chavez is in the wind, his alleged victim, the 2-year-old daughter of his live-in girlfriend, is now in foster care, paralyzed from the beating that also left her with both arms and a femur broken. Well before he was arrested in San Luis Obispo County for attacking the child, Chavez had compiled a lengthy criminal record that includes assault and drug convictions and arrests for violent acts such as kidnapping, car-jacking and cruelty to a child. He was deported in February 2014, but as in previous instances, found it easy to sneak back across the border and into the U.S.
- Hans A. von Spakovsky, Heritage Foundation’
Weeks after Chavez slipped out of custody, on Sept. 1, another 2-year-old toddler named Jonathan Montez was run down and killed in San Bernardino County. Illegal immigrant Jose Enrique Vasquez, 53, an unlicensed driver who witnesses said was speeding down the child’s residential street, fled the scene, according to authorities. He was arrested two weeks later, and, like Chavez, was granted bail.
Vasquez also has compiled a lengthy criminal record under various aliases, including charges of spousal abuse, battery of a peace officer, driving without a license, driving under the influence and armed robbery. But other charges in his criminal record might have given a judge pause in considering bail according to critics, including failure to appear in court, possession of false citizenship documents and eight deportations for illegally entering the country.
Related Image
Jonathan
Montez was just 2 when he was run down and killed in San Bernardino
County. An illegal immigrant was charged in his death.
Judges everywhere maintain discretion to deny bail to anyone they believe is likely to flee justice, yet they often fail to consider illegal status as a factor, said Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies for the Center for Immigration Studies. And critics say it should be obvious that someone here illegally and suspected of a violent crime will bolt rather than face justice, especially in border states such as California, where they can be out of the country an hour after posting bail.
“Aliens who commit acts of violence should not be released on bail, because they are clearly a danger to the public, and when we have someone with this kind of deportation history, clearly they are an obvious flight risk,” said von Spakovsky. “These judges are making mistakes granting bail to illegal aliens – reckless mistakes that endangered the public.”
The willingness of judges to grant bail to illegal immigrants charged with serious crimes compounds the ongoing controversy involving so-called sanctuary cities. Such jurisdictions, either by local statute or practice, refuse to inform federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents when an illegal immigrant is detained.
But even jurisdictions that do not implement sanctuary policies believe that two federal court rulings, the 2013 California “Trust Act,” which limits “cruel and costly immigration hold requests in local jails,” and an ambiguous White House policy all bar them from holding illegal immigrants who have posted bail until federal authorities can collect and deport them – even if ICE asks them to via what is known as a “detainer request.”
The American Civil Liberties Union has sued jurisdictions that attempted to honor the ICE detainers, and the Department of Justice has not intervened in the cases to underscore its support of them. As a result, local law enforcement agencies say they have no choice but to let even violent illegal immigrant suspects walk once they are granted bail.
“Yes, the judges who ignore this risk are at fault, but Congress provided ICE with a tool to address the problem -- detainers -- which the Obama administration is not allowing its officers to use,” Vaughan said.
In the cases of both Chavez and Vasquez, ICE issued detainer requests. In Chavez’s case, ICE agents did not arrive prior to bail being posted. In the case of Vasquez, ICE isn’t immediately taking custody or deporting Vasquez, so that he remains in the U.S. at least resolving the legal proceedings surrounding the hit-and-run charge.
Don Rosenberg, who, after his 25-year-old son Drew was killed by an unlicensed immigrant driver in San Francisco five years ago, began closely tracking illegal immigrant crime, said the biggest problem he sees is “people in power don’t care.” He blames judges for granting bail, but also holds law enforcement accountable for caving in to the threat of lawsuits.
“How can anyone who in law enforcement let people like this out of custody who we know will likely hurt someone badly, if not kill them, even if they are threatened with a lawsuit?” Rosenberg said. “It’s pure callous indifference. I don’t know how they live with themselves.”
Thursday, October 22, 2015
Republican mounts uphill bid to be first Navajo in Congress
In a crowded Arizona race, one Republican quietly is trying to make history as the first Navajo elected to Congress.
His name is Shawn Redd, and he faces an uphill battle in the race for Arizona’s 1st District House seat. Not only is he entering the GOP primary a clear underdog – in a race packed with better-known figures like local Sheriff Paul Babeu – but Navajo historically vote Democrat.
That means Redd can’t necessarily rely on their support in a primary, or a general election. As he explained to Fox News, Redd is taking a chance by running under the GOP flag.
“Republicans have been intimidated by Navajo Nation. They have been unsuccessful campaigning for votes and have given up,” Redd told Fox News. “I’m going extremely hard against the grain, because for people in the 1st District, voting Democrat is a way of life.”
On the reservation, Redd is known as “Shawn the Republican.”
A 35-year-old small business owner born into a Navajo-Mormon family, he said many in Navajo Nation have encouraged him to run for office – just not as a Republican. But he said “that’s just not who I am.”
