In regard to potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material. This is not something I’ve ever been involved in, heard of, or would think would be wise policy

  That is an interesting statement indeed considering yesterday it was reported that it was he who signed off on the warrant to investigate James Rosen as a potential co-conspirator in violation of the Espionage Act.

    If this report is true it would appear as if Eric Holder perjured himself in front of the Congress, but of course this is not the first time Eric Holder has run afoul of the Congress: During the Fast and Furious investigation Eric Holder was held in contempt of Congress for non-compliance with the investigation and when the walls appeared to be closing in around him he ran to Barack Obama to save him. Barack Obama did come to the rescue by sealing the documents through Executive Privilege that possibly would have implicated him (and maybe even the president) in that scandal.

  Now that the walls appear to be closing in on him once again will Barack Obama be able to protect Eric Holder for a second time or will he be forced to throw him under the bus to protect himself?

“Journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs,” President Obama said. “Our focus must be on those who break the law.”

  Because he is so worried about journalists being targeted he asked Eric Holder to conduct a review of the Injustice Department and Eric Holder has agreed to do just that:

“I have raised these issues with the attorney general, who shares my concern. So he has agreed to review existing Department of Justice guidelines governing investigations that involve reporters, and will convene a group of media organizations to hear their concerns as part of that review. And I have directed the attorney general to report back to me by July 12th.”

  Shortly after Barack Obama made this announcement it was reported that it was none other than Eric Holder himself who signed the search warrant to investigate reporter James Rosen as a possible co-conspirator in possible violation of the Espionage Act for attempting to do his job, and the warrant also allowed for the targeting of Rosen’s parents.

  In other words it was Eric Holder who targeted a reporter, and his family, with the possible intent to punish him for doing his job–precisely what Barack Obama railed against earlier today. In essence Eric Holder has been charged with investigating himself.

  In my opinion this should be a fairly quick investigation culminating in the resignation of Eric Holder if Barack Obama is true to his word. I will not be holding my breath as I wait for justice to be done…..

  Over the years many people have complained about the influence a small state such as New Hampshire has in selecting the presidential candidates of both parties but most people probably do not know why New Hampshire enjoys the first in the nation status it currently does in the election process. In fact, to be clear, I did not realize why either, but it is because the New Hampshire primary was the first primary ever.

  Up until 1913 the party insiders chose who would be the delegates to the conventions but that changed in New Hampshire when the Bullock Act was passed–for the first time in this nation’s history the people would choose who would represent the parties at the conventions instead of the party bigwigs. This was the first primary in the nation.

  And then in 1952 a law was passed in New Hampshire which would allow the people to actually vote in the primary for the presidential candidate they preferred in the parties to represent them, creating the system which is currently in place all across the nation. For the first time in United States history the people had direct input in the presidential race. This had a direct impact immediately:

That year, Granite Staters chose Sen. Estes Kefauver over President Harry Truman in the Democratic presidential primary, prompting Truman not to seek a second term.

  To this day New Hampshire law requires the Secretary of State to ensure the New Hampshire primary is the first in the nation and now you might have a little insight into why New Hampshire holds this issue in such high regard.

  If you are interested you can read more about the New Hampshire primary and the celebration of its 100th anniversary here.

  The IRS knew months before the election the department was in error and nothing was said until they decided to preempt the Inspector General report which came out last week–months after the election when it was too late for these groups to participate in the election.

Rep. Darrel Issa, the committee’s chairman, said that the committee learned just yesterday that the IRS completed its own investigation a year before a Treasury Department Inspector General report was completed.

But despite the IRS recognizing in May 2012 that its employees were treating right-wing groups differently from other organizations, Issa said, IRS personnel withheld those conclusions from legislators.

‘Just yesterday the committee interviewed Holly Paz, the director of exempt organizations, rulings and agreements, division of the IRS,’ Issa said. ‘While a tremendous amount of attention is centered about the Inspector General’s report, or investigation, the committee has learned from Ms. Paz that she in fact participated in an IRS internal investigation that concluded in May of 2012 – May 3 of 2012 – and found essentially the same thing that Mr. George found more than a year later.’

