There has been a good deal of discussion of late about whether or not the IRS should launch an investigation into Media Matters’ tax-exempt status. In today’s part two of a three part series from FOX Business’ Elizabeth MacDonald, details of the civilian complaint filed by C. Boyden Gray demonstrate why the former White House counsel to President George W. Bush believes that Media Matters should have its tax-exempt status yanked.

Citing a pattern of “unlawful conduct,” Gray writes in his petition, which FOX Business has obtained, that the nonprofit has “executed a partisan strategy” in violation of U.S. tax law as it exists “no longer to educate the public but, rather, to declare ‘war on FOX,’” Gray says, quoting from an interview its founder, David Brock, gave to the website Politico.

Also unlawful, Gray says, is the nonprofit’s reported goal to “disrupt” the commercial interests of News Corp. (News Corp. is the parent of FOX News and FOX Business.)

Read the whole article, Former White House Counsel to IRS: Pull Media Matters’ Tax-Exempt Status.

Among the activity noted in the complaint: (more…)

From Fox Business:

First of a three-part series

David Brock, chairman and chief executive of Media Matters for America, told a news website earlier this year that his nonprofit is now moving to “sabotage” FOX News because it says the network is now the “de facto head of the GOP,” among other things.

Anchors and guests appearing on FOX News have said because of such statements, the nonprofit is violating U.S. tax law.

There is no indication the IRS is auditing or probing Media Matters for these alleged violations.

However, interviews with current and former IRS officials, tax lawyers and tax experts, as well as a review of Media Matters’ IRS documents and its activities indicate the nonprofit has put its tax-exempt status in jeopardy for reasons beyond those allegations. (more…)

The slings and arrows of outrageous legislation, proposed and enacted, fly at you in fusillades from every direction. The enemy lurches towards you, massive, determined, unstoppable. The cavalry you expected to throw him back in confusion has decided to sit this one out. Betrayed, you’re on your own.

In this case, it is the National Rifle Association that has literally decided to sit this one out. After swearing that the freedom and right to bear arms is also dependent on the freedom of speech, it has decided to recuse itself from the First Amendment objections in exchange for a protected status. It will not oppose H.R. 1575, the Disclose Act, sponsored by Maryland Democrat Christopher Van Hollen. The purpose of this legislation is to counter the Supreme Court ruling in the Citizens United case, which freed corporations and non-profits from many of the restrictive speech provisions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act. It was a qualified victory for the First Amendment.

The NRA’s first obligation must be to its members and to its most ardent defense of firearms freedom for America’s lawful gun owners….The NRA will continue to fight for its right to speak out in defense of the Second Amendment. Any efforts to silence the political speech of NRA members will, as has been the case in the past, be met with strong opposition.

The rest of you can pound sand. (more…)

The “Cry Wolf” leader Professor Peter Dreier has a clear right to solicit all the biased, agenda-driven, fraudulent “research” he desires under the First Amendment of the Constitution he and his pals have so little regard for.  But his antics may not pass muster under another set of guidelines that he – and his institution – operate under.

Occidental College, Professor Dreier’s employer, expressly promises the students, whose parents fork over a cool $55,655 a year for the privilege of attending, that they will not be subject to any political litmus test as they participate in the school’s academics between bong hits and sessions of binge drinking:

Students are entitled to an atmosphere conducive to learning and to even-handed treatment in all aspects of the teacher-student relationship. Faculty members may not refuse to enroll or teach students because of their beliefs or the possible uses to which they may put the knowledge to be gained in a course. The student should not be forced by the authority inherent in the instructional role to make particular personal choices as to political action or his or her own part in society. Evaluation of students and the award of credit must be based on academic performance professionally judged and not on matters irrelevant to that performance, whether personality, sex, race, religion, degree of political activism, or personal beliefs.  (Occidental College Faculty Handbook, p. 2)

Of course, here a professor – in his capacity as an Occidental professor while using his Occidental email account – is expressly soliciting research work to support his personal political beliefs.  Sure, he’s not technically granting or denying credit based on his students’ political views.  He’s just exercising some of the informal “authority inherent in the instructional role.”  And it’s abundantly clear – even if he doesn’t say it outright – that a student who disagrees with Professor Dreier’s politics best keep on walking. (more…)

Drudge Report readers woke up this morning to the news that GOP senatorial candidate Sharron Angle won the Republican primary last night in Nevada.  Associated Press writer Michael R. Blood’s linked piece on Drudge represents the MSM’s template in its upcoming biased reporting against Angle, and other conservative GOP candidates.  It’s all in the language.

Blood’s piece begins:

Nevada Republicans Tuesday picked tea party insurgent Sharron Angle to take on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid…

“Tea party insurgent.” Blood’s lede links a broad citizen movement with a word that connotes roadside bombs and civilian casualties. Angle is a…

…conservative renegade who wants to turn Washington on end.

