50-year Congressman John Conyers not eligible for primary ballot?

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly
Election 2014

The road ahead looks a bit rocky for Conyers.

Interesting:

Detroit – Veteran U.S. Congressman John Conyers does not have enough signatures to get on the Aug. 5 primary ballot, according to Wayne County Clerk Cathy Garrett.

Garrett told Local 4 on Friday that the signatures of two of Conyers’ circulators appear to be invalid.

However, she said this is not the final decision on the issue. That will come by May 7, following an investigation into a formal challenge of Conyers’ signatures.

If he doesn’t get on the ballot, Conyers will have to run as a write-in candidate for his 26th term. The 84-year-old Detroit Democrat is coming up on 50 years in the U.S. House of Representatives.

He needed 1,000 valid voter signatures to get his name on the ballot.

On Wednesday, one of the Deputy Clerks, who did not want to appear on camera, told Local 4 Conyers qualified with 1,193 total signatures. Conyers put out a statement saying the Clerk’s Office verified his petitions.

“I am pleased that the County Clerk has determined that there are a sufficient number of signatures to allow my name to appear on the ballot in the upcoming August 5th primary election. I look forward to a full and robust campaign in the primary and general elections,” Conyers’ statement reads.

However, Conyers’ statement was premature as Garrett now says Conyers does not appear to have enough valid signatures on his nominating petitions.

Assuming he has to run as a write-in, expect the cries of raaaaaacism to commence.

Stay tuned, of course ….

#Benghazi: Boehner to appoint special investigating committee? UPDATE: Here we go

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

**Posted by Phineas

American Blood, US Consulate, Benghazi

American Blood, US Consulate, Benghazi

At last. Just posted on Fox News:

House Speaker John Boehner is “seriously considering” appointing a special committee to probe the Benghazi attacks and an announcement from GOP leaders could come as early as Friday, sources tell Fox News.

One senior GOP source told Fox News that Boehner, who has faced pressured from rank-and-file members for months to form such a panel, is expected to go forward with the committee.

It’s unclear whether the decision is yet final. Some sources told Fox News this is a “done deal,” while others said it is “close.”

The movement comes after newly released emails raised questions about the White House role in pushing faulty claims about the attacks.

For more about the emails in question and their significance, see….

This is one of those “about danged time” moments. What was probably the back-breaker for Boehner was the revelation that the White House had withheld this email when first demanded by the House, then released it only as part of a judicial decision in a FOIA lawsuit regarding Benghazi, and then claiming it really had nothing to do with Benghazi, even though it clearly did. (And why release it as part of the documents demanded in a Benghazi lawsuit, if it had “nothing to do with Benghazi, per se” and was previously classified? And why was it classified?) This just screams “something to hide.” which is like blood in the water to Opposition politicians.

Keep in mind there are really three parts, interrelated but distinct, to the “Benghazi question:”

  1. Prior to the attack: What was the role of then-Secretary Clinton, her top aides, and the State Department in determining the level of security in Benghazi, and why wasn’t the level or protection raised, or the compound evacuated, in the face of clear warning signs? Why were no emergency-reaction assets pre-positioned nearby to come to the aid of a station in a clearly dangerous area? Defense and the White House, too, have questions to answer here.
  2. During the attack: Where exactly were President Obama and Secretary Clinton, and when? Who was calling the shots? What actions, if any, did they take that night? Who made the decision not to even attempt a rescue with assets available in Sicily and Italy? (This last question was examined by the House Armed Services committee, which found no wrongdoing, but the testimony yesterday of General Robert Lovell (ret.), Deputy Director for Intelligence for Africom, the combat command responsible for Benghazi, makes it worth reopening.)
  3. After the attack: Who came up with the largely fraudulent story about a video? Why was it pushed on the American people for weeks after the massacre, including Secretary Clinton lying to the faces of the victims’ families? Why were the reports from State Department and CIA personnel on the ground in Libya that there was no anti-video demonstration ignored? My strong suspicion is that this was done to protect Obama’s reelection and Hillary’s 2016 prospects, but we need to know a lot more.

Clearly this committee would have a lot of work to do, much of it taking a lot of time. (Remember how long the Watergate hearings took?) Even if nothing criminal occurred, the American public has a right to a full public audit of the decisions and actions of its hired help before, during, and after the crisis.

Having raised the possibility, I can’t see Boehner not going through with this, which means we can expect some televised fireworks as witnesses are called under oath and House Democrats try desperately to protect the White House.

Stock up on the popcorn. smiley popcorn

RELATED: Earlier posts on the Benghazi massacre.

UPDATE: It’s on. Boehner will form the committee and Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) (1) is expected to lead it. Meanwhile, Issa’s House Oversight Committee has subpoenaed Secretary Kerry regarding the State Department withholding documents.

Footnote:
(1) Good choice.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

The maturity level & “professionalism” of the Obama admin in one quote

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly
Everything's a joke unless they declare otherwise. Official White House Photo by Pete Souza

Everything’s a joke unless they declare otherwise.
Official White House Photo by Pete Souza

I think this about sums up how “adult’ the “adults in charge” are at the White House:

Former White House spokesman Tommy Vietor, in a tense interview with Fox News’ Bret Baier, downplayed the revived controversy over the Benghazi talking points, saying he does not remember his own role in the editing process because: “Dude, this was like two years ago.”

Vietor, the former spokesman for the National Security Council, insisted on “Special Report with Bret Baier” Thursday that emails that link a White House adviser to former U.N. ambassador Susan Rice’s controversial Sunday show statements about the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate say nothing new.

The Obama administration has been under fire since the emails were released earlier this week, with some Republicans calling them the “smoking gun.” The emails indicate a White House aide helped prep Rice for her appearances and pushed the explanation that the attack was because of an Internet video. The White House is now facing credibility questions, since they had previously downplayed their role in Rice’s talking points.

Vietor repeated the stance of Press Secretary Jay Carney, who has repeatedly tried to claim that the so-called “prep call” with Rice — as it was described in one email — was not about Benghazi. Vietor said the email was referring to ongoing protests around the world against American embassies.

Baier then asked Vietor whether he personally changed the word “attack” to “demonstrations” in the talking points for Rice.

“Maybe, I don’t really remember,” Vietor said.

When pressed by Baier, Vietor said, “Dude, this was like two years ago. We’re still talking about the most mundane process.”

You can watch the video at Right Scoop.

Note to Vietor: Dude, like 4 American citizens including a US Ambassador were MURDERED in cold blood.  Doesn’t matter if it happened 20 years ago.  The American people – and the families of those killed especially – deserve answers.  And since when did this “it happened years ago” argument hold water for the left anyway? How many issues came up during the Bush administration that they’re still talking about  – and blaming him for – today? Always count on Democrats to out themselves as hypocrites. Never fails.

Yeah, I know Vietor isn’t in the administration anymore but he was at one time – and this is the mindset of Team Obama from the top down: “Beer Summits” are supposed to resolve decades old racial tensions that bubble to the surface thanks to the President inserting himself into a debate that he shouldn’t have, Presidential appearances on late night TV talk/entertainment shows are meant to showcase the “coolness” of the Commander in Chief, and when you can’t refute serious questions about a major policy issue seriously impacting voters, you puff out your bottom lip and essentially declare that although you don’t know the numbers on Obamacare – you also know that the numbers being given to you by the press aren’t correct, either.

Unfreakingreal. I sure as hell can’t wait for actual adults to be in charge of this country again. What an absolute disgrace.