May 24, 2013 | 6 comments
May 24, 2013 | 4 comments
May 23, 2013 | 3 comments
May 23, 2013 | 5 comments
May 22, 2013 | 4 comments
Thomas Perez, Assistant Attorney General of the United States, is one of the most destructive forces against the rule of law in our nation, including being the man responsible for the DoJ dropping charges against the New Black Panthers for voter intimidation in Philadelphia during the last presidential election. (If you want to understand more about just how bad this man is, read “Injustice” by Christian Adams.)
Perez appeared before the House of Representatives Subcommittee on the Constitution (glad to know we have one of those!) which is a subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee. Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) chairs that committee, and the congressman posted a clip of the questioning to his YouTube page with the following introduction:
In a Constitution Subcommittee hearing yesterday, Congressman Trent Franks (AZ-02) questioned Assistant Attorney General, Thomas Perez, over the Administration’s commitment to 1st Amendment rights. Franks’ questions were prompted by a Daily Caller article from late last year in which Perez was quoted as warmly embracing the proposals of Islamist advocates in a meeting at George Washington University, among them a request for “a legal declaration that U.S. citizens’ criticism of Islam constitutes racial discrimination.”
Perez’s refusal to answer Franks’ question suggests a further dangerous inroad by Islamists into the policy-making of this administration (by which I do not mean that Perez is a Muslim, but rather that he is sympathetic to any force, such as Islam, which runs counter to the rule of law in this country.)
One has to wonder whether the rational questions by Rep. Michele Bachmann and others — despite the weak-kneed response of Republican “leaders” like John McCain — about the infiltration of Islamists into the Obama administration (and to be sure the reprehensible smiling photos of prior presidents with some terrible characters) will become a campaign issue.
Frank Gaffney has put together an online course about “The Muslim Brotherhood in America” which contains more than its fair share of eye-opening information (and rather dramatic music), though I have no easy way to validate what is true and what isn’t…particularly when it comes to the ongoing fued between Mr. Gaffney and Grover Norqust, president of Americans for Tax Reform, known best to Americans as a champion for low taxes. Chapter 8 in particular relates to Islamists and the Obama administration.
Discussion of Huma Abedin, the key advisor to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who has become such a big part of the Bachmann-initiated discussion in DC, begins at 6:55 of Chapter 8. To be sure, essentially all of the questions about Ms. Abedin relate to her family ties to radical Islam. While there is little evidence about Huma Abedin directly, it is nevertheless reasonable to wonder whether a child is likely to be very different from her parents and other family members when it comes to political views. It is also reasonable to wonder whether a hard-core Islamists, as some are suggesting Huma Abedin might be based on her family and other associations, would marry a Jew as Ms. Abedin did…though her particular choice of husband (former Congressman Anthony Weiner) might add to questions of her judgment.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
H/T to National Review Online