More douchebaggery from the Left. (Obama Aunt living off our dime)

[AZhitman]

OK, we've all seen these types of articles surface, and frankly, they're damned irrelevant in my opinion.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITI....html

Cliff's Notes: Sen. Barack Obama didn't know his aunt might be living illegally in the United States.

Blah, blah, blah. SO WHAT.

NOW -

Pay CLOSE attention to the following:

Democratic U.S. Rep. John Conyers of Michigan fired off a letter asking Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff to investigate whether someone leaked the information to the media in an effort to damage Obama.

Wait. WTF?

Some damn libby is wasting OUR taxpayer money to drum up an "investigation" as to whether someone reported that someone was doing something ILLEGAL?

WHAT THE HELL?

Read it again. Conyers, who shall hereafter be referred to as "Ignorant Assclown", wants an INVESTIGATION because he's afraid of a negative story being "leaked" that might "damage Obama".

You gotta be kidding me!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wait... it gets BETTER:

Conyers stated: "This leak is deplorable and I urge you to take immediate action to investigate and discipline those responsible."

OK, so the lesson we've learned is this:

If someone's doing something illegal, do NOT tell anyone about it during an election cycle, because it could 'damage' a campaign, and the person doing the reporting could be held responsible.

Someone find me "Ignorant Assclown's" email address so I can rant in his ear.

What a colossal load of crap.

[AZhitman]

UPDATE: Never mind the email....

According to Conyers' website, "I am only able to accept messages from residents of the 14th Congressional District of Michigan."

OK, so all you libbies crying about the GOP bringing up "irrelevant" issues, here's your payback. Conyers is your guy.

Good luck with your "investigation", you nosy old bastard.

[BusyBadger]

Hard to believe the guy that "is his brother's keeper" doesn't seem to know where the hell his own aunt lives or the situation that she lives in.

So much for the tight Obama family ties.

[AZhitman]

Hell, I don't even CARE about his role.

My issue is with the typical Lefty nonsense here... So, what's wrong with "full disclosure"? What's wrong with "finding the truth"? What's wrong with "reporting the facts"?

Is this censorship?

Is this retaliation?

Where's the "whistleblower" protection?

Conyers is a helmet-wearing Obamuppet.

[BusyBadger]

Someone find me "Ignorant Assclown's" email address so I can rant in his ear.

Here's a link to his Congressional web mail.

Its got a zip code check that only enables his constituents to submit mail. But I think you're from Dearborn, MI (48120) aren't you?

[CakeDaddy]

OK, we've all seen these types of articles surface, and frankly, they're damned irrelevant in my opinion.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITI....htmlCliff's Notes: Sen. Barack Obama didn't know his aunt might be living illegally in the United States.

Blah, blah, blah. SO WHAT.

so why bother posting it? I see crap from the right that isn't worthy of a post.

[AZhitman]

...because it's an ISSUE.

But you missed it.

See lines 13-14 of my post. Or, get someone smart to read it to you.

[wawazat8402]

Greg, they dont want us to have full disclosure, because that leads to people making an educated decision. Educated decisions by a few leads to even more thinking by the majority and the sheet falls away from our eyes. Then what the hell are they going to do when we magically transform from sheep to real people. Nothing is as predictable and accountability starts getting pushed. I think both sides are guilty of this as it is a given part of politics. Its not always who has our best intentions in mind, its those that can sell a message the best. I honestly feel like the older I get and the more I research for elections, the less I feel like change is possible anytime soon.

[Cold_Zero]

These are the same idiots that are investigating the White House, the White House legal counsel, the former Attorney General and the Justice Department for firing some US Attorneys. A practices that was done by the former Clinton Administration, GHW Bush Administration and the Reagan Administration.

[ishkabibble]

These are the same idiots that are investigating the White House, the White House legal counsel, the former Attorney General and the Justice Department for firing some US Attorneys. A practices that was done by the former Clinton Administration, GHW Bush Administration and the Reagan Administration.

No, it wasn't. Don't try and spin it.

The WH sought out attorneys that were not pushing their agenda and selectively fired them mid-term for political reasons. That had never been done before.

[audtatious]

No, it wasn't. Don't try and spin it.

The WH sought out attorneys that were not pushing their agenda and selectively fired them mid-term for political reasons. That had never been done before.

So what? They work at the discretion of the President and the President can put in whomever he wants. If Obama comes into office and gets rid of all the Republicans for his own people I would not be surprised in the least. I see this as really a non-issue that was brought up as an issue in order to throw mud.

I do find it interesting that in the last 8 years a number of "secrets" have been leaked which caused an uproar against the Bush Administration yet nobody gave a damn to find the leak and punish them for what could be treason. Here's someone who brought out something about Obama so now they want to investigate and press charges. Wonderful. When they find the person I wonder if Family Services and Police departments and lawyers are going to go through their personal lives like they did with "Joe the Plumber"....Probably.....Precedent is set.

[ishkabibble]

So what? They work at the discretion of the President and the President can put in whomever he wants. If Obama comes into office and gets rid of all the Republicans for his own people I would not be surprised in the least. I see this as really a non-issue that was brought up as an issue in order to throw mud.