Not just a “conservative,” but a “conservative renegade.” When John McCain was a “maverick” – a label first given him by the New York Times – he was the GOP favorite of much of the MSM.  When Barack Obama promised to turn Washington end, he was a “transformational candidate.”  Sharron Angle, though, is a “renegade.” The spin is in the chosen language. (more…)

Public supported National Public Radio (NPR) posted a report on March 17 during its “All Things Considered” radio show that warns its listeners that “patriot groups” are dangerous and are apparently increasingly prone to attacking government officials and facilities. Oddly the two examples it uses to prove its case have no ties whatsoever to any “patriot groups.”

Headlined, “Hostility Against Federal Workers Troubles Officials,” NPR blames “patriot groups” on these attacks and worries that “anti-government hate groups” are on the “upsurge.” And what does NPR use to prove its case? Nothing but the say so the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center and a misconstruction of two recent attacks on government facilities by disturbed individuals.

NPR ominously begins its report with this: (more…)

The modus operandi of the 1939 “Gleiwitz incident” is a popular tactic of those legacy journalists who, like Frank Rich of the New York Times, distort the facts of an event to fit their pre-determined storyline. Now it’s happening again with regard to J. Patrick Bedell and the Pentagon shooting incident.

The Gleiwitz incident is a matter of historical record, so it’s beyond media spin. Here’s what happened:

On August 31, 1939, German SS soldiers dressed in Polish uniforms and took over a radio station near the German border with Poland. From there they broadcast an anti-German rant in Polish.

To make the ruse convincing, the Germans dressed a dead civilian German named Franciszek Honiok, reputed to be sympathetic to Poland, in a Polish soldier’s uniform and shot up his body to make it look like he was killed in a gun fight. Along with Honiok, they littered the scene with several other bodies of dead prisoners from Dachau concentration camp, also dressed as Polish soldiers. (more…)

Now that the MSM has done its best to ignore the Amy Bishop Obama obsession and is going all out to pin the right-wing-nut-job tail on Joseph Stack, it would seem that leftist-radical myopia is once again controlling the establishment media narrative.

It is, after all, difficult to see clearly when your legs are tingling and your passions are in willing-thrall mode.

So, here’s the pertinent question, the question our drowning Obama groupies in the MSM do not dare to ask:  Is disillusionment with Obama causing people to snap and commit acts of violence?

It’s a good question, born of common sense.

If there was a single characteristic that defined the Obama campaign followers in 2008, it was an adolescent fawning the likes this country has never seen.  There were the creepy fainting women in teenybopper crush mode wherever Obama went.  There were the so-called intelligentsia speaking of a man who, to them, seemed more like a god, a savior, an uber-competent of downright immortal stature, purely obsequious observations based on Obama’s postage-stamp-sized resume, his fondness for arugula and GQ looks. (more…)

No clearer difference can be seen in how the Old Media and its left-wing compatriots treat mass killers, terrorists and nutjobs than the way Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab and Joe Stack have been portrayed by the Old Media and the left. Abdulmutallab, the jihadi Christmas Bomber, was treated as an aberration unconnected with any larger group — despite that he trained with al Qaeda — and Joe Stack, who flew a plane into an IRS building in Austin, Texas, has been held up as the epitome of the “teabaggers” and the “anti-government right” despite that not a single tie to those folks has been yet discovered.

Immediately after Abdulmutallab tried to blow himself and a plane full of passengers into martyrdom on Christmas Day 2009, President Obama’s administration declared this guy an “isolated extremist” and said he had no connection to our Islamofascist enemies. Obama was helped along in this by many Old Media news sources.

On Dec. 26, for instance, CBS reported that Abdulmutallab was a loner: “As of now, he appears to be a lone actor with no conspirators. A report the following day said of the jihadist bomber, ‘We’re not aware of anybody else,’ one official told Orr. No further arrests are imminent.” (more…)

In the wake of yesterday’s tragedy in Austin, it’s certainly worthwhile to ask what caused troubled software engineer Joe Stack to crash a plane into an office building that housed 200 Internal Revenue Service employees. But will the media get the story right? Perhaps, just perhaps, I’ll be blessedly wrong about this, but I don’t think so.

We know how these stories seem to go. The “unbiased” journalists from the old media working in the field first develop the story, establish the “factual record” and – once that job is done – the would-be opinion makers move on, using that “factual” docket to make their pious cases. The narrative has begun, as this AP story demonstrates. Joe Stack hated the IRS, felt that this oft-criticized agency had done him wrong and – the conclusion is easy to see – was therefore another right-wing nut job who went over the edge. He was a victim, if you will, of the hatred and fury that festers within the conservative and libertarian movements. His friends, the AP tells us, never saw it coming:

They never heard Stack talk about politics, about taxes, about the government — the sources of pain that Stack claims drove him to his death.

But, nowhere in this story does the AP drill down any further. If you read Stack’s 3,000+ word on-line suicide note, it’s clear that he didn’t hate the IRS because he despised big-government per se. He hated the IRS because he believed that the agency was in collusion with the ultimate enemy: big business. A few telling examples from Stack’s manifesto: (more…)