Mediaboss Marketing

In 2009, a national, grassroots movement known as the Tea Party emerged in cities across the country to combat then-President ObamaBarack Hussein ObamaDon't let China distract us from Russia Biden appoints Sara Minkara as US special advisor on international disability rights Fox poll shows Youngkin leading McAuliffe by 8 points among likely voters MOREs radical spending agenda and government takeover of American health care. Bureaucrats at the IRS and Department of Justice quickly took notice and got to work to stop it. After all, with midterm elections right around the corner, Obamas political agenda was at stake.

This was not an accident. This is a willful act of intimidation to discourage a point of view. What the government did to our little group in Wetumpka, Alabama is un-American, Wetumpka Tea Party President Becky Gerritson testified at a June 2013 congressional hearing. The demands for information in the questionnaire shocked me as someone who loves liberty and the First Amendment. I was asked to hand over my donor list including the amounts that they gave and the dates in which they gave them.

We knew we were being targeted because fellow Tea Party organizers across this nation were getting the same types of letters and questionnaires, she continued.

While IRS officials in Washington, D.C., claimed the targeting was an isolated, rogue operation in an Ohio office, documents showed the IRS was asked by Sen. Sheldon WhitehouseSheldon WhitehousePavlich: Democrats' weaponization of the DOJ is back Senate Democrats blast Supreme Court on one-year anniversary of Barrett's confirmation Bipartisan lawmakers target judges' stock trading with new bill MORE (D-R.I.) and Rep. Elijiah Cummings (D-Md.) to look into the groups.

Right on cue, IRS official Lois Lerner had a series of meetings with DOJ officials about how to criminally prosecute conservative groups with a goal of making them an example. Groups applying for tax-exempt status with the words tea party or patriot in their titles were singled out for extra scrutiny.

One IRS prosecution would make an impact and they wouldnt feel so comfortable doing the stuff, Lerner said in a 2013 email. In another email, Lerner said the Tea Party Matter [is] very dangerous.

It was obvious the IRS was attempting to quash political dissent. Lerner eventually admitted the targeting was wrong, retired and then the IRS lost thousands of her emails.

Fast-forward to 2016, and politically motivated FBI agents, who regularly exchanged text messages about their disdain for former President TrumpDonald TrumpCandidates sue after Pennsylvania county sent hundreds of ballots to wrong address Harris makes a final pitch for McAuliffe Overnight Defense & National Security Biden discusses Afghanistan, submarine deals in Europe MORE, used a fake dossier commissioned and paid for by the Clinton campaign to go after Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonTrump doubles down on calling for Pulitzers to be revoked from WaPost, NYT Iowa House maps create competitive seats Education blunder igniting suburban parents driving McAuliffe panic in Virginia MOREs presidential political opponent.

While the FBI maintains the fake document wasnt used to obtain FISA warrants against Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, bad information was. Years later and after significant damage, a FISA judge berated the bureau and ruled two warrants were illegal. Former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith falsified information on FISA applications in order to get them approved.

This manufactured scandal and associated lies caused me to adopt the lifestyle of an international fugitive for years, Page said during a court hearing about the illegal surveillance. I often have felt as if I had been left with no life at all. Each member of my family was severely impacted.

Now that Democrats are back in charge at DOJ, the political weaponization of the agency has returned and concerned parents are the target.

After President BidenJoe BidenOvernight Energy & Environment American Clean Power Supreme Court to review power plant rule case Harris makes a final pitch for McAuliffe Overnight Health Care Presented by Altria Young children one step closer to vaccine MORE received a letter from the National School Boards Association (NSBA) requesting DOJ treat parents as domestic terrorists, with an assist from the Patriot Act, Attorney General Merrick GarlandMerrick GarlandDemocratic reps call for investigation into Texas border policy Families in Charleston church massacre reach M settlement with DOJ The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Facebook - Democrats have so many hurdles ahead MORE coincidently released an official memo warning the FBI would be monitoring school board meetings. During recent congressional testimony, Garland admitted the letter from NSBA, not an independent investigation or evidence of threats, was used for the DOJ memo.

After heavy criticism and outrage, with many school boards disavowing the letter, the NSBA backtracked and issued an apology.

There was no justification for some of the language included in the letter. We should have had a better process in place to allow for consultation on a communication of this significance, the NSBA wrote in a follow up letter. The voices of parents should and must continue to be heard when it comes to decisions about their childrens education, health and safety.

