Lois Lerner / AP

Lois Lerner / AP

July 9, 2015

We The People:

It appears quite clear that few if any departments within the Department of Justice haven’t been corrupted by Barack Obama and his band of street hustling thugs. 

With another racist attorney General, Loretta Lynch would we expect any prosecution on this issue? 

Feel free to click on the side bar noting the Obama clock so you will have a fix on how much longer we must suffer this evil being and his cabal.

120606_j_edgar_hoover_ap_328Hoover was a flawed individual using tactics like Obama against the law.

Controversial Tactics:  He kept meticulous records on any person of interest, including U.S. Presidents during his term as Director of the FBI.

J. Edgar Hoover was the long-time director of the FBI (1924-1972)

Hoover was renowned for his vendettas, particularly against Martin Luther King, Jr. Naming him “the most dangerous Negro in the future of this nation,” Hoover initiated around the clock surveillance on King, hoping to find evidence of communism or sexual deviance.Using an illegal wiretap, Hoover was convinced he had proof of King’s infidelities , and attempted to push reporters into publicizing the recording.

The media refused.

Instead, Hoover sent the tape directly to King’s office, suggesting he commit suicide or face exposure.

Hoover’s  tactics remained a secret until it was revealed to the public in 1971.

Its exposure resulted in some of the harshest criticism of Hoover and the FBI. Reports revealed that methods included infiltration, burglaries, illegal wiretaps, planted evidence, and false rumors. At its worst, some experts say the group also arranged the murders of certain suspects.

Had he been alive today he would have all the goods needed to remove Obama immediately.

We are told that Obama’s records are sealed.  Hoover would have had the information following his as a racist arrogant senator from Illinois, to the current time.

Indeed Edgar, where are you now when your country needs you most?

Perhaps you can pull some strings from Heaven or Hell


Lois Lerner / AP

July 7, 2015

Newly obtained documents from the conservative educational foundation Judicial Watch detail an official memo from October 2010 of a meeting between Lois Lerner and officials at the Department of Justice and the FBI to plan for the prosecution of targeted nonprofit organizations.

A lawsuit filed under the Freedom of Information Act produced the documents which included the memo as well as revelations that the Justice Department wanted IRS employees to turn over sensitive documents before giving them to Congress, Judicial Watch said in a press release Tuesday.

In a letter from then-House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R., Calif.) to IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, Issa said “this revelation likely means that the IRS—including possibly Lois Lerner—violated federal tax law by transmitting this information to the Justice Department.”

An IRS document confirms that the organization supplied the FBI with 21 computer disks containing 1.25 million pages of confidential information from more than 113,000 tax returns.

“The FBI and Justice Department worked with Lois Lerner and the IRS to concoct some reason to put President Obama’s opponents in jail before his reelection, and this abuse resulted in the FBI’s illegally obtaining confidential taxpayer information,” Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, said in the release.

Lerner, a former IRS official, was at the center of past allegations that the agency had targeted conservative groups applying for 501(c)(4) nonprofit status. More than 6,000 Lerner emails thought to be lost were turned over to the 60badffa8eedec0989f43985Senate Finance Committee in April.

The new documents shed light on the relationship between various agencies in the Obama administration and their plans to gain access to unredacted documents forbidden under federal tax law, according to Judicial Watch.

The memo followed an Oct. 8 meeting with representatives from the Justice Department and “one representative from the FBI” to discuss the prosecution of nonprofit organizations for alleged political activities.

“How can the Justice Department and FBI investigate the very scandal in which they are implicated?” Fitton said in the release.

In his letter to Koskinen, Issa asked why information about the 1.25 million pages was withheld from the committee for a year. He also requested all documents relating to the information transfer between the IRS, the Justice Department, and the FBI.

More at We The People

Disclaimer: This was not written by Lorra B.

Obama To Unleash ‘Community Organizers’ On Crime-Filled Cities

Obama taught “father of community organizing” Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” (Screenshot Credit, WND)

Obama taught “father of community organizing” Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals”
(Screenshot Credit, WND)

May 20, 2015


The Department of Justice announced it will send millions of dollars to various community-activist groups to combat urban crime and reduce tensions between racial minorities and the police.