‘Think about it,’ he continued: ‘For more than a year, the IRS knew that it had inappropriately targeted groups of Americans based on their political beliefs, and without mentioning it, and in fact without honestly answering questions that were the result of this internal investigation.’

  And on the heels of this comes a report which shows us that much like Fast and Furious this couldn’t have been the actions of rogue agents in the field:

When an application for tax exempt status comes into the IRS, agents have 270 days to work through that application. If the application is not processed within those 270 days it automatically triggers flags in the system. When that happens, individual agents are required to input a status update on that individual case once a month, every month until the case is resolved.

Keep in mind, at least 300 groups were targeted out of Cincinnati alone. Those applications spent anywhere from 18 months to nearly 3 years in the system and some still don’t have their non-profit status. 300 groups multiplied by at least 18 months for each group, means thousands of red flags would have been generated in the system. 

So who in the chain of command would have received all these flags? The answer, according to the IRS directory, one woman in Cincinnati, Cindy Thomas, the Program Manager of the Tax Exempt Division. Because all six of our IRS workers have different individual and territory managers, Cindy Thomas is one manager they all have common.

It turns out Cindy Thomas’ name is one we have heard before. The independent journalism group ProPublica says in November of 2012 they had requested information on conservatives groups that had received non-profit status. 

Cindy Thomas, says Swann, is the highest-ranking employee in the Tax Exempt and Government Entities Department in Cincinnati. 

  It is becoming all too clear that the IRS knew what it was doing was wrong but because they knew nothing would come out before the election they decided not to hide the results until after the election so today I stand with Massachusetts Democrat Stephen Lynch–the man who should have been the Democrats nominee to replace John Kerry in the special election next month–in stating the time is nigh for a special prosecutor to be appointed to the case.

One top Democrat breathed fire, warning that prosecutions could result.

Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Stephen Lynch said that if witnesses stonewalled the committee there would be legal consequences.

‘If you refuse to answer,’ Lynch said, ‘you will leave us no choice but to ask for a special counsel or the appointment of a special prosecutor to get to the bottom of this.’ 

‘I hope that’s not the approach of the IRS going forward,’he added. ‘Because there will be hell to pay.’

  This is an issue which should have voters on both sides of the aisle equally upset and it is great to see some Democrats at least paying lip service to the possibility of a special prosecutor, however actions speak louder than words and we will be watching to see if these Democrats put their money where their mouths are when it comes time to make that decision.

    According to the article linked to above there are more whistleblowers looking to come forward once they procure the proper legal counsel and one of them is set to testify that the United States government supplied the Libyan rebels with weapons including Stinger missiles. Once it became clear these rebels were actually part of al-Qaeda (something many of us suspected all along but apparently the Obama regime did not do its due diligence before supporting the rebels) the Obama regime sent Chris Stevens to Libya to buy back the weapons.

  But that isn’t all because the whistleblower is reportedly going to testify that the CIA (General David Petraeus) was dead set against sending these weapons to the rebels so it was the State Department which authorized the transfer of weapons because Hillary Clinton thought it was a cheap way to dispose of Qaddafi.

Stevens’ mission in Benghazi, they will say, was to buy back Stinger missiles from al-Qaeda groups issued to them by the State Department, not by the CIA. Such a mission would usually be a CIA effort, but the intelligence agency had opposed the idea because of the high risk involved in arming “insurgents” with powerful weapons that endanger civilian aircraft.

Hillary Clinton still wanted to proceed because, in part, as one of the diplomats said, she wanted “to overthrow Gaddafi on the cheap.”

This left Stevens in the position of having to clean up the scandalous enterprise when it became clear that the “insurgents” actually were al-Qaeda – indeed, in the view of one of the diplomats, the same group that attacked the consulate and ended up killing Stevens.

  Rumors have been circulating for some time about the United States being involved in arms trafficking to the Libyan rebels and we might be about to learn that is indeed the case, and if this is the case there is no way that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama had no knowledge of what was going on in light of the claim that the CIA recused themselves from this activity.

