Leaked Emails Prove Obama DOJ Funneled ‘Slush Fund’ Money To Leftist Groups

Leaked Emails Prove Obama DOJ Funneled ‘Slush Fund’ Money To Leftist Groups

The Justice Department under President Obama funneled ‘slush fund’ money to left-leaning activist groups, leaked documents show. “The DOJ settlement program has come under fire by a number of critics who refer to it as a “slush fund” that allows money to be funneled to third-party activist groups,” writes Joe Schoffstall of the Washington Free Beacon. 

Washington Free Beacon reports:

The practice in question began in August 2014 when the Justice Department entered into a $17-billion settlement with Bank of America for selling residential mortgage-backed securities leading up to the 2008 financial collapse. Similar arrangements were made with J.P Morgan Chase and Citigroup that brought the total amount to $36.65 billion.


Approved nonprofits included groups such as UnidosUS (formerly the National Council of La Raza), NeighborWorks America, and the National Urban League, which gives grants to left-leaning community organizing groups.

The documents obtained by the Free Beacon show that individuals in the Justice Department sought to route money to allied groups while excluding conservative groups.

“I’m sorry to be a pest. We keep tinkering with the settlement agreement and I want to make sure we are doing it right,” Elizabeth Taylor, then the principal deputy associate attorney general, wrote in a November 6, 2013 email. “Can you explain to Tony the best way to allocate some money to an organization of our choosing?” she later added, referring to Associate Attorney General Tony West. (Emails are below)

Washington Free Beacon provides a transcript of an email, where Justice Department officials are mulling over potential groups to route money to — ‘Pacific Legal Foundation,’ was barred from receiving funds because it is a right-leaning organization specializing in  “property-rights free legal services.”

The email reads:

Got it. Ok, this will hopefully address the concerns we’d like to avert:

Donations to state-based Interest on Lawyers’ Trust Account (IOLTA) organizations (or other statewide bar-association affiliated intermediaries) that provide funds to legal aid organizations, to be used for foreclosure prevention legal assistance and community development legal assistance.

Concerns include: a.) not allowing Citi to pick a statewide intermediary like the Pacific Legal Foundation (does conservative property-rights free legal services) or a statewide pro bono entity (will conflict out of most meaningful legal aid) we are more likely to get the right result from a state bar association affiliated entity; b.) making sure that it’s legal assistance provided, not a scenario where the bank can direct IOLTA or other intermediary to give to even a legal aid organization but to do only housing counseling, for example, under the umbrella “foreclosure prevention assistance.” This get you closer?

The Justice Department announced over the summer that it will be ending an Obama/Holder-era slush fund that funded radical left-wing groups.

As TGP previously reported, the Obama administration funneled billions of dollars to activist organizations through a Department of Justice slush fund scheme, according to congressional investigators and the GOP was looking to eliminate it. Another win for Americans as Obama’s ‘legacy’ is erased and replaced with law and order.


As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to edit or remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. The same applies to trolling, the use of multiple aliases, or just generally being a jerk. Enforcement of this policy is at the sole discretion of the site administrators and repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without warning

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/SIPp5X

Trump Restarts Refugee Resettlement With ‘Enhanced Screening Measures’

President Donald Trump

President Donald Trump / Getty Images


The Trump administration announced Tuesday evening that it is restarting the resettlement of refugees in America following a months-long freeze that saw U.S. law enforcement and intelligence officials crafting a stricter vetting process to stop the flow of criminals and terrorists into America, according to senior administration officials.

The Department of Homeland Security, in conjunction with the State Department and Director of National Intelligence, announced a strict new set of vetting tools aimed at stopping refugees with criminal and terrorist histories from entering the United States, according to the officials.

However, after a 120-day review of U.S. security flaws, the administration has created a list of 11 high-risk countries that will undergo further vetting and security reviews. Officials would not name the countries included on that list, but described them as posing increased risk to America.

These “enhanced screening measures” will focus on raising security standards “across the board,” according to Trump administration officials.