But critics believe such policies will only fuel further unrest by funding many of the so-called “community organizers” responsible for creating anti-police sentiment in American cities.

To spread awareness of the new campaign, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch toured Cincinnati Tuesday and identified the city as a model for how police departments around the country should operate.

Until recently, Cincinnati operated under a “Collaborative Agreement” after a 2001 police shooting. The agreement allowed various community organizations, including the Cincinnati Black United Front and the American Civil Liberties Union, to work directly with the police through a court-brokered agreement.

New guidelines on how officers were to interact with the public, especially blacks, were often imposed over the objections of police themselves.

President Obama, himself, toured the crime-plagued city of Camden, New Jersey, Monday to promote the new report from his “21st Century Policing Task Force,” designed to increase public trust in the police.

The report calls for “mitigating implicit bias” as a “part of training at all levels of a law enforcement organization to increase awareness and ensure respectful encounters both inside the organization and with communities.”

It particularly condemned “the use of disrespectful language and the implicit biases that lead offices to rely upon race” in the context of the law enforcement policy known as “stop and frisk.”

The president also restricted the availability of military hardware previously provided to local law enforcement. Critics, including Cheryl Chumley, author of “Police State USA,” charge such actions are less about “saving innocent lives” and more about “creating a social justice movement that’s likely to clamp police from doing their jobs even while it federalizes the nation’s forces.”

The Justice Department also announced $163 million in grants to be distributed for the purpose of “building trust with the community.” As part of its effort to execute the recommendations of the president’s task force, the Justice Department is looking for 10 localities to participate in a “collaborative reform” process to serve as a model for the rest of the country, emphasizing “procedural justice” and “implicit bias training.”

‘Racial agitators’

A list of grants awarded by the Justice Department in 2013 indicate federal funding has been and will continue to be directed toward activist groups described by critics as “racial agitators.”

For example, “Community Policing Development Awards” were given in 2013 to programs including “Building Trust With Communities of Color” from the Vera Institute of Justice, the “Race and Social Justice Initiative” at the Portland Police Department and “Racial Reconciliation, Truth-Telling, and Police Legitimacy” at John Jay College.

Matthew Vadum, an expert in left-wing activist groups and the author of “Subversion, Inc.,” warns such federal funding invariably finds its way into the hands of progressive activists who personally profit from increased community tensions.

“President Obama is no stranger to irony, or hypocrisy for that matter,” Vadum said in an interview with WND.

“After attacking police as stupid, racist, vicious and thuggish almost non-stop throughout his presidency, now he suddenly cares about police officers and the communities they serve. Now he wants to throw millions of taxpayer dollars at ACORN-like groups and professional left-wing agitators whose calling in life is to generate civil unrest,” he said.

“This means that people like the president’s point man on race relations, riot organizer Al Sharpton, will get his hands on lots of government money. This money won’t actually help anyone except for the often-violent Saul Alinsky-inspired community organizers who have been living high off the hog ever since one of their own took up residence in the White House.”

More at WND

Disclaimer: This article was not written by Lorra B.


dApril 11, 2015

A Montpelier View: by Mustang

You can’t make this stuff up. According to Chuck Ross’ article in the Daily Caller:

“An Egyptian-born imam who in 2007 said that Somali-born activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali should receive the death penalty for her criticism of Islam is now a Department of Justice contractor hired to teach classes to Muslims who are in federal prison.

“According to federal spending records, Fouad ElBayly, the imam at Islamic Center of Johnstown in Pennsylvania, was contracted by the DOJ’s Bureau of Prisons beginning last year to teach the classes to Muslim inmates at Cumberland Federal Correctional Institution in Cumberland, Md.”

Dare we even begin to dissect this revelation?

Looney Left 001We should perhaps begin with this question: if Imam Fouad el Bayly is an example of Islamic jurisprudence, then should we be concerned about the curriculum at this new university? My guess is, “Uh, yeah.”