  But the story does not end there because it is also being reported that General Ham–who had people in place to come to the rescue in Benghazi–was ordered by the WHITE HOUSE to stand down. This is in direct contrast to Barack Obama’s claim that he ordered the use of all available resources to the scene to rescue Chris Stevens before he disappeared for the night to prepare for his campaign stop in Nevada the next day.

Ham was told by the White House not to send the aid to the trapped men, but Ham decided to disobey and did so anyway, whereupon the White House “called his deputy and had the deputy threaten to relieve Ham of his command.”

General Ham was set to disobey a direct order and was threatened with disciplinary action from the White House, General ham was eventually relievd of duty after the attack anyway. I guess we now know why General Petraeus and General Ham had to go in the eyes of the White House–they knew too much.

  Now the question is, why did the White House order the stand down order once things went bad with the plot to buy back weapons it had provided to al-Qaeda? (Weapons which might actually have been used to carry out the attack.) Could it be that dead men tell no tales, or so Barack Obama thought….. 

The head of the National Treasury Employee Union (NTEU), which represents employees of the Internal Revenue Service, met with President Barack Obama in the White House one day before the manager of the IRS’s “Technical Unit” suggested establishing a “Sensitive Case Report” for the tax-exempt status applications of Tea Party groups, according to data from the official White House visitor log and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration.

The White House visitor log shows that NTEU President Colleen Kelley met with Obama–“POTUS,” President of the United States–on March 31, 2010.

  Jay Carney and the White House are refusing to answer the question about whether Barack Obama discussed the Tea Party at this meeting:

As the White House press briefing was ending on Monday, CNSNews.com asked White House Press Secretary Jay Carney as he was leaving the podium, “Did the Treasury union chief talk about tea parties during her meeting with the president in March 2010?”

Carney did not respond.

Later on Monday afternoon, CNSNews.com again e-mailed the White House press office and Carney, with the same question sent earlier in the day. CNSNews.com also called the White House press office and confirmed that it had received the e-mailed question.

However, neither the press office nor Carney responded before this story was posted.

CNSNews.com also called the NTEU, twice, and was transferred to its press office voicemail; the same question was left on the voicemail but the union did not respond before this story was posted.

  Barack Obama is claiming that he did not learn about the IRS scandal until he saw it on the news, and Jay Carney is saying that even though White House counsel knew about the investigation they did not think it was an important enough issue to tell Barack Obama about, (you can bet your sweet ass that if it were liberal or minority groups which were targeted Barack Obama would have been on the telievision every day bemoaning the disenfranchisement of these groups), but damn what a remarkable coincidence this turn of events is. That is if you believe it was a coincidence and I for one do not.

  And now we can add Keith Olbermann to the list of liberals who are feeling disenchanted by the now exposed Barack Obama. This is what Keith Olbermann tweeted the other day:

My experience dealing with @jamesrosenfnc was unpleasant and contentious. And I fully support him against this unwarranted act by DOJ

— Keith Olbermann (@KeithOlbermann) May 20, 2013

  Of course it is true that Mr. Olbermann is currently unemployed but is in not fun to see these people who were such staunch supporters of Barack Obama finally come to the realization that we were right all along?

  It cannot be overstated that these people cannot be trusted for there is probably an ulterior motive, and political calculation, behind this trend and I happen to believe they are leaving Barack Obama in order to set up their support for Hillary Clinton in 2016. Barack Obama is toxic and is old news while Hillary Clinton represents the future of the party. If Hillary takes the fall for Benghazi she will never become president so with a choice to make between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton they are looking to the future.

  United States attorney Dennis Burke is the man guilty of inappropriately leaking this information:

The DOJ IG said it found “Burke’s conduct in disclosing the Dodson memorandum to be inappropriate for a Department employee and wholly unbefitting a U.S. Attorney.”

“We are referring to OPR our finding that Burke violated Department policy in disclosing the Dodson memorandum to a member of the media for a determination of whether Burke’s conduct violated the Rules of Professional Conduct for the state bars in which Burke is a member,” the IG wrote

  This is  interesting in light of the fact that it was none other than Barack Obama who signed the Whistleblower Protection Act into law isn’t it? Suddenly he is not so interested in protecting whisleblowers.

