Exclusive: Tom Cotton Pushes IRS to Investigate Southern Poverty Law Center’s Tax-Exempt Status ‘the SPLC’s defining characteristic is to fundraise off of defamation’

By Matthew Boyle

Screen Shot 2019-04-02 at 3.39.22 PM

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) is pressing the IRS to investigate the tax-exempt status of leftist group Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), an organization that has been mired in scandal.

Cotton argues that a series of recent reports regarding the leftist group’s patently political activities are troubling, and in a letter to the head of the IRS provided to Breitbart News exclusively ahead of its public release questions whether these actions warrant removal of the group’s status as a nonprofit organization.

“I am writing to urge you to investigate whether the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) should retain its classification as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization,” Cotton wrote in the Tuesday letter to IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig. “Recent news reports have confirmed the long-established fact that the SPLC regularly engages in defamation of its political opponents. In fact, the SPLC’s defining characteristic is to fundraise off of defamation.”

2019 SPLC Cotton Letter VF by Breitbart News on Scribd

Cotton noted in the letter to the IRS commissioner, citing SPLC financial documents, that the leftist organization has made lots of money by targeting conservative groups with allegations that they are hate groups–regardless of the veracity of such allegations.

“This business model has paid well. The SPLC has accrued more than $500 million in assets,” Cotton wrote. “According to the group’s most recent financial statement, it holds $121 million offshore in non-U.S. equity funds. The SPLC uses these assets to pay its executives lavish salaries far higher than the comparable household average.”

Cotton’s letter cites a number of recent investigative reports by the media into SPLC’s standards and culture, including a recently-published CNN exposé where staff alleged racism and sexism running rampant throughout the leftist group’s organizational structure.

“Famous civil rights group suffers from ‘systemic culture of racism and sexism,’ staffers say,” was the headline in CNN’s March 29 article by Nick Valencia and Pamela Kirkland.

“Some employees at the Southern Poverty Law Center say the legendary civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a ‘systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace,’” Valencia and Kirkland wrote. “The SPLC, which has been on the front line of the fight against racial inequality and injustice in the United States since 1971, has been thrust into chaos after allegations over its treatment of minority and female employees. The claims have been followed by changes in its leadership and a company-wide review.”

Cotton also cites New York Times report from Alan Blinder published on March 22 that Cotton noted described the SPLC as “in turmoil” while citing SPLC employee claims that the organization and its leadership are “complicit in decades of racial discrimination, gender discrimination, and sexual harassment and/or assault.” Both Richard Cohen, the organization’s president, and Morris Dees, the organization’s co-founder, have been pushed out in recent days amid these scandals — and the SPLC has named an interim president to lead the group for now.

“Based on these reports, and in the interest of protecting taxpayer dollars from a racist and sexist slush fund devoted to defamation, I believe that the SPLC’s conduct warrants a serious and thorough investigation,” Cotton wrote to the IRS commissioner. “Engaging in systematic defamation is not a tax-exempt purpose: Federal law requires nonprofits classified as 501(c)(3) organizations to comply with IRS guidelines and have a ‘tax-exempt purpose.’ While IRS guidance lists several examples of tax-exempt purposes, engaging in defamation as a business model is of course not one of them. The SPLC defames other organizations in several ways.”

From there, Cotton cites Washington Post piece by David Montgomery published in November 2018. The piece in the Post notes how the SPLC, which used to simply target hate groups like the KKK, Neo-Nazis, Black Nationalists, White Nationalists, and others, has expanded in recent years its so-called “hate map” to target mainstream conservative organizations to tarnish their reputations in order to push a leftist agenda.

“Today the SPLC’s list of 953 ‘Active Hate Groups’ is an elaborate taxonomy of ill will,” Montgomery wrote in the Post on Nov. 8, 2018. “There are many of the usual suspects: Ku Klux Klan (72 groups), Neo-Nazi (121), White Nationalist (100), Racist Skinhead (71), Christian Identity (20), Neo-Confederate (31), Black Nationalist (233) and Holocaust Denial (10). There are also more exotic strains familiar only to connoisseurs: Neo-Volkisch (28; ‘spirituality premised on the survival of white Europeans’) and Radical Traditional Catholicism (11; groups that allegedly ‘routinely pillory Jews as ‘the perpetual enemy of Christ’ ‘). Then there are the more controversial additions of the last decade-and-a-half or so: Anti-LGBT (51), Anti-Muslim (113), Anti-Immigrant (22), Hate Music (15), Male Supremacy (2). Finally, the tally is rounded out by a general category called Other (53) — ‘a hodge-podge of hate doctrines.’”FB

Montgomery noted that the SPLC hate group list for many years — decades, he says — “was a golden seal of disapproval, considered nonpartisan enough to be heeded by government agencies, police departments, corporations, and journalists.”

