Members of Judiciary Committee express concern over broad-ranging, secretive authorities under Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, push for bill to strengthen oversight, transparency. …read more
Tag Archives: Judiciary Committee
Feds Admit Improper Scrutiny Of Candidate, Donor Tax Records
A government watchdog has found for the first time that confidential tax records of several political candidates and campaign donors were improperly scrutinized by government officials, but the Justice Department has declined to prosecute any of the cases.
Its investigators also are probing two allegations that the Internal Revenue Service “targeted for audit candidates for public office,” the Treasury’s inspector general for tax administration, J. Russell George, has privately told Sen. Chuck Grassley.
In a written response to a request by Mr. Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, Mr. George said a review turned up four cases since 2006 in which unidentified government officials took part in “unauthorized access or disclosure of tax records of political donors or candidates,” including one case he described as “willful.” In four additional cases, Mr. George said, allegations of improper access of IRS records were not substantiated by the evidence.
Mr. Grassley has asked Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to explain why the Justice Department chose not to prosecute any of the cases. The Iowa Republican told The Washington Times that the IRS “is required to act with neutrality and professionalism, not political bias.”
The investigation did not name the government officials who obtained the IRS records improperly, nor did it reveal the identities or political parties of the people whose tax records were compromised. By law, taxpayer records at the IRS are supposed to be confidential.
Read More at The Washington Times . By Dave Boyer and Ben Wolfgang.
Video: Law Enforcement Disagrees With Obama
By NewsEditor
Turns out that law enforcement stands with the NRA and America’s gun owners…
From: http://www.westernjournalism.com/law-enforcement-disagrees-with-obama/
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/9/2013
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
11:52 A.M. EDT
MR. CARNEY: Welcome, everyone. Thanks for your patience. I have a couple of quick announcements. As you may have seen already, President Obama is announcing his intent to nominate three members of the National Labor Relations Board — Mark Gaston-Pearce to serve another term as member and to be designated chairman. And then, Harry I. Johnson, III and Philip Miscimarra both to be members of the NLRB.
These nominations — if all, including the two that we’ve nominated prior, are acted on by the Senate — would bring the NLRB up to full operating level, ensuring that it continues to function and fulfill its responsibilities to look after workers’ rights. This would be a bipartisan board. The two nominees, Harry Johnson and Philip Miscimarra, are Republican nominees and you would have a balanced, bipartisan board, and we urge the Senate to move on those nominations efficiently.
Separately, I’d also like to say that this afternoon the Senate will vote to confirm Judge Patty Shwartz to the Third Circuit. Judge Shwartz was reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 8, 2012, making her way to 397 days for what should be a bipartisan confirmation vote. After her expected confirmation, there will still be 14 other judicial nominees awaiting floor votes. Of these 14, 13 were approved by the Judiciary Committee unanimously, and five nominees would fill judicial emergencies. They have been waiting on the Senate floor for an average of 67 days for a vote. That’s nearly twice as long as President Bush’s judicial nominees. We urge the Senate to move on these nominees without further delay.
Julie.
Q Thank you. North Korea is urging all foreigners to evacuate South Korea, saying that the two countries are on the verge of a nuclear war. Does the U.S. take this latest threat seriously in any way? Or do you think that this is just more bluster?
MR. CARNEY: North Korea’s statement advising foreigners to make plans to evacuate Seoul is more unhelpful rhetoric that serves only to escalate tensions. This kind of rhetoric will only further isolate North Korea from the international community and we continue to urge the North Korean leadership to heed President Obama’s call to choose the path of peace and to come into compliance with its international obligations. We have seen this kind of bellicose rhetoric, these kinds of provocative statements consistently — obviously, in recent days and weeks — but also as part of a pattern of behavior that we’ve seen over the years from the North Korean leadership.
The end result of this kind of behavior has only been to further isolate North Korea from the rest of the world and to do harm to the North Korean …read more
Congressman Moves To Automatically Kill Senate Gun Ban
By Congressman Steve Stockman (R-TX)
WASHINGTON – Should Senate Democrats approve a sweeping new anti-gun bill, Congressman Steve Stockman (R-Texas 36th) announced Tuesday he will seek to automatically kill it using a House “blue slip.”