  With all the scandals currently swirling around the Obama regime we have already learned that Nancy Pelosi failed to drain the swamp of the culture of corruption in Washington as she promised to do, but now we are learning there is a culture of intimidation running rampant within the Obama regime. This is Chicago style thuggery at its best, oppose the president at your own peril…..

  To his credit Chris Wallace tried to get an answer to that question from White House spokesman Dan Pfeiffer on ‘Fox News Sunday’ but all he got from Mr. Pfeiffer was what basically amounts to his own what difference does it make moment:

Wallace pressed him further: “With due respect, you didn’t answer my question: what did the president do that night?” Pfeiffer said that Obama was in touch with his national security team, but as Wallace pointed out, he didn’t talk to the Secretary of State except for one time after the attack was over, didn’t talk to the Secretary of Defense, didn’t talk with the Joint Chiefs of Staff as it developed.

 Finally, Wallace asked whether Obama was in the Situation Room. “I don’t remember what room the President was in on that night,” shot back Pfeiffer, “and that’s a largely irrelevant fact.”

  Dan Pfeiffer was sent out there this morning to defend Barack Obama and even he cannot tell us where Barack Obama was during the attack and we are supposed to believe it really does not matter where he was because Barack Obama was in contact with someone even though he cannot tell us who he was in contact with? Barack Obama is the Commander-in-Chief, he is the one charged with doing all he can to protect those in harms way, and nobody can tell us where he was even eight months after the attack, this is not irrelevant!

    With rumors circulating about Barack Obama going to bed in the midst of the attack so he could be well rested before a fundraiser in Las Vegas on September 12th I think it is highly relevant for us to know where Barack Obama was during the attack. Did Barack Obama put his reelection ahead of the lives of Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone Woods? It certainly seems to be the case to me.

  But then Dan Pfeiffer did what the Obama regime is quickly becoming famous for: He tried to turn the tables on those who are seeking answers by claiming it was “offensive” to question Barack Obama on this issue.

  This was the same tactic employed by Barack Obama himself last week when he tried to turn the tables on those who question him by calling the inquiry into the Benghazi attack a “sideshow” and a “political circus.” He went on to basically state that if you question him you are dishonoring anyone who has ever decided to serve the United States:

We’ve got a whole bunch of people in the State Department who consistently say, ‘You know what, I’m willing to step up, I’m willing to put myself in harm’s way because I think that this mission is important in terms of serving the United States and advancing our interests around the globe.’ And so we dishonor them when we turn things like this into a political circus,”

  No sir, you do not dishonor these people when you question incompetence in the highest levels of government, you dishonor them when you are the Commander-in-Chief and you fail to have their backs after they have committed their lives to serving their country. 

  The Obama regime is trying to discredit all of those who question his inaction during the attack when he is the one whose credibility is now being questioned. This is a typical attempt at shifting the blame while at the same time trying to intimidate those who question him by shaming them into silence and it is not going to work this time.

  As always you can follow America’s Watchtower on Facebook and Twitter by clicking on the links to the right or you can sign up for email updates and never miss a post again.

  If you are sick and tired of both the Democrats and the Republicans please check out the New Federalist Party. Myself and several others have been working hard behind the scenes for several months to create a viable option to both parties and if you like what you see please make a donation–no matter how small-to help the cause. All donations will be appreciated more than you will ever know. A small $5 donation will help to get this party off the ground, and what do you have to lose other than the Republic if you fail to act?

  This has been quite a week hasn’t it? We are finally seeing the Obama regime called on the carpet for various scandals and the American people are finally starting to realize the warnings we have been giving all along are actually more than just conspiracy theories.

  This was never more evident than when Eric Holder appeared before the Congress and claimed approximately 1,592 times that he had no idea what the hell was going on with the rank and file he supposedly oversees, so I thought it to be quite appropriate to include Sam Cooke’s ‘Don’t Know Much” as this week’s musical selection. Okay, the song is technically called ‘Wonderful World’ but what the hell, don’t know much is much more fitting, and the Obama regime would never let such a small fact get in the way of his agenda, so why should I?

  Enjoy: