Feed: Sister Toldjah - AggScore: 61.6
Byron York reports on some potentially explosive information that came out of a WH document drop on Friday afternoon on the politically motivated firing of Americorps Inspector General Gerald Walpin, who the admin tried to paint as senile and unfit for office after the news of his firing was revealed:
Just hours after Sen. Charles Grassley and Rep. Darrell Issa released a report Friday on their investigation into the abrupt firing of AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin, the Obama White House gave the lawmakers a trove of new, previously-withheld documents on the affair. It was a twist on the now-familiar White House late-Friday release of bad news; this time, the new evidence was put out not only at the start of a weekend but also hours too late for inclusion in the report.
The new documents support the Republican investigators’ conclusion that the White House’s explanation for Walpin’s dismissal — that it came after the board of the Corporation for National and Community Service, which oversees AmeriCorps, unanimously decided that Walpin must go — was in fact a public story cobbled together after Walpin was fired, not before.
Walpin was axed on the evening of June 10, when he received a call from Norman Eisen, the special counsel to the president for ethics and government reform, who told Walpin he had one hour either to resign or be fired. The next day, congressional Republicans, led by Grassley, objected, charging that Walpin’s dismissal violated a recently-passed law requiring the president to give Congress 30 days’ notice before dismissing an inspector general.
Pressed for the reason Walpin was fired, Eisen told House and Senate aides that the White House conducted an “extensive review” of complaints about Walpin’s performance before deciding to dismiss him. According to the new report, Eisen told Congress that “his investigation into the merits of removing Gerald Walpin involved contacting members of the Corporation for National and Community Service [CNCS] board to confirm the existence of a ‘consensus’ in favor of removal.” But Republican investigators later discovered that during that “extensive review,” the White House did not even seek the views of the corporation’s board — the very people whose “consensus” purportedly led to Walpin’s firing.
Other than board chairman Alan Solomont, the Democratic mega-donor and Obama supporter who originally told the White House of his dissatisfaction with Walpin, “no member of the CNCS board had any substantive input about whether the removal of Gerald Walpin was appropriate,” according to the report. Only one other board member, vice-chairman Stephen Goldsmith, was even called by the White House, and that was on June 10, a few hours before Walpin was fired. According to the report, Goldsmith told investigators that “the White House had already decided to remove Walpin and wanted to confirm [Goldsmith's] support for the action.”
Read the whole thing.
Rest assured that if anything remotely close to this happened during the Bush admin, the MSM would have been all over it.
Oh wait – they already were … over the bogus Attorneysgate scandal. Where have they been on this scandal? An Instapundit reader describes it about right (via GayPatriot):
“Just like Nixon, except without the press coverage.”
Yep. I don’t think we’ll be seeing any eager Woodwards and Bernsteins during the Obama administration. In spite of the fact that he really is not an agent of the “good” kind of change he promised (honesty, transparency, and accountability), the MSM has too much invested in their guy to turn their backs on him now. They have a scratch my back, I scratch yours mentality over the corruptocrat sitting in the WH, and that’s not going to change anytime soon – if ever.
Having a typical busy Monday morning. I’ll update Hot Headlines in a few minutes, and will hopefully be able to check back in sometime this afternoon.
Catch y’all later.
Via Fox News:
[...] Al Gore’s award-winning global warming film “An Inconvenient Truth,” socked two years ago by a British court ruling that found several errors, is facing additional scrutiny with the release of a new documentary that seeks to rebut many of Gore’s claims.
Buoyed by the ruling, two Irish journalists — Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney — released a documentary in which they gather evidence outlining the damage of global warming hysteria. In “Not Evil Just Wrong,” they challenge the claims made in Gore’s film and conclude that the film is not worth screening in schools because it is shown there as “an article of science, not faith.”
“I wouldn’t like our documentary to have nine significant errors and if it did, I certainly wouldn’t be showing it to school children across America, and that’s the important thing,” McAleer told Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Friday.
[...]
[Gore's] film went on to win Academy Awards for Gore and Guggenheim and to re-energize the environmental movement.
But in 2007, a British High Court judge ruled that Gore’s film contained nine significant errors and should no longer be screened in schools unless accompanied by guidance notes to balance Gore’s “one-sided” views.
The film’s “apocalyptic vision” was not an impartial analysis of climate change, High Court Judge Michael Burton said, adding that the film is “substantially founded up scientific research and fact” but that the errors were made in “the context of alarmism and exaggeration.”
Just last month, McAleer publicly confronted Gore in an contentious exchange at an environmental journalist conference, where Gore was the keynote speaker and took questions from the audience.