“The Democrat gun ban is dead on arrival. I will introduce in the House a blue slip resolution that will automatically kill the Senate gun ban,” said Stockman. “Not only are Democrats on the wrong side of public opinion, they are on the wrong side of the Constitution. You can’t strip Americans of their gun rights, and you certainly can’t do it by having the Senate create a national tax on firearms. They are in violation of constitutional limits on federal power.”
A “blue slip” is a resolution that automatically returns to the Senate any bill that violates the “origination clause” of the United States Constitution. The origination clause states “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.”
Blue slip resolutions are immediately considered as a matter of constitutional privilege, are debatable for an hour and are not subject to amendment.
Senate Democrats took three anti-gun bills (S. 374, S. 54 and S. 146) and quickly rammed them through the Judiciary Committee without even a committee report, then combined them into one bill (S. 649.) The bill includes language mandating a fee for background checks for all private transfers of firearms. Similar legislation has been construed by the Supreme Court to be a tax. By introducing a bill imposing a new tax through the Senate, Democrats have violated constitutional mandates and the bill is automatically invalid.
According to The Heritage Foundation, S.649 imposes a new tax by forcing individuals to pay for background checks when selling or giving away a firearm. The mandate to use the National Instant Criminal Background Check System does not provide a service to the buyer or seller but to the government, making it a tax.
Additionally, the Supreme Court ruled last year in NFIB v. Sebelius that mandating citizens to pay for a service can be construed to be a tax, with Chief Justice John Roberts writing the majority opinion expanding the federal definition of a tax.
Contact:
Donny Ferguson
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/1/2013
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
12:53 P.M. EDT
MR. CARNEY: Hello, everyone. It’s very good to see you. Thanks for taking care of Josh in my absence last week.
Before I take your questions, I want to say a couple of things. One, and perhaps most importantly, I apologize for keeping you here to miss the opening pitches of the Red Sox versus Yankees game and the Marlins at the Nationals here. I, for one, wish I were at the stadium, because it’s going to be a very exciting season I think for Nationals and Red Sox fans, of which I am one.
I’d also like to say something about the fact that this morning, the Senate Judiciary Committee announced its hearing for our D.C. Circuit Court nominee, Sri Srinivasan. As you know, Sri is the Principal Deputy Solicitor General, but you may not know that Sri was born in India and raised in Lawrence, Kansas, eventually becoming an all-star point guard at Lawrence High School. And, of course, he is still recovering today from the loss by his beloved Kansas Jayhawks over the weekend.
Sri is of course also a highly respected appellate advocate who has spent a distinguished career litigating before the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals, both in private practice and on behalf of the United States for both Democratic and Republican administrations. He has argued before the Supreme Court 24 times; drafted briefs and several dozen additional cases; and has also served as lead counsel in numerous cases before the federal and state appellate courts.
As a testament to how highly regarded he is by members of both parties, 12 former officials from the Solicitor General’s office — six of them Democrats, six of them Republicans — all announced their support for Sri today. The signatories of the letter, including Paul Clement, Ted Olson, Ken Starr, and Walter Dellinger, write, “Sri has a first-rate intellect, an open-minded approach to the law, a strong work ethic, and an unimpeachable character. Sri is one of the best appellate lawyers in the country.”
The D.C. Circuit, as you know, is often considered the nation’s second-highest court, but it has twice as many vacancies as any other court of appeals, and its workload has increased by over 20 percent since 2005. Sri’s confirmation will be an important first step to filling this court’s four vacancies, and he will be, when confirmed, the first South Asian circuit court judge in history.
We also urge the Senate to move swiftly to confirm the 15 additional judicial nominees waiting for votes. Of those 15, 13 were approved out of the Judiciary Committee unanimously; not a single Republican dissent. And four would fill judicial emergencies; six are represented by Republican home-state senators who support their nominations.
