Acting Attorney General Whitakre

[psiberzerker]

No one should be surprised that she has a point of view, as do we all.

Yes, but journalists like her also attack the opposite opinion (Also, by "Like her" I don't mean it's exclusive to Breitbart)  For exactly the same thing, that's what "Fake News," and it's older sister "Mainstream Media" mean.  They're biased, and just say X about whoever doesn't agree with them.

Sound familiar?  I wonder where you (Plural, everyone that uses the "Everyone that doesn't agree with you" argument against everyone that doesn't agree with you.  Not to mention everyone that tries to agree with you, or just have a calm discussion about interesting topics without it going straight into a fight.)  In journalism, there is a longstanding tradition of editorials being prominantly labeled as Editorials.  

So, it's not so much that she's opinionated, but that she misrepresents her opinions as Fact, and anyone else's opinions as biased "Fake News."  Yes, it's common in political commentary, but "She started it!" was a lame excuse in 2nd grade.  

I guess what I'm saying is that Brietbart has lower standards for factual reporting than what they serially call "Fake News."  It's politically correct, it's a euphemism that has no meaning, when it's use by people that routinely misrepresent opinion as fact.

[Jed_]

I hope Anne Coulter's observations and commentary help people think, sort out reality.

Um no, it has the opposite affect.  She’s the political commentary equivalent of being blind stupid drunk and extremely high on LSD.

[Athos_131]

Trump is such a fuck up he can't even obstruct justice properly.

Matthew Whitaker's Appointment as Acting Attorney General: Three Lingering Questions

Whitaker’s past statements and relationships might implicate at least two ethics regulations.

First, as recently highlighted here on Lawfare, the Justice Department regulation that lead to Attorney General Sessions’ recusal might (ironically) be implicated here as well. It provides that no employee “shall participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship” with “any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation or prosecution” or “any person or organization which he knows has a specific and substantial interest that would be directly affected by the outcome of the investigation or prosecution.”

Second, the Office of Government Ethics’ Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch has a catch-all provision that provides that a government employee “who is concerned that circumstances other than those specifically described . . . would raise a question regarding his impartiality” should seek formal ethics advice to determine whether he should or should not participate in a particular matter.

Without engaging in a full analysis of Whitaker’s recusal obligations, at a minimum it is clear that his past statements regarding the conduct of the special counsel’s investigation potentially “raise a question regarding his impartiality” under the catch-all provision that merits consultation with career Justice Department ethics officials. Likewise, his personal relationship with Clovis at a minimum raises questions that may implicate the department’s recusal provision. Whether he is obligated to recuse may turn on facts—such as the nature of his relationship with Clovis and whether Clovis is a witness, subject or target of the investigation—that are not publicly known. But the public facts make clear that Whitaker must consult with career department ethics officials regarding his participation in connection with the special counsel’s investigation before taking any steps to participate in that investigation. As highlighted here, Whitaker may also have other issues involving personal or political relationships that require ethics advice, depending on his relationship with Sessions and other potential witnesses to the special counsel investigation, as well as his past political activities.

#Resist

[psiberzerker]

Trump is such a fuck up he can't even obstruct justice properly.

 

[Katiebee]

Miss B, with the exception of Ben Carson and Betsy DeVoss, I will so stipulate.

[Athos_131]

Ryan Zinke?  Rick Perry?

#Resist

[Lois]

I heard that an appointment of an acting director, from outside the agency bypassing Rosenstein, without approval from the Senate could be problematic.

[Katiebee]

Ryan Zinke?  Rick Perry?

#Resist

They are competent, regardless of whether they are going to what their agencies are supposed to do.

[MissBarbara]

The kinds of people that consider Anne Coulter qualified for unbiased political commentary.

"unbiased political commentary" seems a oxymoron to me. I hope Anne Coulter's observations and commentary help people think, sort out reality.
No one should be surprised that she has a point of view, as do we all.

I agree with Joan (well, up to a point).

Expecting a partisan political commentator, no matter where on the political they fall, is frankly silly.

I don't read or follow Anne Coulter, but basing these observations on the Anne Coulter piece Joan posted about birthright citizenship, I'd deem that article very typical for this type of commentary, and, in context, relatively non-noteworthy.

Granted, as I noted in that thread, I disagreed with almost every single word in that opinion piece. Yet, I had no objection to the piece itself. It's partisan political commentary, written to make a point, and I had zero expectation of objectivity. Nor should it have been objective. As kids today like to say, "It is what it is."

Take a counter-example. Last week The New York Times, with perfect predictability, endorsed Andrew Cuomo in his run for re-election for Governor of New York. The editorial made him sound very much like Jesus. The only time it mentioned anything negative about Cuomo, it framed it as people's opinions about Cuomo, and they quickly shifted the blame to members of the State Assembly and State Senate (and, of course, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, whom the NYT had heartily endorsed last year).

The article was completely biased, and completely lacking in objectivity and non-partisan analysis. And, as much as I despise Cuomo, I didn't have the slightest problem with it, recognizing it for what it was.

[psiberzerker]

I guess i just resent that there's nothing BUT biased political commentary on right now.  Most of it revolves around the Cult of Personality, because our peerless leader is a Narcissist, but I would like just 1 reliable, dispassionate, factual source for what's really going on.  I'm just going to set my personal standard at "Less biased than Rachael Maddow."  She seems to be the closest to my probably unrealistic expectation for someone I can trust to cover both sides, and consider something other than their political Identity.

Basically, Identity Politics has consumed US, on both sides, to the point that it's not just accepted, it's Expected.  That didn't use to be the case, it's even infected the BBC now, when traditionally, they didn't have a horse in the race.  They just told it the way it really was, instead of filtered through the lens of who the Enemy is.