When asked by McAleer whether he would do anything to correct the errors found by the British court, Gore said he wouldn’t go through each of the errors but added that the ruling was in favor of screening the film in schools.
“There’s been such a long discussion of each one of those specific things,” he said. “One of them for example was that polar bears really aren’t endangered. Well polar bears didn’t get that word.” The audience laughed.
Phelim countered that the number of polar bears has increased and is increasing.
“You don’t think they’re endangered?” Gore asked.
“The number has increased,” McAleer repeated, prompting the same question from Gore. “If the number of polar bears has increased, surely they’re not in danger.”
Before McAleer could say anything else, he was interrupted by environmental journalists who said it wasn’t a debate and shut off his microphone.
You can watch the full Fox interview here.
For much more on the revealing CRU emails/documents controversy, click here.
Cross-posted to Right Wing News, where I am helping guestblog for John Hawkins on Sundays.
The best news of the day will be for Panthers fans, who can rest assured that their team will not lose today.
Because they’re not playing. Their game for the week is over – they were defeated Thursday night in primetime by the Dolphins here at home. So now that that is out of the way, I can actually enjoy a day of Sunday football without worrying about whether or not my team is going to show up, or just simply go through the motions.
What games do you have your eye on? C’mon, everyone – I know it’s that blockbuster show down between the Browns and the Lions. How would you like to be the color commentator calling that one? They probably will have some No-Doze handy. FWIW, I picked the Lions to win that one in the football pool this week. It’s really a toss-up.
In all seriousness, I’ll have my eye on the Patriots/Jets game, and not just because I think Tom Brady’s hot. I think it’ll be a good match up between division enemies. The Jets won their first meeting 16-9. Today they’ll be playing on New England’s home turf, where Brady and the gang will be looking both for revenge and a recovery from last week’s embarassing loss to the Colts.
Last but not least: For your entertainment, a memorable – and humorous – moment in NFL history (via Keith):
I’m off to do some Thanksgiving grocery shopping. Will check back in later.
Via Fox News:
WASHINGTON — Sweeping health care legislation has cleared its first hurdle in the Senate on a party-line vote.
The 60-39 vote clears the way for a historic debate after Thanksgiving on the legislation. The measure is designed to extend coverage to an estimated 31 million Americans who lack it and crack down on insurance industry practices that deny benefits.
The rare Saturday session amounted to a first round in the fight to pass the bill in the full Senate, with the remaining Democratic holdouts announcing they would support at least the measure to open debate on the bill, avoiding an early knockout by Republicans.
Sens. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana waited until Saturday to say they would vote yes for a floor debate. Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska announced Friday his support for moving the bill forward.
All three cautioned that their votes to start debate should not be construed a support for the bill in its current form.
“It is a vote to move forward to continue the good and essential and important and imperative work that is under way,” Landrieu said on the Senate floor. “I’ve decided that there’s enough significant reforms and safeguards in this bill to move forward but more work needs to be done.”
Lincoln said she still would support a filibuster if the so-called “public option,” a government-run insurance plan, remains in the health care bill.
“I along with others expect to have legitimate opportunities to influence the health care reform legislation that is voted on by the Senate later this year or early next year,” she said.
Uh huh – and risk the $100,000,000 that was used to buy you off, Senator Landrieu? Don’t make me laugh.
Michelle Malkin is liveblogging the post-vote goings on, and notes that Ted Kennedy’s name has already been invoked by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who earlier had likened GOP opposition to his version of healthcare reform to “slavery.”
Sigh. As our Vice President once famously said: Gird your loins.
I’m getting ready to go meet my sis and we’ll be headed to the movie theater to see if we can catch the New Moon movie this morning before the crowds pick up in the afternoon. Yes – I’m a Twilight fan. 
" class="wp-smiley" width="18" height="18" title=":">" />
I understand the Senate will have a “test vote” tonight on healthcare, a vote that will determine if Senators can begin debating the monstrous healthcare bill on the floor. Lord willing and I don’t faint from seeing Edward Cullen on the big screen, I should be around to blog about it. 
Catch y’all later.
Blockbuster news (via MM):
If you own any shares in alternative energy companies I should start dumping them NOW. The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka Hadley CRU) and released 61 megabites of confidential files onto the internet. (Hat tip: Watts Up With That)
When you read some of those files – including 1079 emails and 72 documents – you realise just why the boffins at Hadley CRU might have preferred to keep them confidential. As Andrew Bolt puts it, this scandal could well be “the greatest in modern science”. These alleged emails – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory – suggest:
Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.