“But in recent years, as the list has swept up an increasing number of conservative activists — mostly in the anti-LGBT, anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim categories — those conservatives have been fighting back,” Montgomery wrote. “[General Jerry] Boykin, of the FRC, recently sent a letter to about 100 media outlets (including The Washington Post) and corporate donors on behalf of four dozen groups and individuals “who have been targeted, defamed, or otherwise harmed” by the SPLC, warning that the hate list is no longer to be trusted. Mathew Staver, chairman of the Christian legal advocacy group Liberty Counsel, told me 60 organizations are interested in suing the SPLC.”

Conservatives’ efforts to expose the SPLC as a fraudulent group that does not represent an honest arbiter of what is a hate group and what is not have been effective, Montgomery noted.

“There are signs the campaign is having an impact,” Montgomery wrote. “Last year GuideStar, a widely consulted directory of charitable organizations, flagged 46 charities that were listed by the SPLC as hate groups. Within months, under pressure from critics, GuideStar announced it was removing the flags. The FBI has worked with the SPLC in the past on outreach programs, but Attorney General Jeff Sessions has signaled a very different attitude. At a meeting of the Alliance Defending Freedom in August, Sessions said, ‘You are not a hate group,’ and condemned the SPLC for using the label ‘to bully and to intimidate groups like yours which fight for religious freedom.’”

In his letter to the IRS leader, Sen. Cotton noted that the SPLC regularly defamed reputable conservative groups in its hate map designation–which runs as he already detailed contrary to IRS regulations and federal statute regarding nonprofit status for organizations.

“Each year, the SPLC publishes a so-called ‘hate map,’ which ostensibly identifies hate groups such as the Ku Klux Klan and the Nation of Islam. But under the guise of its ‘hate map,’ the SPLC also lists its mainstream political opponents and faith-based groups, including reputable organizations such as the Family Research Council, the Alliance Defending Freedom, and the Center for Immigration Studies,” Cotton wrote.

Cotton also noted that the SPLC has regularly engaged in defamation of individuals, citing reports from the Washington Examiner‘s Emily Jashinsky and National Review‘s Douglas Murray.

“The SPLC also defames individuals. It labeled the civil-rights activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali and the British political activist Maajid Nawaz as ‘anti-Muslim extremists,’” Cotton wrote. “Last June, the SPLC agreed to pay Nawaz – who is himself Muslim – $3.375 million following a defamation lawsuit.”

Cotton noted too that the leftist group’s defamation of conservatives has real-life serious consequences as well, citing the shooter who attacked the Family Research Council in 2012.

“The SPLC’s defamation has not just damaged the reputation of these mainstream organizations and individuals by lumping them in with the Ku Klux Klan and Nation of Islam; it has resulted in injury and the threat of the loss of life, including an attempted mass murder,” Cotton wrote. “In 2012, Floyd Lee Corkins entered and shot up the Family Research Council’s headquarters, while carrying fifteen Chick-fil-A sandwiches that he planned to smear in his victims’ faces. Corkins told investigators that he selected the Family Research Council because the SPLC labeled the organization as a ‘hate group.’”

Cotton cites a 2013 CNN report on Corkins’ trial, where Corkins admitted he targeted the FRC–a leading mainstream conservative group–because of SPLC’s false labeling of it as a “hate group.”

Cotton then turns to how the organization has abused its tax-exempt status to enrich its leadership, including the now-removed leader Dees. To make these points, Cotton cites New Yorker investigation into Dees and the SPLC published on March 21, as well as the SPLC’s own financial documents including the group’s 990 form filed with the IRS and a report from the Nonprofit Times.

“The SPLC operates as a tax-sheltered slush fund to enrich its leadership: In addition to failing to have a tax-exempt purpose, the SPLC’s peculiar financial situation warrants your attention,” Cotton wrote. “Federal law prohibits tax-exempt organizations from inuring to the benefit of any private individual. Yet the SPLC has accrued more than $500 million in assets as of October 31, 2018. Reportedly and inexplicably, $121 million of these assets are parked in offshore accounts. In 2017 alone, these funds were used to pay the organization’s founder and longtime leader, who was recently removed for unspecified inappropriate conduct, more than $400,000. This payment came despite reports that Morris Dees, in addition to allegedly engaging in sexual misconduct, had ‘ratchetted down his involvement with the organization.’ This is more than nine times the median household income for Montgomery, Alabama, where the SPLC is headquartered.”

Cotton concludes the letter by asking Rettig, the IRS commissioner, to take “immediate action.”