As of this writing, Garland hasnt withdrawn the DOJ memo issuing federal law enforcement scrutiny to local meetings. NSBA President Viola Garcia has been appointed by Education Secretary Miguel CardonaMiguel CardonaPavlich: Democrats' weaponization of the DOJ is back President, first lady honor teachers at White House awards ceremony Ilhan Omar to Biden: 'Deliver on your promise to cancel student debt' MORE to the National Assessment Governing Board, where she will give guidance on education policy. She is the author of the original letter calling for DOJ to go after parents.

Given the lefts history of using powerful government agencies to target political opponents, Americans opposed to Bidens agenda should understand Garlands memo about parents was simply a test run.

Pavlich is the editor for Townhall.com and a Fox News contributor.

Read the rest here:
Pavlich: Democrats' weaponization of the DOJ is back | TheHill - The Hill

by Aleurophile

Secretly recorded video of his speech reveals that Glenn Youngkin participated in the Virginia Tea Partys Backlash to Socialism Summit this past June, which featured two keynotes: Del. Nick Freitas (#HD30) in the morning, and Chinese Communist conspiracy theorist Trevor Loudon in the afternoon.

Youngkin spoke via a pre-recorded video in which he says that while he could not attend in person, he was present in spirit. Kelly Weill of The Daily Beast wrote a great expos of Youngkins appearance and of his attempts to hide and even to deny it as he seeks to convince suburban Republicans that hes not a Trumpian extremist.

Also present at the event was Del. John McGuire (#HD56), who was recorded congratulating Loudon, asking for his card, and asserting that the Virginia Assembly has suffered pervasive infiltration by the Chinese Communists, casting doubt on even those members of his own party who vote for Democrat stuff (see Blue Virginia).

Loudons speech, the first 30 minutes of which is available here, ranged widely, though with the basic theme that the United States is losing its democracy to pervasive infiltration by the Chinese Communist Party (Canada is already gone, by the way). Highlights of Loudons allegations include:

According to The Daily Beast article, Youngkin claims not to have known who the speakers were in advance of the event; however the speaker list (minus Youngkin) was available online and then theres always the good old-fashioned telephone call. Or texting! They could have found out in a heartbeat.

Kelly Weill also received word from an anonymous source within the Tea Party that Youngkins name was not included on the speaker list because he did not confirm until the last minute; however, his name IS listed on this YouTube promo, which was posted five days prior to the event. And none of those excuses account for the fact that, as Weill points out, neither the Virginia Tea Party nor Youngkin posted photos on social media of Youngkin after the event, though Youngkin has other postings on his whereabouts that day and the Tea Party has more than 60 photos that include every other speaker on its Facebook page.

No, none of these excuses will fly. Youngkin is following a now-familiar pattern of trying to hide his extremist tendencies from voters. The truest thing he said in his speech was that he was present in spirit. While he didnt allude in his speech to a specter haunting America, he did fall back on Republican boogeymen both old and new: if Democrats are elected, there will be crime and chaos in the streets and the murder rate will go up (racists, do you hear that old dog whistle?) and election fraud will be rampant.

We must do all we can to keep Glenn Youngkin and extremist members of our General Assembly, such as Nick Freitas and John McGuire from holding power. If they are willing to participate in events where the featured speaker instills distrust in our major institutions, our neighbors and allies, and in the political process itself, then they themselves do not deserve our trust.

But we can stop the madness by voting between now and November 2nd, and by contributing to the Democrats running against Youngkin, Freitas, and McGuire: Terry McAuliffe, Annette Hyde, and Blakely Lockhart.

Go here to read the rest:
Video Spilling Tea: Glenn Youngkin, Nick Freitas, and John McGuire at a Truly Mad Tea Party with a Chinese Communist Conspiracy Theorist - Blue...

(Photo by Brendan Smialowski / AFP) (Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)

New details of how a top fundraiser for former President Donald Trumps campaign parked funds with groups that helped organize the Jan. 6 rally before the Capitol attack shine light on the coordination between seemingly independent groups and the role of Trump campaign officials.

Caroline Wren, a top fundraiser for Trumps campaign who was listed as a VIP Advisor on the permit granted by the National Park Service for the Jan. 6 rally, reportedly boasted of raising $3 million for the protest before the Capitol riot. She then parked funds with two dark money groups that helped organize the protest and a closely-tied super PAC, ProPublica reported last week.