One of the alleged emails has a gentle gloat over the death in 2004 of John L Daly (one of the first climate change sceptics, founder of the Still Waiting For Greenhouse site), commenting:
“In an odd way this is cheering news.”
But perhaps the most damaging revelations – the scientific equivalent of the Telegraph’s MPs’ expenses scandal – are those concerning the way Warmist scientists may variously have manipulated or suppressed evidence in order to support their cause.
Ed Morrissey’s posted some of the emails, in particular a few in which the contents look pretty damaging. Make sure to read his post in full.
A few things that go without saying: 1) Hacking into someone’s emails and private files is obviously wrong, and it should be prosecuted. 2) In spite of the title of this email, I’m well aware – as are those who read this blog – that global warming alarmists have been exposed as fearmongering chicken little liars (not to mention hypocrites) for decades, but rarely has it been on a level where you actually have “scientists” and their associates caught on paper attempting to suppress data that is contra to their pre-desired result. And the few times these “scientists” have been clearly exposed, the MSM – predictably – engages in a cover-up of their own.
But this scandal has the potential to eclipse past agw scandals, to the point where the MSM will have no choice but to report on it. That said, when – if – the reports start filtering in, expect the angle on the stories not to be about the damaging information in the emails – information that, to my layman’s eyes, appears to show “scientists” trying to hide data that would hinder their pro-alarmist agenda, but instead about how it was an “invasion of privacy” with quotes from “scientists” and those in related fields expressing “outrage” that the hard work of their colleagues has been “compromised.” The same MSM – and many of the same lefties – who yawned back when Sarah Palin’s personal email account was hacked into last year, will rise up in favor of stonger laws that would allow for tougher punishment for hackers.
As they say, this story is developing – so hold on to your hats.
If these numbers are to be believed, then all of Obama’s talk about how this economy is “Bush’s fault” is falling on deaf ears:
Washington (CNN) – Nearly two years into the recession, opinion about which political party is responsible for the severe economic downturn is shifting, according to a new national poll.
A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Friday morning indicates that 38 percent of the public blames Republicans for the country’s current economic problems. That’s down 15 points from May, when 53 percent blamed the GOP. According to the poll 27 percent now blame the Democrats for the recession, up 6 points from May. Twenty-seven percent now say both parties are responsible for the economic mess.
“The bad news for the Democrats is that the number of Americans who hold the GOP exclusively responsible for the recession has been steadily falling by about two to three points per month,” says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. “At that rate, only a handful of voters will blame the economy on the Republicans by the time next year’s midterm elections roll around.”
That’s music to my ears.
Related reading:Another Keystone cop strikes again:
If the U.S. captures Osama bin Laden, there’s no need to interrogate him, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said Thursday.
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the chairman of that committee, said that arguments raised by Republican senators about whether bin Laden would be afforded Miranda rights if he were captured amount to a “red herring.”
“The red herring that my friend [Sen.] Lindsey Graham [R-S.C.] was covering is not realistic,” Leahy said during an appearance on “Washington Journal” on C-SPAN.
“For one thing, capturing Osama bin Laden — we’ve had enough on him, we don’t need to interrogate him,” Leahy added.
Graham had grilled Attorney General Eric Holder during a hearing on Capitol Hill on Wednesday on whether bin Laden should be afforded due process in courts if he were captured.
“The big problem I have is you’re criminalizing the war, that if we caught bin Laden tomorrow, we have mixed theories and couldn’t turn him over to the CIA, the FBI, military intelligence for an interrogation on the battlefield, because now you’re saying he’s subject to criminal court in the United States and you’re confusing the people fighting this war,” Graham said.
A senior Republican aide criticized Leahy, saying “it’s a good thing they kicked him off the intel committee in the late 80’s.”
I’ll say.
For all of Lindsey Graham’s faults – and there are many – major props for cornering Holder on this issue yesterday.
But back to Leahy, he’s defending Holder’s decison:
“We’re going to bring [KSM and other detainees] back to New York and prosecute them,” he said. “I think we ought to stand up and applaud that.”
No. “We” won’t be applauding this farce. They will.
Yahoo! A Thursday night, primetime game for the Cats here at home in lovely, slightly chilly Charlotte. Let’s hope they put on their best faces for the cameras 
Both teams are hoping to get to 5-5, and a good way to get there will be for the Panters to neutralize the “wildcat offense.” Will Delhomme and the gang continue to use the “no huddle” strategy, which worked out well for them this past Sunday?
Stay tuned.
Game time is at 8:20 ET and it will be broadcast on the NFL Network. For those of you like me who don’t have that channel, you can watch the game online here.