The enhanced procedures come after years of criticism by lawmakers and security experts who blamed the Obama administration for making it easier for criminals and potential terrorists to enter the United States under cover as a refugee.

President Donald Trump campaigned on freezing the refugee program until U.S. authorities enhance screening methods.

The new vetting procedures come as the Trump administration restarts the refugee resettlement program, which will be subject to increased security protocols.

Trump’s original executive order mandated the U.S. government assess, review, and update its vetting procedures.

Platforms such as social media and classified databases will now be used to vet individuals to determine the accuracy of their refugee claims.

While administration officials would not discuss in-depth the enhanced procedures out of concerns about the sensitivity of these new measures, officials told reporters that new biographic security checks will go into action.

This is meant to further determine the veracity of claims made by those applying for refugee status to the United States

Additionally, new fraud detection officers will be deployed overseas to assist those officials already vetting individuals.

Officials are making it a priority to crackdown on drug offenders, human traffickers, smugglers, and those tied to terror organizations and movements.

“It’s not in our interest to bring people into our country with views hostile to the United States,” said one senior administration official, who said these types of individuals likely would not pass revamped security procedures.

An additional 90-day review of the 11 countries deemed particularly hostile to the United States will now be carried out. Individuals from these countries seeking to enter the United States will be forced to clear even stricter hurdles to be granted entrance to America, including having to prove their admission is in the interests of the United States.

The additional review will focus on addressing the threat of these 11 nationalities, according to officials.

via Washington Free Beacon

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://freebeacon.com

GOP Congress Pushing Hard Against U.N. Denying Jewish And Christian Roots In Jerusalem

On October 12, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) introduced a resolution in the House that affirmed the historical connection of the Jewish people to the ancient and sacred city of Jerusalem. The resolution also condemned efforts at the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) to deny Judaism’s millennia-old historical, religious, and cultural ties to Jerusalem.

Four days later, on October 16, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) introduced a resolution with the exact same wording.

Those resolutions were buttressed by recent discoveries by the ongoing archaeological discoveries from the City of David. Those have included dozen of seals and seal impressions from the First Temple period, many with biblical-type names in ancient Hebrew text, that have been found in 2017.

In May 2017, the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) and Nature and Parks Authority announced that they had discovered arrowheads and stone ballista telling the story of the last battle between Roman forces and the Jews fighting against them in the last fight before the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans.

In addition, in October 2016, the very same day that UNESCO ratified a resolution that ignored Jewish and Christian ties to the Temple Mount, an announcement was made that a papyrus was found that dates back to the First Temple period, when the temple was build by King Solomon. The papyrus predates the famous Dead Sea Scrolls by centuries.

UNESCO’s nefarious campaign to separate Jews and Christians’ historical connection to Jerusalem is foundering on the shoals of the facts.

via Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/1TJbF1r

Protecting American Consumers: Why Trump And The Senate Should Restrict The CFPB

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau announced a new rule in July that heavily restricts arbitration clauses, and opens companies to more frivolous class action lawsuits. This new rule, passed under the guise of consumer protection, is not just anti-consumer — it will make the elite class of trial lawyers even richer off the backs of consumers.

In typical fashion, Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and Elizabeth Warren claim that Republicans are anti-consumer and are only on the side of big banks. Maxine Waters, the Ranking Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, went so far as to say that “it is outrageous that Republicans are trying to nullify the rule to the detriment of consumers. Republicans should think twice before taking away consumers’ rights to be heard in a court of law.”

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Under this new rule, the only people who will truly be “heard” in a court of law are the already powerful trial lawyers who have made billions of dollars from class action lawsuits. Republicans are against this bill because it not only hurts consumers by passing on higher costs to them, it empowers lawyers to line their pockets with millions of dollars while class action participants are left to pick up the scraps.

Mandatory Arbitration clauses are beneficial to consumers because they give them a low-cost alternative to resolve disputes with lenders and banks. Consider this: The CFPB’s own study on arbitration concluded that on average, consumers receive more than $5000 through arbitration hearings, as opposed to roughly $32 through class-action litigation — if they even have the chance to get anything at all.

Litigating class action lawsuits has become an entire industry unto itself. According to Forbes, “for practical purposes, counsel for plaintiffs (and for defendants) are frequently the only real beneficiaries of the class actions. When consumer class actions do settle, lawyers usually negotiate a deal that pays them and their named plaintiffs well, but delivers little to nothing to their other clients.”

It’s no wonder that we see commercials daily advertising class action lawsuits. The only reason law firms can afford millions in national TV advertising is because they make even more off of the lawsuits, and end up passing the litigation costs off to the consumers.

Luckily, under the Congressional Review Act, a bipartisan bill signed by President Clinton in 1996, Congress has the power to nullify rulings by government agencies within 60 days of the rule’s passage. It even goes one step further, and prevents any government agency from issuing the rule again. This law has already been used to retract several Obama-era regulations, and should be used again in this case to protect consumers.

The House recently voted 231-190 to repeal the controversial ruling, with the bill currently awaiting a vote in the Senate. President Trump has indicated his strong support for the bill, and has promised to sign it once passed by the Senate.

Like all government agencies, the CFPB has morphed from its original intention of protecting consumers to becoming an agency that fights for powerful interests under the guise of consumer protection. Restricting the powers of the CFPB to regulate arbitration clauses isn’t just smart policy, it’s a consumer-first policy. It’s critical that the Senate passes this bill, and President Trump signs it, for the good of the American people.

via Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/1TJbF1r

Cultural Marxism’s Indoctrination into Islam through Opera

Cultural Marxism's Indoctrination into Islam through Opera

The “enlightened” and multicultural” public from Cluj Napoca recently attended Karl Jenkins’ The Armed Man, a Mass for Peace, an “opera that included a Muslim muezzin chanting the call to prayer.” It was a thinly-veiled attempt to force Romanians to accept the Cultural Marxism agenda of the European Union which is implemented through the heavy islamization of Europe’s population.

via CanadaFreePress.Com

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/11sy9G3

Oh yes, Frederica Wilson is lying

Frederica Wilson is lying
Did Donald Trump really insult the family of fallen Sergeant La David Johnson? Did he really say “he knew what he signed up for” in an insulting and dismissive way? Did he really offend the family with his callous attitude and behavior when he called to ostensibly offer condolences?

via CanadaFreePress.Com

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/11sy9G3

It’s Obama’s fault American soldiers died in Niger

It’s Obama’s fault American soldiers died in NigerCongresswoman Frederica Wilson has come up with a new gimmick for getting invited on CNN. After exploiting the death of one soldier killed in an attack in Niger, she decided that if exploiting one soldier made her famous, exploiting the deaths of all the soldiers would make her even more famous.

via CanadaFreePress.Com

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/11sy9G3

E-Verify off the table in Senate DREAM negotiations — thanks to the GOP

How should we apportion blame on this one? Show of hands: Does anyone think Pelosi and Schumer would agree to an enforcement measure as useful as E-Verify for an amnesty as limited as a DREAM bill? E-Verify won’t be put on the table by Democrats unless and until a mass amnesty for all adult illegals is on the table too. There’s no point in the GOP insisting on a demand they know the other party won’t accept if they’re serious about getting a deal done. A “minor” amnesty gets only “minor” enforcement improvements in return.

On the other hand, show of hands: Does anyone believe Senate Republicans are eager to expand E-Verify? If Pelosi and Schumer turned around tomorrow and said they’re open to including that in a DREAM deal, the Chamber of Commerce and agricultural lobby would descend and demand a meeting with Mitch McConnell post haste. Democratic support for open borders remains the chief obstacle to immigration reform in the United States, but lord knows it ain’t the only obstacle.