No, it's an issue. The lawyers were told to prosecute partisan cases right before the election or be fired, which is illegal. This "discretion" stuff is not the issue and is right wing talking point BS. Go read the Talking Points Memo archives; they unearthed the story and present it fairly objectively.

I do find it interesting that in the last 8 years a number of "secrets" have been leaked which caused an uproar against the Bush Administration yet nobody gave a damn to find the leak and punish them for what could be treason.

You can't punish for treason if the "whistleblower" is bringing illegal activities to light. Since you "call BS on both sides", do you feel that anyone involved in the Plame leak should be convicted of treason?

Anyway, the administration will not go after the "leakers" since they will have to reveal all the evidence they have about the situation and incriminate themselves if any wrongdoing is found. This, in itself, is telling.

[audtatious]

No, it's an issue. The lawyers were told to prosecute partisan cases right before the election or be fired, which is illegal. This "discretion" stuff is not the issue and is right wing talking point BS. Go read the Talking Points Memo archives; they unearthed the story and present it fairly objectively.

You don't have a clue do you? Nah, just kidding...I'll look into it as it's been a while since I've seen any updates.

You can't punish for treason if the "whistleblower" is bringing illegal activities to light. Since you "call BS on both sides", do you feel that anyone involved in the Plame leak should be convicted of treason?

Anyway, the administration will not go after the "leakers" since they will have to reveal all the evidence they have about the situation and incriminate themselves if any wrongdoing is found. This, in itself, is telling.

You are correct and I would not expect a true "whistleblower" of illegal activities to be punished. Of course, that depends on how they leak the information as well. If it's classified then it should be taken up with the appropriate committee and not simply given to the NY Times.

[Cold_Zero]

No, it wasn't. Don't try and spin it.

The WH sought out attorneys that were not pushing their agenda and selectively fired them mid-term for political reasons. That had never been done before.

Well, then why did the Clinton Administration sever the investigator that was looking into Dan Rostenkowski right before he was going to bring charges up for bilking the American people through his mail allowance? I guess that is just spin! Do you remember how charges were filed? Certainly not through the US Department of Justice, since Tom Foley sat on the results of the investigation.

Sorry this stuff happens and if these Attorneys didnt like getting swept out half way through the term, then they shouldn't have gone to work for the Bush Administration.

[ishkabibble]

Again, you are trying to equate two things which are not equivalent. Clinton, like Reagan, fired nearly all of the attorneys at the beginning of his first term, which is fairly standard practice. Bush fired 7 attorneys midterm who were not doing his partisan bidding.

Also, if nothing fishy was going on, why did so many people resign from the administration over this issue? Why are so many people refusing to testify? Where did all of the emails related to the issue go?

"They shouldn't have gone to work for the Bush administration?" These people are working for justice, not to do a party's bidding. Your attitude scares me.

[WDRacing]

Why do we have two topics being discussed?

The Bush/Attorney scandal wreaks...but is actually something that seems fairly par for course when compared to the rest of his 8 years.

But the OP is far worse IMO. Suppressing the investigation of crime simply because it's an election year makes me lose the last remnants of faith I had in this POS so called democracy. Between this and the crap in Ohio and the stuff ACORN does in general...makes me wanna throw up.

I'm not partial to either candidate btw, if it was McCain or his idiot running mate I'd have the same opinion. Suck is suck no matter the party.

[audtatious]

They work at the discretion of the Prez and I don't see why he can't get rid of them anytime he wants. Now, if they were fired because they would not do something illegal for the Prez then that's another ball of wax.

[AZhitman]

Why do we have two topics being discussed?

But the OP is far worse IMO. Suppressing the investigation of crime simply because it's an election year makes me lose the last remnants of faith I had in this POS so called democracy. Between this and the crap in Ohio and the stuff ACORN does in general...makes me wanna throw up.

Exactly. Anyone in Michigan needs to do some letter-writing. This is pure BS.

Wonder if Conyers is so gung-ho on this because he's Black?

Hmmmmm.... Yep. I said it. Maybe he'd like to prove to me otherwise.

[smockers83]

He is a founding member the Black Caucus. Don't black people have the mentality of protect your own no matter what? That's what I see here and it's despicable. This doesn't surprise me seeing that he's from Detroit. He's also one of the most liberal people in the House.

*edit* Greg's post above mine wasn't there when I originally started to write mine. Kinda got caught up and sidetracked in researching the guy.

[ishkabibble]

They work at the discretion of the Prez and I don't see why he can't get rid of them anytime he wants.

I agree, with a caveat:

Now, if they were fired because they would not do something illegal for the Prez then that's another ball of wax.

And this is what happened.

With respect to the OP, Conyers is always "investigating" something. Not a fan of the guy. However, it is apparently against policy for Homeland Security to disclose details about someone's immigration status. So perhaps that's what this is about.

[480sx]

Now, if they were fired because they would not do something illegal for the Prez then that's another ball of wax.

[AZhitman]

it is apparently against policy for Homeland Security to disclose details about someone's immigration status. So perhaps that's what this is about.