Now, as I mentioned, the last time I gave an update on our judicial nominees, we have seen …read more
Source: White House Press Office
Source: White House Press Office
Rhode Island Mayors Call For Gay Marriage In State
By The Huffington Post News Editors
By Daniel Lovering
BOSTON, March 25 (Reuters) – Six Rhode Island mayors voiced support for same-sex marriage on Monday, calling on the state Senate to pass a bill legalizing gay marraige that has already won overwhelming support in Rhode Island‘s House of Representatives.
The House in January voted strongly in favor of the bill, but the measure was expected to face an uphill battle in the state Senate.
Nine states and the District of Columbia have already legalized gay and lesbian weddings. Illinois, like Rhode Island, has a bill pending on the issue, with the state’s Senate having approved legislation in February but with its fate in the state House uncertain.
The legislation in Rhode Island, supported by independent Governor Lincoln Chafee, has been introduced in the House every year since 1997.
Rhode Island currently allows gay civil unions. It is the last of New England‘s six states without a law allowing gay nuptials.
On Monday, four mayors — Angel Taveras of Providence, Donald Grebien of Pawtucket, Daniel McKee of Cumberland and James Diossa of Central Falls — threw their support behind the bill at City Hall in Providence, said Devin Driscoll, a spokesman for Rhode Islanders United for Marriage, an advocacy group.
Two other mayors, Scott Avedisian of Warwick and Charles Lombardi of North Providence, also support the measure, but were unable to attend the news conference, Driscoll said.
“It’s a strong indication of the kind of unrelenting momentum that this campaign for marriage equality has,” he said, adding that the mayors were a majority of the state’s nine mayors. “This is the year.”
The state Senate president, Teresa Paiva Weed, opposes gay marriage but has said she would allow a Senate Judiciary Committee vote on the bill if it passed in the House. Last week, a Judiciary Committee hearing lasted for 12 hours, dragging on until 5 a.m., after hundreds of people signed up to testify, Driscoll said. No date has been set for the vote. …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Huffington Post
Stunning Revelations From Eric Holder
John Cruz, a former HSBC (global Swiss Bank) Senior Vice President for Relationship Management has charged Obama’s Department of Justice under Eric Holder as handing them a virtual “slap on the wrist” for being a criminal enterprise. HSBC agreed to pay a fine of $1.92 billion dollars for money laundering profits from Mexican and Columbian drug cartels, which is the least offensive crime they commit on an ongoing basis, to end the matter and DOJ involvement.
A Senate hearing on this matter was held last week in what has become standard operating procedure (SOP) for the Obama administration on the corruption of the “Rule of Law.”
In effect, Mr. Holder believes that some “banks” are too big to prosecute for illegal and criminal activity, as it will cause irreparable harm to the national and world economy. It makes no difference that this action gives tacit approval to the financing of global terrorism or drug cartel efforts to spread their poison onto our streets (and allows the American people to pay a heavy price for this lawlessness in increased criminal activity.) Chicago’s horrendous murder rate comes to mind as just one consequence…culminating in over 510 homicides in Chicago last year alone, with a majority fueled by the illegal drug trade.
The following excerpts are from Eric Holder’s revealing testimony before the Judiciary Committee as relayed in an article from WND (video of John Cruz, parts 1 and 2, at the end of the article is worth watching):
“Banks the size of HSBC are “too big to jail,” as a member of the Senate panel put it.
“I am concerned that the size of some of these institutions becomes so large,” the attorney general confessed, “that it does become difficult for us to prosecute them when we are hit with indications that if you do prosecute, if you do bring a criminal charge, it will have a negative impact on the national economy, perhaps even the world economy.
“And I think that is a function of the fact that some of these institutions have become too large,” said Holder.”
Holder’s later testimony showed the callous indifference to the workings of a criminal enterprise that has engaged in money laundering, financing of terrorism, and outright fraud. A criminal enterprise that is masquerading as a legitimate bank that can affect the entire world’s economy is in desperate need of investigation and prosecution as relayed by Sen. Grassley:
Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, asked Holder to explain why federal and state authorities decided not to indict HSBC after it admitted funneling cash to Mexican drug cartels, helping rogue regimes avoid sanctions and assisting Saudi banks tied to terrorism.