As for suggesting that any human being deserves the death penalty for expressing factual information about Islam and its pedophile founder, we are all used to these inanities by now. Were it not for the fact that Islamist nitwits pose a clear and present danger to the people of my country, I would probably shrug it off and go back to reading a good book. But the problem is that we have several of these people serving in the current administration, which leads a reasonable person to conclude that America is in deep trouble.

Imagine … disbursing public funds to an idiot in exchange for teaching courses of instruction to federal prisoners who also just happen to be Mohammedan boneheads. Actually, I am really not very shocked by this revelation. By billing itself as a religion, elements of the Muslim Brotherhood have infiltrated our federal and state prisons for decades. The problem is that state and federal prison officials have accepted the false notion that Islam is a religion.  It is no more a religion than Obama is a constitutional scholar. Islam is a bloodletting cult; the world would be a better place, a safer place, if we could rid ourselves of this plague on humanity. Luckily for the Moslem Brotherhood, there is no one inside our federal or state governments with the courage or the common sense to make the obvious connection between the Islamic cult indoctrination going on inside our prisons, and the extraordinarily high recidivism rate among black convicts.

And now we might wonder what it is that Imam Fouad is teaching imprisoned Mohammedans. Could it be head-removal 101? How to build a bomb in the basement of your Mom? How to mutilate the genitals of little girls? How to avoid flatulence while wearing C-4 Skivvies?

Equally apparent, DOJ staff do not have a clear understanding about what imprisonment means. It doesn’t mean public financing for advanced degrees in decapitation, atomic fission, or the Islamic version of animal husbandry.

I suspect there is nothing that anyone of us can do about this disgrace. It is just one more humiliation in a very long, and growing list of debasements perpetrated by Islamists, and enabled by this government of the people. A government, as it turns out, that is untrustworthy.

Hat tip: Geeez

Permission was given by A Montpelier View to Lorra B. to post their articles in their entirety. Disclaimer: This article was not written by Lorra B.

Justice Department Declares Victory Over Town That Barred Muslims From Setting Up A Worship Center

December 18, 2014


The Islamic Center of America in Dearborn, MI

The Islamic Center of America in Dearborn, MI


The Department of Justice announced on Tuesday that it has reached a “settlement agreement in principle” with a Minnesota city that tried to prevent an Islamic group from establishing a worship center. In 2012, the St. Anthony, Minnesota city council voted to deny the Abu Huraira Islamic Center’s ability to set up a worship center in the basement of a local business complex. Although a city planning commission recommended that the Islamic Center’s plan be approved, the council voted 4-1 to reject the plan after several local residents spoke out against it, many of them reportedly making “disparaging remarks about the Muslim faith” in the process.

The Justice Department sued under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), a federal law which provides that “[n]o government shall impose or implement a land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person, including a religious assembly or institution” except under certain limited circumstances. Though the proposed settlement still needs to receive final approval from the St. Anthony city council, the Justice Department itself and a federal district judge, DOJ’s triumphant press release announcing the agreement suggests that they do not anticipate problems getting to final approval.

Under the terms of an agreement reached during a settlement conference with a federal magistrate judge, the Islamic Center will be able to “use the St. Anthony Business Center for religious worship” and “the City of St. Anthony Village will not treat Abu-Huraira or any other religious groups in a discriminatory manner by application of its zoning laws.”

The RLUIPA law that underlies DOJ’s involvement in this case closely resembles another law, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, that formed the basis of the Supreme Court’s controversial Hobby Lobby decision earlier this year. Hobby Lobby, which held that many private businesses may refuse to include contraceptive care in their health plan if the business’ owners object to birth control on religious grounds, rejected decades of precedent indicating that religious objections should not be wielded to diminish the rights of others — especially in the business context. As the Supreme Court explained in United States v. Lee, “[w]hen followers of a particular sect enter into commercial activity as a matter of choice, the limits they accept on their own conduct as a matter of conscience and faith are not to be superimposed on the statutory schemes which are binding on others in that activity.”

The St. Anthony case, by contrast, is a less controversial application of federal religious liberty law because the presence of a worship center at a particular location does not diminish the legal rights of people who hold different religious beliefs.