 Bolder than Holder: Cruz Demands Answers from DOJ
For once, Eric Holder is
conducting an investigation instead of being the subject of one. Even
that's proving to be a tall task for the U.S. Attorney General, whose
agency can't seem to put aside its political motives long enough to give
conservatives a fair shake. And while accountability isn't exactly the
motto of this Justice Department, Congress at least expected a pretense
of concern over the very serious allegations of conservative targeting
at the IRS.
At a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday, Attorney
General Holder feigned interest as he listened to members rant about the
DOJ's indifference over one of the most shocking scandals to hit the
IRS in modern history. It's "astonishing," said Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
of Holder's lack of urgency. Despite stacks of evidence dating back to
2010, DOJ has yet to hold anyone accountable for the high-level
shakedown of tea party groups applying for nonprofit status.
"In the 280 days since that
inspector general report, nobody has been indicted. Not a single
person. In the 280 days since that inspector general report, it's been
publicly reported that no indictments are planned. Today in this
hearing, you were unwilling to answer a question whether even a single
victim of targeting has been interviewed," Cruz scolded.
"Two hundred and eighty days have passed and apparently the anger and
outrage that both the President and you expressed has utterly
disappeared." Holder shrugged off the insinuation that the investigation
was being conducted with the same bias as the original targeting. He
insisted the probe was above board and that there was no need for the
special prosecutor Cruz called for. "[I know this] by looking at the
facts, applying the law to the facts and reaching the appropriate
conclusions."
That's hardly a comfort to
conservatives, who know that there are two things Eric Holder rarely
considers: the law or the facts. The IRS's viewpoint suppression, which
can be traced all the way to senior management, aimed to shut down the
President's opposition by holding back the groups' application for
nonprofit status. One of the victims, True the Vote's Catherine
Engelbrecht, said her organization was run through the gauntlet,
with agents asking "hundreds of questions over and over again. "They
requested to see each and every tweet I've ever tweeted or Facebook post
I've ever posted. They also asked to know every place I've ever spoken
since our inception and to whom, and everywhere I intend to speak in the
future." The FBI, Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, and
Occupational Safety Hazards Administration all started snooping around,
followed by surprise audits of the family's business.
And according to Cruz, none of this was a coincidence -- not with a
generous Obama supporter at the helm. "[I]t has not been publicly
reported that the lead lawyer heading the investigation was, No. 1,
appointed from the civil rights division, which has historically been
the most politically charged division in the Department of Justice. And
even more astonishingly, is a major Democratic donor and donor to
President Obama."
Knowing this, Cruz asked,
was the DOJ taking a closer look at the meetings between the head of the
IRS and White House operatives? As if on cue, Holder clammed up,
insisting he couldn't discuss an ongoing investigation. Either way, Cruz
went on, the DOJ's integrity has been "severely compromised." That's
putting it mildly, considering Fast and Furious, Holder's defiance of marriage law, pornography laws, marijuana laws, gambling laws, and his own shame of being held in contempt of Congress -- which, at this point, is nothing compared to the public's contempt.
House Questions M.O. of E.O. If
religious liberty isn't a problem in the military, you wouldn't know it
by the number of people in yesterday's House hearing. According to
Armed Services Subcommittee Chairman Joe Wilson (R-S.C.), the members'
attendance was record-breaking, as people packed the room to debate what
the Left insists is a non-issue. After months of complaints from
service members, Wednesday's hearing was the first opportunity members
have had to question the Defense Department publicly about the
military's war on religious liberty.
And while the discussion
touched on several subjects -- from grooming standards to turbans --
leaders pressed hardest on the cases of anti-Christian harassment. From
the attacks on prayer to the DOD's definition of extremism, members
criticized the Obama Pentagon's disregard -- or worse, outright
hostility -- toward Christians in the ranks. "We know of instances where
Christians have been reprimanded for statements as simple as
[expressing their faith in Jesus Christ]," said Rep. Austin Scott
(R-Ga.). Congressman Alan Nunnelee
(R-Miss.) added his concerns about the wave of anti-Christmas political
correctness at Camp Shelby. But after each episode, Nunnelee said, "We
get the same answer we continually get, and that is, 'This is an
isolated incident, it will not happen again.'" Interestingly enough, DOD
and branch chiefs of chaplains claimed they hadn't heard of service
members or chaplains being restricted in their faith -- which
contradicts what members of Congress have heard and what FRC and other
groups are hearing directly from service members. At that point, Rep.
John Fleming (R-La.) directed the DOD to FRC's "Clear and Present Danger"
report, documenting the cases of abuse. "I'm disappointed that we don't
have General Boykin and others who can actually tell us about this
[problem]," he said.
Fortunately, the Committee did have the benefit of General Boykin's written testimony,
which FRC submitted into the official congressional record. In one of
the more interesting moments of the hearing, Rep. Rob Wittman pointedly
asked if the Pentagon still considers the Southern Poverty Law Center
(SPLC) a reliable source and whether the group (which was officially
tied to a case of domestic terrorism in federal court last year) still
had input on training materials for Defense's Equal Opportunity
institute. Virginia Penrod, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, said
she didn't know but promised to look into the matter. Based on the
members' interest, she'll have ample time to update the House, since
conservatives plan on hosting a series of hearings to delve deeper into
the problem. That itself is a big step toward victory on religious
freedom.
Steny Hoyer: The Women's Lib? Just
when you thought Democrats couldn't sink any lower, the House's
Minority Whip, Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) launched his own war on women -- or,
more specifically, a woman: Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.). The
Washington State Republican was chosen by GOP leaders to give her
party's response to the President's State of the Union address Tuesday
night -- a selection Hoyer called "transparent." "I think the Republican
Party knows full well they are not a very diverse party, whether you
look down on the conventions or down from the gallery of the House of
Representatives or the United StatesSenate... [S]o when they get the
opportunity to project some diversity, they want to take it. Cathy
McMorris Rodgers is a very pleasant person... She gives a good
appearance [and] she speaks well." Hoyer's comments were shockingly sexist for a party that insists it speaks for all women.
As our own Connie Mackey
pointed out, leaders like Cathy McMorris Rodgers are the ones speaking
truth to power. They're the ones promoting life, freedom, and family --
and in so doing, reflecting the majority of women in America. So when
liberal MSNBC hosts, who think they've cornered the market on feminism, tweet,
"Living room. Lady on a settee. Where's the needlepoint?" -- look out.
That kind of condescension is sure to backfire among Americans who
judged McMorris Rodgers's response -- not based on gender, but merit.
And speaking of transparent, what about the Democrats' motives for
suddenly embracing the military? President Obama put a wounded warrior
on display in the gallery on Tuesday when his own record has done
nothing but undermine brave men like Cory Remsburg. Who's playing
political games now?
** Do taxpayer dollars really impact abortion rates? FRC's Emily Minick is sure of it. Check out her Christian Post op-ed, "Government Funding Increases Use of a Product or Service: Abortion Is No Different." Also, don't miss Ken Blackwell's column, "President Obama: Mr. Inequality" in the Christian Post.
Tony Perkins' Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment