Document drop: Turning the tables again on Obama’s speech-squelching thugs
Just obtained the latest counterpunch from American Issues Project, the independent group running the ad about Bill Ayers that the Obama campaign doesn’t want you to see. (Embedded again at the end of this post. Keep passing it around.)
As I’ve pointed out repeatedly over the past few days, Obama’s attempt to bully TV stations airing the ad and stop scrutiny of his radical ties is part and parcel of a larger campaign to chill the free speech of conservative political activists and donors.
AIP sends the same message to the DOJ’s Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Keeney and turns the tables on the Chicago thugs:
Re: Response to August 25, 2008 Letter to DOJ from Obama Presidential Campaign (“Second Letter”)
Dear Mr. Keeney:
Yet again, the Obama for America campaign has sent a letter to you and your office, demanding now that the Department of Justice prosecute one of the donors to American Issues Project, Inc., (“AIP), a non-profit organization which is presently sponsoring advertisements to which the Obama campaign objects.
As stated in my letter sent in response to the Obama campaign’s first letter, AIP has not violated the law, is not violating the law and is taking every possible precaution to assure that it does not violate the law in the future.
The Obama campaign dislikes the content of AIP’s advertising – but is unable to contradict the facts contained in the ad. That is precisely why the ad is presently being broadcast by numerous television stations. It is accurate, documented, and truthful.
The Obama Campaign has specifically called on the Department of Justice to prosecute a donor to AIP, whose contribution was disclosed publicly in accordance with federal law. See 11 C.F.R. §109.10.
Information contained in AIP’s FEC Form 5, filed on August 19, 2006 was attached to the Obama Campaign’s Second Letter to DOJ and information contained in the filing forms the basis for the Obama Campaign’s latest demands of you and the Department.
The Obama Campaign’s request gives rise to a significant legal and constitutional question: that is, whether the Department of Justice would seriously undertake the prosecution of a citizen under pressure from a prominent government official / political candidate, relying on information contained in truthful and accurate government filing, disclosed in accordance with federal law. There are serious Fifth Amendment self-incrimination issues involved in a situation whereby a criminal prosecution could be ordered at will by political pressure on your Department based solely on a timely and accurate federal government disclosure.
AIP has sought and received the voluntary after-tax contributions of donor(s) to support its policy objectives, which happen to differ from those of the Obama Campaign. Rather than addressing the facts contained in the AIP advertisement, it has instead set about to “deal” with AIP through your Department.
This is, however, only the latest in a series of brazen public statements and efforts by liberal Democratic operatives and agents of the Obama Campaign to silence their critics and organizations with whom they disagree, by initiating what they acknowledge is a concerted national effort announced in recent weeks to intimidate, harass and otherwise bully conservative donors.
An organization calling itself “Accountable America” announced two weeks ago its intent to obtain publicly filed disclosures to attempt to coerce donors to conservative causes to stop making contributions and essentially threatening potential donors into not making contributions to conservative groups. Like the Obama Campaign, this group of operatives is using information obtained from legally mandated public disclosures to identify and target for their attack donors to conservative causes.
Of course, should the Department decide to yield to the pressure from the Obama Campaign and undertake its requested ‘investigations’ of donors to politically related conservative causes, the Department would necessarily be required to do so in an even-handed, non partisan and non-ideological approach. In that regard, the Department would be required to review all donors to all causes and political / policy organizations, whose contributions exceed $5,000 per calendar year to any such causes, the vast majority of which are donors to liberal causes, not conservative ones.
Based on calculations from the Center for Responsive Politics (www.crp.org ) the following are leftwing donors whose substantial contributions to political causes in the last three election cycles have consistently landed each of them on the top donors list and surely each of these donors warrant the Department’s review, scrutiny and prosecution, if the Obama Campaign standard is to be applied evenly:
George Soros:
2004: $23,450,000
2006: $ 3,542,500
2008 (to date) $ 4,650,000
Steven Bing:
2004: $13,852,031
2008 (to date) $ 4,850,000
Peter Lewis:
2004: $22,997,220
2006: $ 1, 624,375
2008 (to date) $ 850,000
Herb and Marion Sandler:
2004: $13, 008, 459
Linda Pritzker:
2004: $3,300,000
2006: $2,101,000
John Hunting:
2006: $1,647,000
2008 (to date) $1,243,000
Alida Messinger
2004: $ 3,580,200
2006: $ 1,042,000
2008 (to date) $ 883,000
Pat Stryker:
2006: $ 1,331,293
2008 (to date): $ 300,000
Jon Stryker:
2006: $ 1,271,313
2008: $ 604,054
The list is quite lengthy and this is but a partial list of those the Department would be obligated to pursue if it bows to the demands of the Obama Campaign to undertake investigations of wealthy donors making large contributions to political causes. The Obama Campaign should be aware that most of the donors on the list are individuals who consistently support left-wing, liberal and Democratic causes. And most of the donors listed above have made public statements regarding their intent to use their wealth to impact the outcome of federal elections should the Department need further evidence of their activities.
The letters from the Obama Campaign to you and your Department are a gross misuse of the power and prestige of that organization. However, because of the environment in which we function, it is important that AIP respond to the ongoing baseless allegations in the letter war now being waged against it by the Obama Campaign.
AIP has violated no provision of law. The donor(s) to AIP have violated no provision of law. However, if the Department of Justice decides to initiate investigations of donors to AIP and other conservative political and policy organizations, as well as the activities of citizens groups such as AIP, we will be prepared to counter such efforts with our list of targets and entities with which we disagree politically and philosophically for the Department to also investigate and prosecute.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Cleta Mitchell
Cleta Mitchell, Esq.
Counsel, American Issues Project
***
Here is the ad Barack Obama doesn’t want you to see. Pass it on.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- UPDATED WITH DOCUMENT DROP…The Unsealed William Ayers/Barack Obama Papers And Why Obama Should Be Worried | Right Voices
- Obama: If You Attack With Ads That Are True, I’ll Have You Investigated : BigMouthFrog
- Equal Protection
- American Issues Project responds to Obama campaign’s call for DOJ investigation. « Republican Party of Jefferson County, TN
- Obama Campaign Makes Huge Ayers In Judgment « The Vast Global Zionist Conspiracy v 5.0
- The Baby Is Crying Again UPDATED | Democrat=Socialist
- Barack Obama would forbid you to view this video | BitsBlog
- Fess Up, Barry… « Gunservatively!
- Outrageous - ABC cameraman arrested
- Why You Shouldn’t Tick Off Rich People, Part II « Beltway Snark
- Are We Lumberjacks?
- Noblesse Oblige » Who Owns the Democrats and the Superdelegates?
- Plains Feeder
- Mark My Words
- Brain Shavings
- Barry Says “Hush, Child!” « Mountain Shout
- Obama Anthem, Flag and Salute for The First Democratic Party Rally in Stadium « Pronk Palisades
- What Do Obama and Osama Have in Common? « Above My Pay Grade!
- Hoystory
- Ed Driscoll.com
- The Ad Obama Doesn’t Want You to See: Obama’s Links to Weatherman Terrorist Bill Ayers « BUUUUURRRRNING HOT
- Theodore's World
- SURPRISE! Both candidates oppose 1st Amendment! | The TIW Blog
- The Absurd Report » Tonight’s Coronation: A Sense of Entitlement
- Plumb Bob Blog » Assaulting the Press
- King of Kings releases the hounds | Cold Fury
- Smoke, Fire, BO | BitsBlog
- Meet The Real Barack Obama « John Jacob H’s RKBA Commentary
- Michelle Malkin » Next, the Obama thugs came for Stanley Kurtz
- Must See Obama Video - Ties To ’60s Terrorist « Midwestern Republican
- Document drop: Turning the tables again on Obama’s speech-squelching thugs « Thoughts Of A Conservative Christian
- Obama: Free Speech Only If We Like It « The Barton Bulletin
- Barack to the Future « Grand Rants
- TacJammer
- Following In Canada’s Footsteps « Expat Texan
- BULLY! « Rosemary’s News and Ideas
- Rosemary's Thoughts
- Mark Levin Fan
- Mark Levin Fan
- Let’s See If I Can Sum This Up | sassafrassin.com
- Mark Levin Fan » Blog Archive » Mark Levin: Ask campaign why Obama is friends with Bill Ayers 1-866-675-2008 (audio added)
- Michelle Malkin » Obama: Attacks on me are unpatriotic!
- Obama, “Can’t Touch This” Candidate again: « Riggword Weblog
- Michelle Malkin » Exclusive: DOJ will not conduct witch hunts for Obama
- One Old Vet » Blog Archive » VIDEO: DOJ will not conduct witch hunts for Obama
- Why I’m NOT Voting for Obama « Popgun’s World
- Obama: Censoring Free Speech « Sooshi Soo
- The Truth Hurts « The Edge Of Reason
- Why I’m Not Voting For Obama - revisited « Popgun’s World
- Joe The Plumber and Big Media–Invading and Covering Up The Lives of Others « Pronk Palisades
- Who writes your questions? Love Biden II
- Obama’s America: No criticism allowed. « One American Voice
- “Smash the reactionary forces of Imperialism!” « musings from the disloyal opposition…
- Michelle Malkin » Who says conservative bloggers don’t do reporting?
- American Issues Project Fights Back at The Commissioner’s Corner
- Michelle Malkin » Well, now: Anita Dunn’s bully lawyer hubby takes over as White House general counsel
- Hot Air » Blog Archive » Craig out as WH counsel
- The End Of Craig At The White House « Around The Sphere
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Bill Ayers
Power Line
» More From the East Anglia Archives
Doug Ross @ Journal
» ACORN pwnage part II: Breitbart's BigGovt Lowers the BoomBig Government
» BREAKING: San Diego ACORN Document Dump ScandalVillainous Company
» Amateur Hour in the Oval Office Continues....Nice Deb
» OGreen Room
» Times Slimes Obamic ClimesLegal Insurrection
» Nation Mag Outs Secret U.S. Anti-Terror Program
Looks like Obama rejects FDR’s Four Freedoms because the first one was freedom of Speech.
You could add the Fifth, Ninth, and Tenth.
Hit the nail smack dab on the head!
I’m sending some money to Jacob Turk, a guy who is running against Dem. Emanuel Cleaver in Missouri’s 5th district. Stuck with Clair McCaskill for a while longer tho..blahhhk
fmfnavydoc-
actually the former mayor of north chicago did have her photo on the decals and ironically she was indicted within the year.
The other issue was that the north chicago cops were being shot by gangbangers painting their weapons blue or red and the cops were hesitating because they are the same colors of our training weapons.
BTW-when were you stationed with the HM “A” School?
GSP
Another Obama supporter heading to prison. Did America run out of blindfolds or something? I mean he should have one put over his eyes and then a bullet right to the head. Put it on Pay Per View to boot.
On August 27th, 2008 at 1:14 pm, DarthRove said:
Shorter Cleta Mitchell, Esq.:
Hey Obama…Get Bent.
XOXO,
Cleta
Darth, love the handle. Hey, I even wrote a fan letter to FOX about Karl. He’s great. He makes Wolfson look like a nasty, humorless slouch.
God Bless Cleta Mitchell
The left is now and, as many are just finding out, has always been Stalinistic in it’s attempts to silence any voice which stands against their idealogy.
He, Michelle, have you seen this little item?
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Conventions/comments?type=story&id=5668622
Be sure to click “back to story” for the full report.
I heard that chapoutier almost one his first case the other day, but then his client screwed everything up by showing up for court.
ok i know i’m off track here but here is something to think about OBAMA tell s everyone he is black ok where was daddy no white grandparents thats who was there
# 97 THANK YOU FOR THE LINK: I tells the whole story of the mind-set of fascists socialists>>>
ABC reporters shoved around and arrested by Denver officers …
Yesterday >>> a man was physically assaulted by a “loud mouth” (MM was the loud mouth’s target for verbal abuse)–Denver police did NO-Thing about the assault.
Can someone say “lawsuits”??
I think the reason the ObamaMessiah people have went to the DoJ rather than the FEC is twofold.
First; a criminal complaint carries a lot more weight. If you don’t think so, just look at what happened to Trent Lott.
Second; an FEC investigation is likely to take at least 3 months, and that would only give results after the election. They don’t need to silence dissent in the middle of November, they need to silence it now!!
JHSII, true that but ultimately this may a matter for the IRS… and btw, it is a shame that Cleta Mitchell, Esq. is not on the ballot. LOL
HMM:
Cambridge Press–folds
Random House—–folds
ABC————–folds
link via # 97 above—
Freedom of speech-anyone??!!!!!
I don’t get it. I read the story and found no mention of Obama. Or is your comment linking this guy to Obama supposed to be funny or clever somehow?
More on :
http://ibloga.blogspot.com/
ABC reporter arrested -public sidewalk by cigar chomping sergeant..
So does Bob Bauer’s intimidation tactic something that could affect hi standing in the bar? Can a lawyer ethically use legal processes to intimidate people?
Yes, thank you for pointing out my mistake and thank you for admitting your moral equivalence.
That’s what makes it extra special fun to point out when conservatives are doing the same thing. I hope you will look upon lgm a little more kindly now.
I say we just take their word for it. In fact, I think a “Not guilty” plea by anyone should really be enough, shouldn’t it? No need for a trial. After all, they SAID they were innocent.
As I told atheling before, there is no “spirit of the law.” there is the law, so if you think they are breaking one, please cite it. And in any case, you are not going to let some effete arugala eating nancy boy intimidate you rough and tumble conservatives, are you?
chap, re: “…As I told atheling before, there is no “spirit of the law.” there is the law…”
No dis, honest question… if there is no spirit of the law then why do we have juries, or even courts for that matter? Would not a judge be enough??
This is a common misperception, no worries. Judges are triers of law. If there is any ambiguity as to what the law says, a judge make the determination as to what it is and then instructs the jury. Juries are triers of fact, i.e., they decide what story they believe as between plaintiff/defendant or state/accused and apply what they believe are the facts to the law they have been provided.
But a judge can’t, or at least shouldn’t, go against the letter of the law or the most reasonable resolution of an ambiguity in law because they want to exercise some sense of equity or what they think the law SHOULD be. That seems to me a conservative principle.
Obama and the Democrats are traitors to the Constitution and democracy. I have no doubt that the Democrats are intent on ending democracy in our nation. These fake charges, are all part and parcel of the liberals criminalization of conservatism. They have undermined confidence in ballot machines, claim we steal elections, while they collect cash from our nations’ enemies. The Supreme Court recognized our right to defend ourselves and there is no difference between a criminal invading our house and the Democrats using legal institutions to assault us. Democrat Nifong’s prosecution of the Duke students was an outright assault, and crossed the line to life threatening violence and those players had a right to use violence in my opinion. The professors and students who publicly called for violence against the lacrosse players also were asking for a beating for themselves and I would have enjoyed seeing it.
It is time for us to defend ourselves and each other. Every conservative should be well armed and trained in self defense and physically, financially, and legally support each other. We must hang together or surely the democrats will lynch us.
I guess that’s why Lady Justice is blind and carries a balance; justice for all. Haha. Everybody should have their day in court; right Chap? Afterall quail eggs are awfully expensive nowadays.
I don’t know. But the meal that I had them with certainly was.
BTW, it was at “Toque” in Montreal. If you find yourself up there, I would highly recommend it.
chap, re: “If there is any ambiguity as to what the law says, a judge make the determination as to what it is and then instructs the jury.”
So the judge defines the spirit of the law, for the jury to interpret???
And this is also why the Second Amendment is so critical – for without the Second, the first is meaningless and unenforceable.
Make no mistake – if the leftards assume control of the executive and legislative branches both – they will come for our guns, the Constitution be damned.
Bruce, someone wiser than me once said “it’s about boxes… first you got your ballot box, then you got your jury box, & finally you got your cartridge box…”
Well I guess the next step is pine box.
So I guess if someone cries “Fire!” in a theatre where there is none, we cannot prosecute them for violating the First Amendment?
The law is the law. Right?
I think you are misinterpreting me a bit, and actually I have misspoken a bit. There may be a “spirit of the law”, i.e, an intent of the legislators, but “spirit” is pretty much useless. It cannot, and should not, supplant the letter of the law or a reasonable interpretation of the letter of the law. Legislative intent is almost the lowest of the low on the totem pole of judicial authority.
As for juries…say some one said to another party “I’ll get you my pretty and your little dog Toto too!” Lets say that same person was sued for intentional infliction of emotional distress. A judge would have to decide if threatening the life of a pet rises to the level of IIOED, i.e, the law. If the judge says that, yes it can, the jury must then decide if the particular facts of the case, i.e., the exact words spoken by our defendant rise to the level of threatening a pet. If they determine it was, they really have no choice but to find the defendant guilty.
No. The law is clear this is not protected speech.
So there is more than just the letter of the law.
That’s what I mean by the spirit of the law.
Okay. Fair enough.
chap, this site may just do wonders for your career… just don’t ever say it in public
It’s pretty amazing how far these thugs will go.
The nutroots have began targeting other companies that advertise on the TV networks that ran this ad. I work in IT support/consulting and one of these advertisers is my client. They were “email bombed” by the Obama supporters today in retaliation for advertising on the same network that ran the AIP ad. My client received over 200,000 emails today warning them not to advertise on TV networks that run the ad. My client is a small company without a large network infrastructure and the flood of automated emails nearly shut down their system.
Here’s the letter they received over 100,000 times today until we determined and blocked the originating servers:
Due to the sheer volume of identical email originating from a very few mail servers, it’s evident that the intent was not just to send the letter, but to shut down my client’s email system. They nearly succeeded.
This is basically domestic economic terrorism.
The letter is a, “go ahead, punk, make my day”, response. Good on them its time we start standing up for ourselves. I mean, we hem and haw about the constitution but when it comes to standing up or shutting up, too many of us are willing to be John McCain’s, Linsy Grams. The worst thing we can do to these people is use the constitution, as a sword if necessary, to beat them down they simply have no ground to stand on. Either that or they will beat us down and then burn the unprotected US Constitution.
mojojojo said:
Chilling stuff, there. I hope your client doesn’t “cave in” to the threats and intimidation.
lol you people are grabbing at straws if the worst you can say about Obama is he is too popular. you sound like school girls whining. God forbid we have a president that people like. He’s got my vote.
I don’t know about ya’ll but I am keeping a list (checkin it twice) anyone found being naughty not nice, well, Santa wont be coming to town. That’s right, I only watch leftist stations to see what companies to avoid, I use my wallet which is more powerful than any left wing spokesmouthe will ever be. Be real careful who you support companies, individuals, corporations, we wield great weight in our pocketbooks.
We drive the world and we will drive you out, just ask the NY Times (or any leftwing no talent hollyweird director/producer) forget what actors say, they read other peoples lines for a living and have memory but no common sense, otherwise they would be writers, well, writers of the past at least. We have none these days or have you missed it?
God forbid Nero focuses on what the point is.
This has nothing to do with Obama’s popularity,” dingbat. We’re talking about his criminal and radical associations. These reflect on his judgment and on how he might lead.
Try to keep up.
How many weeks do you think nero will spend crying on its pillow after the big Zeros defeat? Any bets, any one?
RE: Fire in the theater
You have a right to falsely yell out fire in a theater. If there is a panic or injuries because people get trampled fleeing you will be charged with inciting a riot or other charges related to damages the false alarm causes. I also have the right to say BO’s middle name. He has the right to call me a racist for doing so – but in falsely labeling me such, he demonstrates that he is a big eared major league azzhole. When the Constitution says, ” Congress shall make no law…” that means Congress is not allowed to make any law related the to banned area. It is really quite simple for honest people to understand. Just like the 2nd Amendment. It’s purpose is quite simple – citizens are to have the right to own guns so they can use them to attack government officials who have become tyrannical. In fact, that actually happened and is called the American Revolution. Regarding the current democrat actions to deprive us of energy. If our government blocks our ability to acquire and use electricity and we have a family member dependent on dialysis or a ventilator who dies or is injured because of that action, we have the right if not duty to remove those tyrants from office by any means necessary. And by the way, that would be an excellent situation to turn to the militia and cry out, “Fire!”
I see you avoided the interesting part.
Ummm, except that there’s no indication other than bully-boy’s whining that they’ve broken the law. But it’s different to see a lawyer that actually believes somebody’s guilty before they’ve been tried. Usually you’re claiming innocence long after the bloody knife is put into evidence and the jury’s gone home. And let me repeat what I said yesterday, in case you missed it. I not only want this case tried, I want it appealed all the way to the SC, so they can throw that stupid law out once and for all.
I didn’t say “spirit of the law”. Just like a lawyer, twisting the truth. And I didn’t say they’re breaking one, I said just the opposite. Of course you’re the expert on “the law”, I only know what I read. As far as the “nancy-boy” is concerned (your words not mine) I think that’s a derogatory British slang term for homosexual. How intolerant of you.
I suppose it could be a little intimidating for somebody like Sinclair to be threatened by lawsuits from people with bottomless wallets. It certainly worked with the Kerry movie. I’m not terribly concerned about it myself. Can’t get blood from a turnip, they say.
You’re right, it is a conservative principle, which is why, I suppose, none of the leftist judges understand it. If they did, there’d wouldn’t be a Roe vs Wade to argue about, among many others. Of course, that would still leave them the option of quoting Zimbabwean or Nigerian or some such law as an excuse for an outrageous decision.
Seems to me that you could look into having this prosecuted under the same law they used to shut down some of the big spammers a few months ago. (But I’m not an expert in the law, Chappie, so never mind the flames.)
I really don’t see Cleta Mitchell’s response as anything other than AIP’s position that they are ready to move forward, if forced to do so.
Also, I’m not sure why Chapoutier would argue the “moral equivalence” stance.
From what I’ve read in prior posts, Chap claims to be an attorney. Attorneys routinely respond with references, citations, and examples they feel bolsters their clients’ case.
Why is Mitchell’s response any different? Simply because it’s in defense of a conservative group? How hypocritical….
Chappie isn’t hypocritical, he’s a lawyer. He’s trained to argue his case, no matter how absurd, in any manner he can – no matter how he has to stretch, twist, or mangle the facts.
Thanks for the clarification, txvet! LOL
OT, has anyone ever heard of the following?
?
If so, is this on the up and up?
I was reading their website and it had some pretty good ideas on it.
Sorry, my preview didn’t work.
The organizaton is called the Veterans Party….
The leader of the Obama campaign’s attempts to suppress the truth is Robert (Bob) Bauer. He is a partner in the firm Perkins Coie. His telephone number is 202.434.1602 and his e-mail is rbauer@perkinscoie.com. Perhaps it would be more effective if you were to go to Perkins Coie’s web site and choose a few of his partners and ask them why they support their partner in his efforts to suppress free speech.
Be polite, be direct and target your e-mail constructively. The Perkins Coie professionals web page has an excellent tool for finding partners and associates by various criteria. Use it wisely.
Also read this before you send anything.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/08/021350.php
$350.00/ hr is enough motivation to come to MM on your down time and hone your skills dontcha think?
I just left Accountable America a comment on their website. I recommend that we all do that.
On August 27th, 2008 at 7:10 pm, pubscout said:
Yet the Denver police allowed a mob to scream invectives and threats of death to Michelle and did absolutely nothing.
Shames me as retired law enforcement.
(Hey, preview isn’t working for me either!)
Apologies Christian Soldier…I didn’t get far enought to see you say the same thing. Ugh. I hate doing that.
Those individuals who are email bombing websites probably coordinated their efforts with each other and seems likely their intent was to cause economic harm to those companies. This sounds like conspiracy/racketeering and should be turned over to the FBI or local law enforcement as well as be reviewed by the companies law firms for litigation.
Accountable America openly states to their intent to intimidate voters and donors and hopefully their actions are being investigated by law enforcement. It seems to me that all the individuals and companies being attacked have the right to go to their state Civil Rights Commission and file a complaint. My experience with my own state CRC is that they are serious about such matters and have treated me respectfully and were honorable. These complaints are investigated and if found to be factual, a public report is issued, names are named, and crimes are outlined.
Those donors who are wealthy and are being attacked by BOs 527s have the option of spending some money to hire investigators and attorneys and take action. BO should recall that the cover up is always more damaging than the truth.
Michelle needs to hire several bodyguards and wear some body armor when she goes near these groups. It is only a matter of time before they start escalating the violence against her and other conservatives – they are BOs SA.