[S]ome outlines of an agreement are becoming clearer. For instance, the [Republican] senators [working on a bill] have all but ruled out including a mandatory workplace verification system known as E-Verify in a final DACA agreement, according to multiple lawmakers engaged in the talks…

Several of the GOP senators involved in the immigration discussions are fine with punting negotiations over a nationwide mandatory E-Verify system, particularly since Democrats will not accept any policy provision that will help identify other immigrants here illegally…

“There are large segments of some important sectors, like agriculture, where we need to do E-Verify with immigration reform to make sure that there’s an adequate legal workforce,” Cornyn said. “And if we start adding too much stuff to the DACA-border security approach, then we get back into comprehensive immigration reform and nothing happens.”

Instead of E-Verify they’re going to try to get a “down payment” on ending chain migration by barring newly legalized DREAMers from bringing their relatives to the United States too — at least until they’re naturalized. How that ends chain migration rather than simply delays it by a few years, I don’t know. It’s going to make the bill exceptionally difficult to sell to populists. If they’re essentially signing off on turning a DREAM amnesty into a mass amnesty, albeit with a delay of a decade or so before the “mass” part fully begins, why shouldn’t Republicans insist on E-Verify as the price?

In a piece endorsed by Steve Bannon, Andrew Sullivan weighs the electoral consequences of Democrats’ increasingly fanatic pandering to illegal immigration activists. Lotta truth to what he says here, but it comes with the caveat that weak bipartisan immigration deals redound to the GOP’s disadvantage too. The public writ large will view them as being as soft on illegals as Democrats are, undermining the restrictionist argument for preferring the GOP. And right-wing populists, ever exasperated on this subject, will turn to populists even more loose-cannon than Trump to enforce the borders. Sullivan:

The Democrats’ current position seems to be that the Dreamer parents who broke the law are near heroes, indistinguishable from the children they brought with them; and their rhetoric is very hard to distinguish, certainly for most swing voters, from a belief in open borders. In fact, the Democrats increasingly seem to suggest that any kind of distinction between citizens and noncitizens is somehow racist. You could see this at the last convention, when an entire evening was dedicated to Latinos, illegal and legal, as if the rule of law were largely irrelevant. Hence the euphemism “undocumented” rather than “illegal.” So the stage was built, lit, and set for Trump.

He still tragically owns that stage. What Merkel did for the AfD, the Democrats are in danger of doing for the Trump wing of the GOP. The most powerful thing Trump said in the campaign, I’d argue, was: “If you don’t have borders, you don’t have a country.” And the Democrats had no answer, something that millions of Americans immediately saw. They still formally favor enforcement of immigration laws, but rhetorically, they keep signaling the opposite. Here is Dylan Matthews, also in Vox, expressing the emerging liberal consensus: “Personally, I think any center-left party worth its salt has to be deeply committed to egalitarianism, not just for people born in the U.S. but for everyone … It means treating people born outside the U.S. as equals … And it means a strong presumption in favor of open immigration.” Here’s Zack Beauchamp, a liberal friend of mine: “What if I told you that immigration restrictionism is and always has been racist?” Borders themselves are racist? Seriously?

Seriously. The dilemma for Republicans now is that Washington is already so distrusted on immigration that even a good deal with real enforcement improvements will spook border hawks, who’ll be convinced that Democrats will water it down or blow it up entirely once they have the power to do so. If they do, both parties will end up being blamed despite the fact that it was the Dems’ handiwork: Republicans will be attacked by the right for having gotten rolled on the deal, having failed to accelerate implementation of the new security measures before the left could block them, and so on. Trust will erode further. Populists will get more desperate and more radical. Even a “minor” amnesty could have major repercussions.

The post E-Verify off the table in Senate DREAM negotiations — thanks to the GOP appeared first on Hot Air.

via Hot Air

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://hotair.com

‘Sheer BS’: Ben Shapiro blasts Jeff Flake in scathing twitter critique

Conservative activist Ben Shapiro criticized Republican Arizona Senator Jeff Flake in a scathing series of tweets Tuesday over his supposed reasons for not seeking re-election.

Flake had announced earlier that he would not seek re-election, and blamed the “flagrant disregard of truth” of the Trump age.