Update – 8:11 PM: Thanks to a tip from ST reader Anthony, I found out that NFL network games are shown in local markets. Charlotte area Panthers fans can watch the game on cable channel 10.
Update 2: Thank goodness it’s over. The Panthers lose in primetime 24-17.
Need any more proof of MSDNC’s slavish devotion to the Democrat party?
I wonder if they would have done the same grilling on any of the young kids who have been coached at schools all across the country to sing Obama’s praises? “You do know President Obama doesn’t support gay marriage, right?”
Yeah – I know. That’s expecting way too much from these classless acts at the KeithO network. 
Damn. I should have known that this was too good to be true.
Jules Crittenden sums up:
With its feverishness, weird syntax and promise to be “up half the night” obsessing, this is a masterful depiction of a mental breakdown in progress.
I am really starting to develop a deep appreciation for what Andrew Sullivan does. That guy needs a special Blog Award category to accommodate the hefty blogging girth he’s been swinging around this year. “Most Bat-Sh*t.” ”Best Crazytown Blog.” “Lifetime Wack-Achievement Award.” Something like that. “Best Unhinged Fantastist Palin Conspiracy Theorist Blog” is more focused and probably worth considering, though people might think that was rigged a little too far in Sullivan’s favor.
Well, in Sully’s defense, he does seem to be doing a darned fine job of emulating his hero. He’s sure as heck got the flip-flopping down pat.
Sigh … and the beat goes on.
So much for trying to demonstrate to the world the “fairness” of our justice system:
Facing a wave of critics warning of the risks of putting Mr. Mohammed on trial, Mr. Holder bluntly asserted that “failure isn’t a option” when asked during a Congressional hearing whether Mr. Mohammed and other key terrorist suspects will be convicted. Acquittals, claims of asylum and even judicial orders freeing them won’t result in releases, he asserted.
“If there is not a successful conclusion to this trial, that would not mean that this person would be released,” Mr. Holder bluntly told the Congressional hearing, referring to Mr. Mohammed – the self-proclaimed planner of the Sept 11, 2001, suicide hijackings.
“What if a federal judge orders the Department of Justice to release Khalid Sheikh Mohammed?” Texas Republican Senator John Cornyn asked. “Will you defy that order?”
Mr. Holder made it clear that by moving Mr. Mohammed to a prison offshore – such as Bagram in Afghanistan, where hundreds of detainees are held – a release order could be circumvented.
“We have taken the view that the judiciary does not have the ability necessarily to certainly require us to, with people who are held overseas, to release them,” he said. “It’s hard for me to imagine a set of circumstances, given the other things that we could do with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed” that would result in him being freed,” the Attorney-General said.
“Under the regime we are contemplating … the ability to detain under laws of war, we would retain that ability,” Mr. Holder added, meaning anyone freed by the courts could simply be returned as an enemy combatant to indefinite military detention.
Mr. Obama, a former law professor, denied he was interfering with Mr. Mohammed’s right to a fair trial. “I’m not prejudging it,” he said in a televised NBC interview. “I’m not going to be in that courtroom. That’s the job of the prosecutors, the judge and the jury,” he said.
Like I said this morning, this so-called “trial for justice for the 9-11 victims” is a pretense for this administration. If their whole point in this trial is to demonstrate to the world that we have a “fair and just” system, then proclaiming KSM guilty and deciding his punishment before he’s had a trial – and suggesting that even if he isn’t found guilty that he will still be held and possibly sent to Bagram is certainly unlike any “fair and just” system I’ve ever heard of. Essentially, Holder is saying, “If we don’t like the verdict, we still have options for keeping him in custody.” Huh??
All the options he put on the table in the event of a not guilty verdict for KSM are options he should have taken advantage of instead of going the route he’s chosen to with this farcical show trial.
Really. Wake me up when amateur hour is over in this WH!
Via Andrew Malcolm:
Speaking of military tribunals, we went back into the video archives and found this C-SPAN tape below. Holder might want to watch it.
It contains his boss, Barack Obama, a brief member of that same Senate, in 2006 stating that a military tribunal was a perfectly fine way of handling such dangerous individuals as Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.
Obama said the fight against terrorism was “an extraordinarily difficult war” where terrorists could plot undetected from within our own borders.
The freshman Illinois senator was defending a legislative amendment and pointed out that a military tribunal for Mohammed seemed just fine to him.
“The irony of the underlying bill as it’s written is that someone like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed is going to get basically a full military trial with all the bells and whistles. He’s gonna have counsel. He’s gonna be able to present evidence to rebut the government’s case…. I think we will convict him. And I think justice will be carried out.”
Here’s the video:
Apparently, now that he has more “experience,” he believes otherwise. 