Parking funds across multiple groups can give the appearance of more widespread support from multiple independently-operating organizations and makes it more difficult to trace the source of funds.

The strategy added a layer of confidentiality for the donor and offered institutional support for the 6th, Dustin Stockton, a Republican operative who helped Women for America First organize the rally, told ProPublica.

Earlier reports estimated the rally only cost about half a million dollars, primarily funded by a $300,000 donation from Publix supermarket heir Julie Jenkins Fancelli to Women for America First, the 501(c)(4) nonprofit dark money group that submitted the rallys permit records to the National Park Service.

Women for America Firsts co-founder, Amy Kremer, and her daughter have been subpoenaed by the U.S. House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol. They are scheduled for depositions on Oct. 29.

Stockton was also a spokesperson for WeBuildtheWall when former White House adviser Steve Bannon and three others affiliated with the dark money group were charged with fraud related to the online fundraising effort in 2020. Stockton was not charged. The select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack found Bannon in contempt last week for refusing to comply with a subpoena.

Two of the other organizations that ProPublica reported helped store funds for the rally, Rule of Law Trust and Turning Point, are dark money groups that were listed as organizers of the rally.

Tea Party Express is the one group named by ProPublica that was not listed as an organizer on the rally website.

Launched in 2010 as a project of the political action committee Our Country Deserves Better PAC, Tea Party Express gained national attention for its rallies and bus tours. But it was criticized for diverting a large portion of its fundraising to consultants instead of supporting candidates.

Kermer, a longtime political organizer,was Tea Party Express chair from 2009 to 2014.

One of the dark money groups that reportedly parked funds and helped promote the rally, the Rule of Law Defense Fund, is the 501(c)(4) affiliated with the Republican Attorneys General Association.

At least $150,000 of the Rule of Law Defense Funds money for the rally reportedly came from Fancelli in a Dec. 29 donation a little more than a week before the rally, according to records reviewed by the Washington Post.

Other Rule of Law Defense Fund donors included opaque nonprofits such as the Koch networks Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce, the Edison Electric Institute, Empowering Ohios Economy and the Alliance Defending Freedom.

Turning Point, the other organization that parked funds and helped organize the rally, is best known for its conservative youth engagement efforts and digital operations, which were used to promote the rally.

The operations flagship nonprofit organization, Turning Point USA, reported raising more than $39.2 million from undisclosed donors in its most recent tax year spanning from July 2019 through the end of June 2020, according to new tax records obtained by OpenSecrets.

The tax records show how Turning Points operation continued to grow in the leadup to the 2020 election and subsequent fallout.

Turning Point USA brought in $4.3 million and its president, Charlie Kirk, reported earning just $27,231 for 65-hour weeks, according to organizations 2016 tax records.

By the 2018-2019 fiscal year, Kirks salary grew to $292,423 as its annual revenue rose to $28.5 million, with one $6.2 million anonymous donation and multiple additional contributions over $1 million. Turning Point Action attracted more than $1.1 million from July 2018 through the end of June 2019.

In the 2019-2020 fiscal year, Kirk made more than $329,000 across Turning Point-affiliated organizations.

The scope and reach of Turning Points influencer operation also grew during the Trump administration.

The organizations digital operations faced media scrutiny in 2020 when social media platforms removed hundreds of accounts run by Rally Forge LLC after reporting found teenagers paid to post thousands of coordinated messages, giving the appearance of organic grassroots support for messages boosting Trump as well as unfounded information about coronavirus, voting and other topics.

Turning Point USA paid about $500,000 to Rally Forge LLC during its most recent fiscal year.

Turning Point USA and Turning Point Action, the 501(c)(4) arm of Turning Point that was officially listed as an organizer on the rally website, collectively paid another $1 million to Rally Forge LLC disclosed in their 2018-2019 tax returns obtained by OpenSecrets.

Turning Point has received more than $1 million from Republican mega-donor Richard Uihleins family foundation, including $250,000 in 2019.

Uihlein was also a major donor to other groups affiliated with rally organizers. He contributed to the Women for Trump hybrid PAC affiliated with Women for America First, and Uilehin was the top 2020 election donor to the super PAC affiliated with Tea Party Patriots, another rally organizer. Uihlein has given the Tea Party Patriots super PAC about $4.3 million since the 2016 election.