“Flake blaming his fall on Trump and the supposed inability of the base to support good people is disingenuous and cynical,” Shapiro tweeted.

“Flake was deeply unpopular for years and was going to lose,” he added. “Not because of Trump. Because he broke faith with his base.”

“Blaming Trump and Trump voters is a way of playing hero while quitting because he was going to lose,” he continued.

“The media will eat it up because anyone who badmouths Trump (and I agree with many Flake critiques) becomes a tragic hero,” he added.

“Trump is happy to play into that story because it makes him look powerful,” he continued. “Flake wants to play tragic hero. Media love the conflict.”

“He is the president and a vehicle for the base’s anger and desire to stop Democrats,” Shapiro concluded. “Good people can still be elected.”

Flake had been a vocal critic of Trump, and cited him as a main reason why he couldn’t maintain his office.

“We must never meekly accept the daily sundering of our country,” Flake said Tuesday on the Senate floor, “the personal attacks, the threats against principles, freedoms, and institutions, the flagrant disregard for truth or decency, the reckless provocations, most often for the pettiest and most personal reasons, reasons having nothing whatsoever to do with the fortunes of the people that we have all been elected to serve.”

via TheBlaze.com – Stories

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.theblaze.com

1.5 Million People off Food Stamps Since Trump Took Office

One of the many criticisms against former President Barack Obama was the astonishing number of Americans enrolled on food stamps or other forms of welfare assistance while his “non-recovery” economy sputtered along for eight years.

But Breitbart just reported that, within five months of President Donald Trump taking office, food stamp enrollment had dropped significantly, by nearly 1.5 million people or about 3.5 percent.

That revelation came from numbers recently released by the U.S. Department of Agriculture regarding the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, as the food stamp program is officially known.

Advertisement – story continues below

As of July 2017 — the latest numbers released — the number of Americans enrolled in the program was 41,203,721. That’s down from January 2017, when enrollment was at 42,689,768. In July 2016, the number was reported as 43,334,443, meaning food stamp rolls had dropped by more than 2 million enrollees in one year.

It is worth noting that, while the overall downward trend in enrollment is expected to continue, it is nevertheless thought that there will be a spike in reported enrollment numbers over the course of August and September, owing to a temporary increase in the need for government assistance for some residents of Texas and Florida in the aftermath of Hurricanes Harvey and Irma.

To be sure, some of the drop in SNAP enrollment could be attributed to a swiftly improving economy and falling unemployment rate, but it is suspected that Trump’s proposed policies to get Americans off of food stamps may already be having an effect as well.

Advertisement – story continues below

Politico reported in May that Trump’s proposed budget called for cutting SNAP funding by roughly 25 percent, along with a strengthening of work requirements for able-bodied recipients and a strong encouragement for states to match their portion of food stamp funding by 20 percent.

Of course, liberals decried the proposal as a heartless gutting of the “social safety net” that millions of Americans rely upon, but that simply isn’t the case.

“We believe in the social safety net,” Mick Mulvaney, director of the Office of Management and Budget, explained to reporters at the time. “It helps us get to 3 percent (economic) growth, because having a social safety net gives people the confidence to take a gamble and fail and know they won’t be completely wiped out.

Advertisement – story continues below

“What we’ve done is not to try and remove the social safety net from folks who need it, but to try to figure out if there are people who don’t need it and get them back into the workforce,” he added.

Many states had already implemented tougher work requirements for food stamp recipients, as well as limits to how long they could continue receiving benefits, and Breitbart reported that some 42 of 50 states had seen a drop in enrollment thus far this year.

The number of enrollees should only continue to drop as Trump’s policies are further implemented and the economy continues to pick up the pace, sparking job and wage growth that will allow many Americans to enter or improve their position in the job market and no longer need government assistance.

H/T Newsmax

Advertisement – story continues below

Please share this on Facebook and Twitter so everyone can see what has happened to food stamp enrollment since Trump took office.

What do you think of the drop in food stamp enrollment since Trump took office? Scroll down to comment below!

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/2gEOIzE