Warning: session_start() [function.session-start]: open(/home/content/13/4270213/tmp/sess_s5f8kjgqt4k0nod91k7uhu7k36, O_RDWR) failed: No such file or directory (2) in /home/content/13/4270213/html/blog/wp-content/plugins/counterize/counterize.php on line 16

Warning: session_start() [function.session-start]: Cannot send session cookie - headers already sent by (output started at /home/content/13/4270213/html/blog/wp-content/plugins/counterize/counterize.php:16) in /home/content/13/4270213/html/blog/wp-content/plugins/counterize/counterize.php on line 16

Warning: session_start() [function.session-start]: Cannot send session cache limiter - headers already sent (output started at /home/content/13/4270213/html/blog/wp-content/plugins/counterize/counterize.php:16) in /home/content/13/4270213/html/blog/wp-content/plugins/counterize/counterize.php on line 16
Investigators Become Lapdogs? | The Rough Cut

by David Phinney
Saturday August 19th 2017

Insider

Archives

Investigators Become Lapdogs?

Surveying the federal government’s Inspector General system, an independent practice of checks and balances within the federal government, Rolling Stone suggests that President bush has turned watchdogs into lapdogs:

The administration is more interested in turning the watchdogs into lap dogs. Just as he politicized every other facet of government from FEMA to the Farm Bureau, President Bush has ignored the law and stocked the inspector general posts with inexperienced cronies.

Here’s the story.

Share

Reader Feedback

One Response to “Investigators Become Lapdogs?”

  1. Joann says:

    John Podesta, Mark Heilprin, and George Soros are all part of Clinton’s circle, as FrontPage pitnos out.She’s a person, Jay, she’s allowed to have friends. And those friends are allowed to have jobs, etc. Somehow I think George Soros has better things to do like manage his multibillion-dollar investment group than take marching orders from Hillary Clinton.Now, that in itself isn’t enough, but when combined with the way that MM conveniently seems to attack those who say anything unkind about the Clinton campaignWell, but look. Firstly, Media Matters isn’t attacking people for saying negative things about Hillary Clinton. If they were we’d at the very least never see pieces defending Obama and Edwards which we do or we’d see pieces attacking them which we don’t. Hillary has far more to fear from her two main Democratic challengers, including the one beating her in fundraising, than from any of the Republicans. So if Media Matters was shilling for Clinton, they have a funny way of doing it.Secondly the people who would tend to be saying negative things about Clinton are media conservatives anyway, so naturally they’re saying things that Media Matters finds objectionable. As I told you before they don’t hide the fact that they’re progressive. It’s true that Media Matters highlights people who are saying false things about Hillary Clinton but she’s a progressive political candidate, and pointing out those things falls within their stated mission.The idea that they’re taking marching orders from Hillary just doesn’t make any sense, considering how often they’re defending Edwards and Obama from attacks, too.Imus sure as hell wasn’t a Republican. So he was neither Democrat nor Republican just a guy that liked to shoot his mouth off and say stupid things. What’s the issue, here? If you look at their page on Imus, there’s far more about his Rutgers Basketball team remarks than about anything he’s ever said about Hillary. The idea that Hillary sent her Media Matters attack dogs after ol’ Don might play well on Red State, but it doesn’t seem to be supported by any evidence.MM just so happens to have been the one flogging the Imus comments. They’d been keeping tabs on him for a while. It’s what they do.They have filed as a 501(c)(3), but they constantly skirt the edge of what a 501(c)(3) can legally do.That’s your opinion, but again, I don’t see it supported with any evidence. The requirements for 501(c)(3) status are quite clear and they clearly fall within them. 501(c)(3) isn’t just for conservatives, you know, but that appears to be your main objection to Media Matters.Furthermore, their funding sources indicate close political ties to the Clinton campaign and other 527 groups and they act in a coordinated manner with those groups — which a 501(c)(3) can’t do.They do get to be funded, Jay, by anybody who chooses to cut them a check. That’s entirely within the bounds of the 501(c)(3) statute. It should hardly be surprising that someone who donates to Media Matters goes on to donate to other progressive organizations. I don’t see how it even skirts the letter of the law.But they’re shielding themselves as a non-profit charity while engaging in political activism, which is at the very least improper.What activism? Do they lobby? No. Do they contribute? No. They’re not involved in any election campaign or if they are, you certainly haven’t shown any evidence of it.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.




Warning: Unknown: open(/home/content/13/4270213/tmp/sess_s5f8kjgqt4k0nod91k7uhu7k36, O_RDWR) failed: No such file or directory (2) in Unknown on line 0

Warning: Unknown: Failed to write session data (files). Please verify that the current setting of session.save_path is correct () in Unknown on line 0