The congressional race opened up when Arizona Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, a Democrat, announced she would challenge Republican Sen. John McCain in his quest for a sixth term in the U.S. Senate, leaving her traditionally GOP-leaning seat in Arizona’s 1st District up for grabs.
The district is almost 25 percent Native American, and Redd claims he can pick up support from some of them.
“I know our message resonates,” he said. “With the personal relationships that I have with thousands of people among Navajo Nation and the twelve other tribes, there is no doubt that I will fracture the native vote, and if I fracture the native vote, the Democrats will not win.”
But he’d first have to win the primary. And according to Jim Small, editor of the Arizona Capitol Times, he’s an underdog with a big fight ahead.
“He’s got an uphill climb to be competitive in this race, just to put it bluntly,” Small said. “He’s an unknown running as a Republican in that district.” Small described Redd’s task as “incredibly difficult … assuming he can even raise the money to mount a credible campaign.”
Redd is running in the primary against Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu; Arizona House Speaker David Gowan; former Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett; and Gary Kiehne, a 2014 candidate.
Though Redd has not held public office, he claims his legislative experience is extensive within the Tribal Council, specifically in regards to issuing license plates for Navajo Nation.
“The other candidates are established and well-accomplished,” Redd said. “But I think nationwide, the party is looking for new blood.”
Redd says he’d bridge the district’s racial divide and be a champion for economic development needed in rural Arizona.
As for Sheriff Babeu, who is a frequent commentator in the media on immigration enforcement and other issues, he’s launching his second bid for the 1st District seat.
“I’m looking forward to a spirited race over the next year,” the sheriff told Fox News. “I will put my record as a sheriff committed to reducing crime and illegal immigration against anyone in this race. Now it’s time to send a sheriff to Congress.”
The Republican primary is not open to Democrats. So, as few in Navajo Nation are Republicans, few could actually vote in the GOP primary.
“I don’t think the Navajo Nation will be a deciding factor in the primary,” Small told Fox News. “But in the general election, they can swing it; just like they have done in the past.”
Security officials acknowledge 'risk' in admitting Syrian refugees into US
Top law enforcement and security officials cautioned Wednesday that bringing in 10,000 Syrian refugees as planned carries a terror risk, with Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson acknowledging background checks can only do so much and "there is no risk-free process.”
“The good news is that we are better at [vetting] than we were eight years ago. The bad news is that there is no risk-free process,” Johnson said at a House Homeland Security Committee hearing.
The Obama administration has committed to bringing in 10,000 Syrian refugees in fiscal 2016, as part of a total 85,000 worldwide refugees.
However, at the hearing on “Worldwide Threats and Homeland Security Challenges,” officials said while they are confident about their vetting process, there is a risk in terms of screening refugees who have never crossed the intelligence radar.
“If the person has not crossed our radar screen, there will be nothing to query against so we do see a risk there,” FBI Director James Comey said.
“It is not a perfect process. There is a degree of risk attached to any screening and vetting process. We look to manage that risk as best we can,” Nicholas Rasmussen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, said.
“We may have someone who is not on our radar and someone may choose to do something bad after they get here,” Johnson said. “We can only query against what we have collected, so if someone hasn’t made a ripple in the pond, we can check our databases until the cows come home but we have no record on that person.”
However, Johnson said the system in place is “a good system,” and noted that the process also includes a personal assessment for each refugee. “It’s not just simply what’s in a public record,” Johnson said.
The testimony reflects the challenge ahead for the administration, as it tries to respond to a global refugee crisis fueled by the Syrian civil war and other conflicts. Aid groups and other governments had urged the United States to accept more refugees, who mostly have fled to neighboring Middle Eastern countries and Europe, and the administration agreed to accept more.
Republican lawmakers continued to voice concerns at Wednesday's hearing.
“My concern is that you’re relying upon them and what they say or what they write out in an application and you can’t go beyond that,” Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, said. “So you’re having to take their word for it.”
South Carolina Rep. Jeff Duncan said his constituents were "very concerned about our inability to vet properly the refugees that are coming."
“I just want to encourage you all … to rethink the resettlement of refugees in this country, especially in the numbers I’m hearing," Duncan said.
Addressing the ISIS threat more generally, FBI Director Comey also said that the number of Americans going abroad to join ISIS has fallen in recent months. Comey said the FBI is aware of six Americans trying to join the group in the last three-and-a-half months, in contrast to the approximately nine each month they were seeing before that.
However, he said he could not explain the reduction, and noted the group’s use of social media has allowed them to successfully “break the model” of terror recruitment.
“ISIS has used that ubiquitous social media to break the model and push into the United States into the pocket, onto the mobile devices, on troubled souls throughout our country in all 50 states, a twin message, ‘Come or Kill,’” Comey said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Tit for Tat ? ROCHESTER, N.Y. (AP) — A statue of abolitionist Frederick Douglass was ripped from its base in Rochester on the an...
-
NEW YORK (AP) — As New York City faced one of its darkest days with the death toll from the coronavirus surging past 4,000 — more th...