I just wish there was 1 Good example.  Instead of nothing but bad ones.

[Jed_]

In my 4-5 hour jaunt last night to take some things to my mom I passed through a small city in Virginia.  I stopped at a street light and observed a protest of about 50 people.  Curious of course, I read a few of the signs finding them all in support of Mueller completing his investigation.  Based on some reading I did this morning, it could be the protest was one of many across the country organized by MoveOn in the expectation I share that this Whitaker smuck is going to be the instrument by which Mueller is fired.

I believe we will have our Constitutional crisis.

[Athos_131]

Acting attorney general Whitaker fielded early fraud complaints from customers at patent company yet promoted it for years, records show

Internal Federal Trade Commission documents released Friday in response to a public records request reveal the extent of Whitaker’s support for World Patent Marketing, even amid a barrage of warnings about the company’s behavior.

The FTC eventually filed a complaint against World Patent Marketing, accusing it of cheating customers and falsely promising that it would help them patent and profit from their inventions, according to court filings. Some clients lost their life savings, the agency alleged.

In May of this year, a federal court in Florida ordered World Patent Marketing to pay a settlement of more than $25 million and close up shop, records show. The company did not admit or deny wrongdoing.

Whitaker, a former U.S. attorney, did little to assist the investigation. When the FTC subpoenaed for his records, he missed the deadline to reply. In a voice mail responding to follow-up calls from investigators, Whitaker said he was happy to cooperate and stressed an important role he had just assumed in Washington.

“I didn’t know that you had served a subpoena,” Whitaker said in his October 2017 message, released by the FTC Friday. “I am now at the Department of Justice here in Washington DC, as the chief of staff to the Attorney General, so I want to be very helpful.”

But Whitaker never provided any of his records, according to two people familiar with the investigation. He had told the FTC that most of his communications were privileged legal discussions because he provided legal advice to the company’s founder. He also said he had a minimal role at the company and “wouldn’t have personally ever said anything about the business,” according to an investigator’s notes.

A Whitaker spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, the ranking Democrat and future chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said the records show Whitaker was alerted early to the alleged fraud and should have taken action.

“These new documents suggest that Mr. Whitaker was personally aware of allegations of fraud by World Patent Marketing and its CEO at the same time he was receiving payments as a member of the Advisory Board,” Cummings said. “If true, this is extremely troubling and raises serious concerns about his fitness to serve as acting Attorney General and whether he was properly vetted for this critical position. “

The records show that Whitaker fielded angry complaints about World Patent Marketing, starting in April 2015. He appeared to forward them to company founder Scott Cooper without taking other action.

When a customer complained to Whitaker by voice mail on May 29, 2015, Whitaker forwarded the message to Cooper, writing: “Another WPM customer reaching out to me. FYI. I do not plan to call back unless you want me to. Thanks, WM.”

One September 2016 email from someone who said she was a customer sought Whitaker’s help.

“Dear Matthew, can you get a message to Scoot [sic] Cooper,” she asked. “You are on his advisory board but what you don’t know is how many people were scammed by him and how fraudulent they are and how much money they robbed from people. I am not happy and would love to meet him in person and show him how upset I am.

The writer ended by threatening physical violence against Cooper.

Whitaker passed along the complaint to Cooper, records show.

“Scott, Just forwarding this along,” Whitaker wrote. “I hope all is well. MGW”

Cooper viewed Whitaker’s former role as a U.S. attorney in Iowa as a major asset and sought to use his background to lend his company credibility, the records show.

In November 2014, Cooper wrote to a web designer, “Let’s build a Wikipedia page and use Whitaker to make it credible.”

Cooper hoped to broadcast ads featuring Whitaker on CNN, the records show. It’s unclear what happened to that plan, but Whitaker and Cooper discussed how much Whitaker should be paid for appearing in them.

“I do not have a dollar amount in mind,” Whitaker wrote to Cooper in December 2014. “What does talent of my type usually demand?”

Cooper repeatedly cited Whitaker’s prosecutor role in marketing material and in correspondence. In an August 14, 2015 email to a complainant, for example, Cooper wrote:

“I have copied my corporate counsel, Bernie Egozi, and former US Attorney Matthew G. Whitaker, who happens to sit on my board, in this email as I am frankly confused by your behavior and it sounds as though you are trying to blackmail me for something,” he wrote.

In December 2015, Cooper wrote to another complainant that he was copying Whitaker, and highlighting that he was “a board member and former U.S. attorney.” In the future, Cooper advised the complainant to “communicate directly with the two of us on this matter.”

FTC officials were taken aback when they heard Trump had named Whitaker acting attorney general four weeks ago and braced for press inquiries, internal records show.

At the same time, Justice Department and White House officials were surprised to learn of Whitaker’s participation in such a controversial company, according to people familiar with their reaction.

Whitaker’s selection for the staffer position was unusual. Sessions did not previously know Whitaker; he was recommended for the job by the White House, after coming to the attention of the president for his public comments on CNN blasting the special counsel investigation.

Cummings vowed a deeper probe.

“Unfortunately, these documents are incomplete, and do not show what actions Mr. Whitaker took after learning about these concerns,” he said. “Congress needs all of the documents to determine the full extent of Mr. Whitaker’s involvement with this company that deceived consumers and suppressed complaints.”

#Resist

[Katiebee]

Another one of “all the best people”.

[Athos_131]

Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker Incorrectly Claims Academic All-American Honors

#Resist

[psiberzerker]

Another one of “all the best people”.

Yeah, and for all the times I read the mantra "...anyone that doesn't agree with you." on these boards, I would have thought they'd notice the guy that systematically fires anyone that doesn't agree with him.

I'm guessing "The best people" means sycophants, like "Great again" means shutting down the government to save money for a wall to protect us from paying someone to mow our lawns.