The Judicial Crisis Network, a dark money group now legally named the Concord Fund, also contributed to multiple groups involved in the rally. The dark money group gave at least $4.7 million to the Tea Party Patriots, $50,000 to Turning Point Action and $1.9 million to the Rule of Law Defense Fund from 2013 to 2019, according to OpenSecrets review of its tax records. And it gave millions more to the affiliated Republican Attorneys General Association.

Trump campaign officials roles in organizing the protests on Jan. 6 only add to the opacity.

Wren made at least $170,000 from Trumps political operation during the 2020 election cycle for her work as the campaigns national finance consultant with the joint fundraising committee. In total, Trumps political operation reported paying more than $4.3 million to people and firms that organized the Jan. 6 rally since the start of the 2020 election.

Megan Powers, Justin Caporale, Maggie Mulvaney, Tim Unes and Wren organizers of the rally who were paid by Trump s political operation have all been subpoenaed by the House select committee.

Trumps 2020 campaign and joint fundraising committee, the Trump Make America Great Again Committee, funneled another $771 million in payments through American Made Media Consultants LLC during the 2020 election cycle. The joint fundraising committee steered about $685,000 through the LLC in 2021 with around a third of that going to text messaging on Jan. 6.

But since the Trump campaign did not disclose details of payments AMMC LLC made to subcontractors, the full roster of people working for Trumps campaign and the amount of money that changed hands remains hidden from the public.

Support Accountability Journalism

At OpenSecrets.org we offer in-depth, money-in-politics stories in the public interest. Whether youre reading about 2020 presidential fundraising, conflicts of interest or dark money influence, we produce this content with a small, but dedicated team. Every donation we receive from users like you goes directly into promoting high-quality data analysis and investigative journalism that you can trust. Please support our work and keep this resource free. Thank you.

Anna is OpenSecrets' investigative researcher. She researches foreign influence as part of the Foreign Lobby Watch Project, tracks political ad data, and investigates "dark money." She holds degrees in political science and psychology from North Carolina State University and a J.D. from the University of the District of Columbia School of Law.

Link:
Details of the money behind Jan. 6 protests continue to emerge - Center for Responsive Politics

The question Im hearing over and over from residents and business owners alike is Why? said Montgomery County Commissioner Precinct 3 James Noack, a conservative who lives in The Woodlands and opposes incorporation, on Friday. Why would we want to do this in the first place? Who wants this?

Supporters of the ballot measure include several township board members, including longtime chairman Gordy Bunch, as well as the Texas Patriots PAC, the tea party organization for Montgomery County and north Houston.

An array of business, political, and civic leaders have come out against the measure, including Noack; The Woodlands Chamber of Commerce; the Montgomery County Hispanic Chamber; the Howard Hughes Corp., which acquired The Woodlands Development Co. a decade ago and owns much of the undeveloped land; U.S. Rep. Kevin Brady, a Republican; and Georges Coffee Club, a civic group named for George Mitchell, the billionaire, oilman and visionary who founded the township in 1974.

The civic group noted that it doesnt make public statements on political matters, but had to make an exception in this case.

In this unique situation the vast majority of club members feel so strongly that there simply are too many unanswered questions at this point in time to support incorporation now, the members explained in a statement.

Caught in between these unusual coalitions are the voters of The Woodlands, who have been blanketed with slickly produced flyers arguing against incorporation. Many remain confused by the question and the fact that its being posed right now in an off-year, during a pandemic, and in response to a problem that may exist, but hasnt been specified, exactly.

On HoustonChronicle.com: Should The Woodlands become a city? Voters will decide on Nov. 2

Incorporation held a lot of appeal for years to township residents, especially after the city of Houston swooped in and annexed Kingwood 25 years ago. The reasoning was that incorporation would serve as a bulwark against annexation by Houston, 30 miles to the south, or Conroe, to the north. But that threat has been allayed by agreements with both of those cities, as well as laws passed by the Republican-controlled Texas Legislature that basically say no community read, The Woodlands can be annexed without the consent of its residents.

Proponents of incorporation say that annexation is not the issue anyway. They argue this is about local control in the face of ongoing development that could fundamentally change the nature of the community, which the Chronicle described in 2014 as a meticulously planned community nestled in pine trees that's part well-kept neighborhoods and part gleaming skyscrapers. It boasts an outdoor performing arts center, a thriving Market Street shopping district and man-made canals.

