Archive for David Shuster

Pres. Obama's birth certificate vs. Mitt Romney's tax returns... and voter fraud?

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

David Shuster:

Yes, one is a constitutional requirement, one isn't. But the point is a moral one, not a legal one. The president did eventually respond to the utterly ridiculous requests to prove his citizenship even though he didn't need to, but he did so because the issue became a major distraction. The state of Hawaii had already vouched for him, he was vetted thoroughly, but that wasn't good enough for the birthers, so the president said, fine, okay, here's proof.

But unlike his own father George Romney, who disclosed 12 years of his tax returns in his failed 1968 White House bid, Willard Romney will not disclose his tax returns and seems to be hiding something. If he isn't, then what's the problem? And what could he be hiding? Brad Friedman thinks it might be voter fraud.

Speaking of "show me your papers" Mitt? How about that SB 1070 law you like so much!

UPDATE with a "seriously, Lindsey Graham?" added: Romney Surrogate: ‘It’s Really American To Avoid Paying Taxes’

Just for fun, let's compare and contrast Romney to everyone else. Source: TaxHistory.org:

Since the early 1970s, however, most presidents have chosen to release their returns publicly. In the hope of making this information more widely available, the Tax History Project at Tax Analysts has compiled an archive of presidential tax returns.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Video- David Shuster Schools WaPo's Rubin Over Media Bias

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Every show. Every day. They bloviate, we hit 'em back with facts. That is the way to argue with the wingers. Via the gods at Mediaite.

** Sorry, I screwed up, she's with Washington Post.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

WI Gov. Scott Walker denies being target of investigation. "But that's not quite true. In fact, it's a pretty galling lie."

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

(David Shuster recaps WalkerGate on the Young Turks. Via Crooks & Liars)

Scotty Walker has been in denial about the legal hot water he's in, saying that he's not a target of any investigation, and that we'll all find out what a stellar guy he really is when he's cleared. Capper, over at Cognitive Dissidence, thinks otherwise (Please follow the link, because his post is chock full o' great information):

But that's not quite true.  In fact, it's a pretty galling lie.

There is a code that US Attorneys follow that requires them to provide a letter to a person stating that they are not the target of their investigation.  And word is, like they're supposed to, Walker's attorneys have been asking for such a letter for weeks.  And if Walker had such a letter, he would be free to produce it and remove any doubt about his innocence once and for all.

But Walker has produced no such letter, basically because none exists. [...]

By the way, there is also another code that forbids them from filing charges within sixty days of an election, so that there is no appearance of trying to influence said election.  I also learned that in these types of situations, it is common practice for the state, in this case DA John Chisholm, to defer to the DOJ, which is why he also hasn't filed charges against Walker yet. [...]

From what I understand, the charges will be more along the lines of mail and wire fraud and the such.

I also learned that, despite what my friend, H. Nelson Goodson at the Hispanic News Network, insists upon, at the stage their in, any indictments won't be for weeks or even months, if they choose to try him at all on the federal level.

And then Capper goes on to say that there's also a "Walkergate West" which he explains fully in his post.

He adds that "there is a very strong likelihood that Walker will be indicted on a federal and/or state level before the year's out," and "whether it's by recall or by indictment, the odds are pretty good that Walker won't complete a full term."

The problem with that is that Governor Rebecca "Minivan" Kleefisch would then be in charge.

And so we have the bottom line: Wisconsinites, please vote for Tom Barrett, because if Walker wins, so does Kleefisch, and that would be catastrophic.

Here's how those in Wisconsin can help other voters (free cab rides to polls June 5th in Madison, WI).

Bonus link: Wisconsin Democrats Call on Scott Walker to Produce Exoneration Evidence

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

AUDIO: David Shuster on “The Fox Effect: How Roger Ailes Turned a Network into a Propaganda Machine”

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Via.

How I adore the Shuster.

I'm so proud to be a part of the We Act team as a regular on two We Act Radio shows, Nicole Sandler's and Angie Coiro's In Deep.

We Act Radio's Facebook page is here. Please show your support for this brand new Progressive effort by listening and "liking". We need to get our voices out there.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare