Donor Fraud Deja Vu
Obama got some good news Friday, after
his dismal debate performance: the Labor
Department reported that the unemployment rate is down to 7.3 percent, the
lowest it’s been since he took office.
Also, Gallup reported that his approval rating is at 54 percent. The rating was a rolling average from Oct. 2
to 4, 2012, with the debate date right in the middle. On Oct. 4, the Dow Jones climbed about 100
points the morning after the debate.
According to the Examiner, “a taxpayer watchdog group conducted a nine-month investigation into presidential and congressional fundraising and has uncovered thousands of cases of credit card solicitations and donations to Obama and Capitol Hill, allegedly from unsecure accounts, and many from overseas.”
But those 56 percent still love their
guy, anyway. Hey, any president is
allowed to have a bad night – if he’s a Democrat. Poor Obama.
He was probably suffering from jet lag.
He’ll get Romney next time. The
next debate is town-hall style – Obama’s kind of debate in front of adoring
shills.
The bad news is the Fed ended the fiscal
year with a $1.1 trillion deficit and that, according to the Congressional
Budget Office, it means Obama broke his campaign promise of cutting the deficit
in half. Still, all that borrowed money
got people working. It’s the Wimpy
Way. That’s J. Wellington Wimpy, if you
please. “I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for
a hamburger today.”
But the Washington Examiner reporter a
scandal may be brewing over donations coming into the Obama-Biden campaign fund
via foreign entities, many using untraceable prepaid credit cards, a clear
violation of federal election laws.
According to the Examiner, “a taxpayer watchdog group conducted a nine-month investigation into presidential and congressional fundraising and has uncovered thousands of cases of credit card solicitations and donations to Obama and Capitol Hill, allegedly from unsecure accounts, and many from overseas.”
But wait a minute. Didn’t the media, in fact the Washington
Post, of all papers, report the same thing during the 2008 campaign? Why, yes it did, the Examiner reminds us:
“Faced with a huge influx of donations
over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security
measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing
into its accounts, aides acknowledged. Instead,
the campaign is scrutinizing its books for improper donations after the money
has been deposited.”
Regarding this new election 2012
scandal, The Examiner reported that “the Obama campaign has been trying to block
the story. But a key source said it plans to publish the story Friday or, more
likely, Monday.”
Sean Hannity had Bob Woodward on his
show last night to discuss the scandal and whether it affected Obama’s
performance. A friend wanted me to go to
Mom’s house last night to watch the show (since I don’t have cable). But I was too tired to go, so I watched it on
Fox News on Roku instead. Of the entire
six-minute exchange, they spent perhaps 30 seconds discussing the actual
scandal. The answer: it may
have distracted him. Glad I didn't jump in my car to over to Mom's.
Maybe.
If he slithered out of it last night time, he’ll slither out of it
again. Of course, the last time, we
didn’t have Republican House to push for an investigation. If 56 percent of those polls didn’t think he
did a bad job in the debate (how many of them even watched it?), when even Obama's own media cheerleaders were writhing in embarrassment, the sympathy
vote will probably work for him if the scandal they say he’s suppressing
erupts.
Clinton got away with a lot, too. However, back in the 1990s, we didn’t have
the Tea Parties. We can’t put the
pressure on until we have the facts.
It’s time for Drudge, Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, the Blaze, Fox
News, Breitbart, and the others to put the investigation into high gear. We only have about 30 days.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home