The Township cant address these threats, but the City of The Woodlands can, says the Texas Patriots PAC on its website.

And, in its telling, incorporation wouldnt cost residents a thing: rather than contracting with Montgomery and Harris Counties for core services such as law enforcement and road maintenance, the new city could simply pay for those things itself, without higher taxes (a companion ballot measure would set a maximum property tax rate of 22.31 cents per $100 of valuation).

If Woodlands residents vote to become a city, taxes wont go up and government wont grow, asserted Dr. Shelly Sekula-Gibbs, a township board member who supports incorporation, in a September letter to residents. She also said the move would give residents more control over roads and development and prevent clear-cutting of trees.

COVID-19 funds have also become an issue. In June, the township board hired a $50,000-a-month lobbying firm, based in Washington, D.C., to make the case for federal COVID relief funds after failing to secure them from the county or the state. Bunch has argued that The Woodlands, given its population, would be due some $30 million under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, if it were a city.

Since The Woodlands is not currently a city, its hard to assess the claims made by proponents. But by the same token, theres reason to be skeptical of the rosy picture theyre painting

Township directors are elected, just as mayors and city council members are in regular cities. And they do have the capacity to rein in development, in theory. If theyve instead issued variances that have enabled overbuilding, thats a reason to oust them, not scrap the townships governing structure.

And consider the COVID funds. Bunchs argument is reasonable enough, but at odds with other recent developments in the region. Houston is a city, for example, and we arent getting a nickel of federal Harvey relief funds under the plan put forth by the states General Land Office. Seriously, not even a cent! Just because youre a city, in other words, doesnt mean you always get your way especially with a Texas governor and legislature eager to wrest control of decisions from local leaders.

Its easy to see why so many disparate groups have come out against incorporation. The process would be disruptive. It would likely involve new costs for residents, depending on which study you believe and in the event of dueling studies, taxpayers should keep in mind that nothing is free. And once incorporated, The Woodlands would remain a city, rather than the unique township it is today.

The Chamber considers that this is not the best time for The Woodlands to take a step from which it will not then be able to retreat, the Montgomery County Hispanic Chamber said in a statement.

Incorporation advocates shouldnt feel overly optimistic heading into Tuesdays election, given that many voters are unclear on what the benefits of incorporating would be.

And voters who are understandably confused by the case for incorporation should consider that to be a mark against the idea. As it stands, advocates for incorporation havent made a clear case. If thats indeed the best path forward for The Woodlands, its an idea that should be put to voters during an even-numbered election year, after a thorough debate.

erica.grieder@chron.com

Read the original:
Advocates for incorporating The Woodlands haven't made their case - Houston Chronicle

Friday, October 29, 2021

View Larger +

UVA Political Science Chair Jennifer Lawless

As far as the infrastructure bill and the reconciliation bill are concernedI do think theres a general sense now that theres a framework that will pass this week. We know theres bipartisan support for the infrastructure bill it now seems for the social spending bill, everything that Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema wanted out is out and theres enough left for the progressives in the House to get on board, said Lawless.

No one likes the way the sausage is made at the end of the day, we have almost two trillion dollars in additional social spending which should make most Democrats happy. The process certainly revealed some problems in the Democratic Party," she added.

Lawless compared the infighting among the Democrats to a rift among the GOP more than a decade ago but said that the Republicans' internal dynamics then still did not come close to the Democrats issues today.

I think the closest recent example is when all the Tea Party members got elected in 2010 and they basically decided to form their own caucus in the House and made John Boehners life completely impossible. They were civil Libertarians on a lot of issues, which made it difficult renewing pieces of the Patriot Act and other privacy protections that were going up against national security concerns, she said. But certainly in recent history, this is the most egregious in terms of one party not being able to get itself on the same page.

Some of the items that were on the cutting room floor, are things quite frankly Im shocked the progressives were willing to give up I get its important to pass the bill and they have no choice, but the bill doesnt include paid family or medical leave, which was not only a centerpiece of Bidens campaign but something that the House under Democratic leadership has been pushing now for well over a decade, said Lawless.

Go here to see the original:
Lawless: Shocked at What Progressives Were Willing to Give Up - GoLocalProv