The senator said, “I’m concerned that we have a mentality of too-big-to-jail in the financial sector of spreading from fraud cases to terrorist financing and money laundering cases – and I cite HSBC.”
Holder replied: “The concern that you have raised is one that I, frankly, share.”
However, Holder said he was not specifically referring to HSBC, because it would not be “appropriate.”
“Again, I’m not …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Western Journalism
Video: McCain: Enforcement Of Immigration Law Is Immoral
By Daniel Noe
Senator John McCain says Judeo-Christian morality prevents the enforcement of immigration law.
Senate Panel Ready To OK Gun Background Checks
WASHINGTON— Democrats are ready to muscle expanded background checks and other gun curbs through a Senate committee, giving President Barack Obama an initial if temporary victory on one of his top priorities.
The Senate Judiciary Committee was to debate a bill Tuesday that would broaden the requirement for federal background checks to nearly all firearms purchasers. It was also considering a ban on assault weapons and an increase in federal aid for school security, though senators may not consider the assault weapons measure until later in the week.
Requiring background checks for private gun transactions between individuals — they’re currently mandatory only for sales by licensed dealers — is a centerpiece of Obama’s proposal to reduce firearms violence. The system is designed to prevent criminals, people with severe mental problems and others from getting guns.
Tuesday’s meeting comes five days after the panel approved Congress’ first gun control measure since December’s carnage at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school that left 26 students and educators dead. That bill, by the Judiciary Committee’s chairman, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and others, establishes long prison terms for illegal gun traffickers and straw purchasers, people who buy a firearm for criminals or others forbidden to buy one.
The Judiciary Committee is expected to approve all three bills it is debating this week, with full Senate consideration next month.
Read More at OfficialWire . By Alan Fram.
Senate Confirms Robert Bacharach to the United States Court of Appeals
This evening the Senate confirmed Robert Bacharach to the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit in Oklahoma. Judge Bacharach waited 263 days for a Senate floor vote, only to be approved overwhelmingly, by a vote of 93-0. Not only was Judge Bacharach supported by the two Republican Senators from Oklahoma, he was recommended to the White House for this judgeship by Senator Coburn in October 2011. Yet, early last summer, Senate Republicans blocked Judge Bacharach from even getting an up or down vote – the first successful filibuster of a judicial nominee who had bipartisan support in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
In short, Republicans recommended Robert Bacharach for this important position, endorsed him publicly, supported him nearly unanimously out of the Judiciary Committee, then blocked him from getting a vote – and now, after almost a year of pointless delay, joined in unanimously confirming him. Even Senator Coburn, himself a participant in this partisan chicanery, called this “stupid.”
Unfortunately this is not a unique case. On February 13, the Senate confirmed William Kayatta for the First Circuit from Maine. His nomination languished for 300 days, yet he was easily confirmed with 88 Senators supporting him. And next up is Richard Taranto for the Federal Circuit, whose nomination has been pending for 333 days.
To put this obstruction in some perspective, the average wait time for President George W. Bush’s federal appellate judicial nominees, from Committee vote to confirmation, at this point in his presidency was 35 days. By contrast, the average wait time for President Obama’s federal appellate judicial nominees has been 147 days.
Today, there are 14 judicial nominees pending before the Senate, most of whom were approved by the Judiciary Committee unanimously and several of whom would fill judicial emergency seats. An additional 21 nominees are pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee. These 35, highly-qualified nominees signify the President’s unprecedented commitment to a judiciary that reflects the nation it serves: 17 are women; 6 are African American; 6 are Hispanic; 4 are Asian American; and 5 are openly gay.
The Senate should move to confirm all of the judicial nominees pending before it. These nominees deserve immediate consideration by the full Senate, and the interest of justice demands it.
Video: ICE Reveals Shocking Details About Immigration Enforcement
By Daniel Noe
At a hearing yesterday in the Judiciary Committee, Chris Crane, president of the union representing the nation’s 7,000 Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, testified and shared his concerns with immigration amnesty proposals.