Democratic U.S. Rep. John Conyers of Michigan fired off a letter asking Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff to investigate whether someone leaked the information to the media in an effort to damage Obama.

So, nope.

If that's the case, he's asking Homeland Security to get involved in something they have no business in - That is, to "find the person who reported a lawbreaker".

Simple as that.

Opening an investigation on someone who reports a violation of the law? Yay, liberty.

[audtatious]

Proof? Or is it another "guilty because you are a Republican President" issue and we don't need facts?

[ishkabibble]

Kinda hard to outright prove when the administration "oops lost all of the emails!" and all of the "loyal Bushies" claim executive privilege.

I gave plenty of evidence above. If the administration has nothing to hide about the situation, why doesn't the administration just come clean rather than stonewalling? And why did all of those DOJ employees related to the situation resign? They got bored and wanted a career change?

[skylndrftr]

Proof? Or is it another "guilty because you are a Republican President" issue and we don't need facts?

:sigh: so stereotypes are okay when Greg and smockers are playing the race card (oh this will get fun) but not when it gets applied to simply stated, the worst crook ever to govern our country

@Greg The disaster that is homeland security has integrated many formerly independant (and much more cost effective) agencies. ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) is one of them. So it is a homeland security issue. What is going on here, if you bothered to read up on it. Is not a criminal violation, it is an administrative one. And while tax records (Joey the non-Plumber) are puublic record, Immigration status is not. Its okay thought, you and her both live within a 'constitution free zone' so you had no reasonable right to privacy anyways

[AZhitman]

Dude, perhaps YOU need to read.

Todd, for the third time:

Democratic U.S. Rep. John Conyers of Michigan fired off a letter asking Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff to investigate whether someone leaked the information to the media in an effort to damage Obama.

I don't give a DAMN if it's administrative, criminal or a ham freakin' sandwich. In fact, I don't give a damn about the ol' woman. My issue is with some busybody idiot state rep starting a witch hunt against an innocent "reporter of fact".

Conyers is the one asking HS to find out who "ratted" this lady out.

And say what you want, but when you apply for taxpayer-funded services (or employment), your immigration status becomes a matter of record.

Your completely erroneous insinuation about "Constitution-free" is offensive and ignorant.

[skylndrftr]

1) so your okay with the government releasing your information to anyone for any purpose?

I would hope your representative would stand up for you on something like that.

2)are you less than 100 miles from the border? Its not erroneous, its not ignorant. If you find it offensive...vote Obama.

[audtatious]

Kinda hard to outright prove when the administration "oops lost all of the emails!" and all of the "loyal Bushies" claim executive privilege.

Maybe they are in the same place as the Clinton records removed from the Library of Congress

I gave plenty of evidence above. If the administration has nothing to hide about the situation, why doesn't the administration just come clean rather than stonewalling? And why did all of those DOJ employees related to the situation resign? They got bored and wanted a career change?

Maybe they didn't like the atmosphere nor Laura's Christmas pie?

I'm not arguing the points you think I am. I'm just saying that a President can remove them at will. The rest is up to the legal system to decide what to do.

[AZhitman]

1) so your okay with the government releasing your information to anyone for any purpose?

I would hope your representative would stand up for you on something like that..

I would hope my Rep wouldn't stand in the way of an investigation for PARTISAN REASONS. I would also hope that if I'm caught abusing a taxpayer-funded system, I'd be found out, consequenced, and those funds would be directed to a legitimate (and lawful) recipient.

You're continuing to assume that her situation is a "private" matter. It ain't.

Guess what? Anything in my office is free and open for you, a citizen, to walk in and rifle through. Since I work for the State, it's the taxpayers' building, and it's open to the public.

She has NO reasonable expectation of privacy with regards to her immigration status.

Let me make this very simple for you:

- She's in public housing in violation of the criteria. - Someone tipped off officials. - Rather than do an investigation into the VIOLATOR, the tipster has now become the subject of investigation, ALL because Conyers perceives himself as "Protector of The Great Obamessiah".

2)are you less than 100 miles from the border? Its not erroneous, its not ignorant. If you find it offensive...vote Obama.

Pretty close to it. But to imply that the Constitution doesn't apply to me, or her, or anyone else within the curtilage of the US borders, is patently absurd.

So, the rules that govern the land are suspended for certain people, because we're afraid it will tarnish a politician's image?

Sounds like he may as well employ stormtroopers to root out those of us who oppose him, round us all up, and send us to re-education camps... we're obviously too stupid to see and embrace his version of America.

[smockers83]

so stereotypes are okay when Greg and smockers are playing the race card (oh this will get fun) but not when it gets applied to simply stated, the worst crook ever to govern our country

I'm not playing the race card, I'm just telling you how it is. What stereotype have I dismissed about the worst crook ever to govern our country? Find out that one for me and come back. If we want to talk about some sort of seemingly unfair and racist stereotype, the dude walked right into it. If he doesn't want it pulled out on him, why would he go there? If people are so worried about stereotypes, why do people always play into them? Why? The fact of the matter still stands and I'm not being racist about it, its just a cultural and societal thing.