Who Says You Can Kill Americans, Mr. President?
We rarely agree with the New York Times, but the killing of Americans without a trial is a dangerous precedent. Even if Obama is using this unconstitutional power to kill terrorists, it must be stopped.
PRESIDENT OBAMA has refused to tell Congress or the American people why he believes the Constitution gives, or fails to deny, him the authority to secretly target and kill American citizens who he suspects are involved in terrorist activities overseas. So far he has killed three that we know of.
Presidents had never before, to our knowledge, targeted specific Americans for military strikes. There are no court decisions that tell us if he is acting lawfully. Mr. Obama tells us not to worry, though, because his lawyers say it is fine, because experts guide the decisions and because his advisers have set up a careful process to help him decide whom he should kill.
He must think we should be relieved.
The three Americans known to have been killed, in two drone strikes in Yemen in the fall of 2011, are Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical Muslim cleric who was born in New Mexico; Samir Khan, a naturalized American citizen who had lived in New York and North Carolina, and was killed alongside Mr. Awlaki; and, in a strike two weeks later, Mr. Awlaki’s 16-year-old son, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, who was born in Colorado.
Most of us think these people were probably terrorists anyway. So the president’s reassurances have been enough to keep criticism at an acceptable level for the White House. Democrats in Congress and in the press have only gingerly questioned the claims by a Democratic president that he is right about the law and careful when he orders drone attacks on our citizens. And Republicans, who favor aggressive national security powers for the executive branch, look forward to the day when one of their own can wield them again.
But a few of our representatives have spoken up — sort of. Several months ago, Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont and chairman of the Judiciary Committee, began limply requesting the Department of Justice memorandums that justify the targeted killing program. At a committee hearing, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., reminded of the request, demurred and shared a rueful chuckle with the senator. Mr. Leahy did not want to be rude, it seems — though some of us remember him being harder on former President George W. Bush’s attorney general, Alberto R. Gonzales, in 2005.
Maine Sen. King: No strong reason to oppose Hagel
Maine Sen. Angus King said Thursday that he sees no strong reason to oppose President Barack Obama‘s pick for secretary of defense.
The newly elected senator, an independent, said in an interview with The Associated Press that he won’t make a final decision on former Sen. Chuck Hagel‘s nomination until confirmation hearings are finished. King serves as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, which is scheduled to hold a confirmation hearing on Jan. 31.
“I start with a presumption that the president should be able to appoint his own people to his Cabinet. So unless there’s some strong disqualifying element or quality to the nominee, I start with that positive presumption,” King said.
Asked whether he saw a strong disqualifying element or quality with Hagel, King said, “No.”
“But I want to see what the testimony is at the hearing and have a chance to talk to him directly,” he added.
King said he was scheduled to meet privately with Hagel on Friday, but a King spokesman says the meeting has been moved to next week.
Hagel did meet Thursday with Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Leahy had previously expressed his support for the nominee. In a statement, he called Hagel “superb and highly qualified.”
“I know his sense of integrity and his great knowledge of our defense and foreign policies,” Leahy said. “He knows about national defense from the ground up and from his own deeply personal experience — he still carries the wounds of war. The fact that he would be the first enlisted service member to head the Pentagon is significant, and it is timely.”
A handful of Republicans have expressed their opposition to Hagel, a Republican who served two terms as a senator from Nebraska. His nomination gained some Democratic momentum this week with the backing of Sens. Chuck Schumer and Barbara Boxer, but the opposition of the top Republican on the Armed Services Committee, Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, was a blow.
If confirmed, Hagel would be the first Vietnam veteran to serve as the secretary of defense.
“The idea that he’s been an enlisted man, a decorated Vietnam veteran, he knows the reality of the life of the ordinary soldier is a big plus,” King said. “I’ve heard people dismiss that, say, ‘Oh, that’s no big deal.’ I think it is. I think it’s a significant piece of what he brings to this position.”
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Fox US News