“Perhaps the SPLC was founded for noble purposes and decades ago performed some good work, but what is left of the SPLC is no longer operating in a manner consistent with IRS guidelines and applicable law,” Cotton wrote. “Based on this concerning information and the flood of recent reports, I encourage you to take immediate action.”

2017 JUSSIE SMOLLETT MUSIC VIDEO FEATURED A FAKE TRUMP, A NOOSE AND ‘ALTERNATIVE FACTS’

2017 Jussie Smollett Music Video Featured A Fake Trump, A Noose And ‘Alternative Facts’

Smollett’s video, titled “F.U.W.” for “F**ked Up World,” explored themes of perceived racial bias and human rights abuses from Dakota Access Pipeline and Standing Rock to the water crisis in Flint, Michigan

“Empire” actor Jussie Smollett released a music video in 2017 that featured a fake President Donald Trump, a noose and the words “alternative facts.”

WATCH:

Smollett’s video, titled “F.U.W.” for “F**ked Up World,” explored themes of perceived racial bias and human rights abuses from Dakota Access Pipeline and Standing Rock to the water crisis in Flint, Michigan. (RELATED: Dueling Protests Over Jussie Smollett Case Rock Chicago)

The lyrics were clearly aimed at the fake Trump, who made an appearance early on:

Build a wall. You won’t keep us from loving each other.

Rewrite the law. You won’t keep us from loving each other.

Resist. Resist. Resist. Resist. Resist. Resist …

The actor, who claimed he was attacked in Chicago in late January, alleged that his attackers yelled, “This is MAGA country!” as they poured bleach on him and wrapped a noose around his neck. He later said on “Good Morning America” that he believed he had been targeted because of his activism “against 45.”

Police offered a different story, however, saying instead that there was evidence indicating that Smollett had possibly staged the attack himself. Investigators detailed a timeline of events and a series of communications between Smollett and the two Nigerian brothers who admitted to attacking him — but said that he had directed them to do so.

The charges against Smollett were dropped last week after he forfeited his $10,000 bond and agreed to do community service, but many were quick to voice displeasure with the decision. Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel went so far as to call it “a whitewashing of justice.”

#MeToo founder Alyssa Milano defends ‘creepy’ Joe Biden from harassment allegations

 

Screen Shot 2019-04-02 at 10.55.57 AM

Actress, #MeToo advocate, and all round woke feminist Alyssa MIlano has stepped in to defend her “friend” Joe Biden, after accusations of inappropriate touching and groping have mounted against the former vice president.

“I am proud to call Joe Biden a friend. He has been a leader and a champion on fighting violence against women,”Milano tweeted on Monday, adding “that’s who Joe Biden is – a warm, generous individual who believes its on all of us to pay attention to women’s stories and experiences.”

Screen Shot 2019-04-02 at 10.59.02 AM

As vice president, Biden spearheaded the ‘It’s On Us’ campaign against sexual assault on college campuses. However, the 76-year-old has also built up quite the highlight reel of his own inappropriate moments; becoming far too familiar and handsy with women and children at Washington events.

Most recently, Biden was accused of unwanted kissing by former Nevada legislator Lucy Flores, who said the former VP planted a “big slow kiss” on the back of her head at a rally in Las Vegas; and Connecticut woman Amy Lappos, who alleges Biden “put his hand around my neck and pulled me in to rub noses with me.”

Biden denies any wrongdoing, saying it was “never” his intention to make anyone feel uncomfortable. Milano, who reinvented herself in recent years as a vocal feminist and founder of the #MeToo movement, agrees.

“I respect Lucy Flores’ decision to share her story and agree with Biden that we all must pay attention to it,” she tweeted. “But, just as we must believe women that decide to come forward, we cannot assume all women’s experiences are the same.”

Screen Shot 2019-04-02 at 10.59.52 AM

“Believe women, but…” is certainly a change of tune for Milano, who led the crusade against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, last year. Milano said that his confirmation in the face of uncorroborated sexual assault allegations served to “institutionalize sexual violence,” and hashtagged her anti-Kavanaugh tweets“#BelieveWomen.”

Biden has not yet announced a run for the presidency in 2020, but is considered a likely candidate and a frontrunner among a crowded field of Democrats. Although progressive godfather Bernie Sanders remains a favorite among young voters, Biden topped a recent Quinnipiac University poll, with 29 percent of Democrats rating him as their first choice.

With Sanders dangerously close in the polls, a certain few journalists in the mainstream media have stepped in to downplay the accusations against Biden.

“Is is okay to bring up this could be politically motivated?” MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski asked on Monday. “Are we allowed to bring up that Lucy Flores is a huge Bernie person? And she has political connections that might be counter to Biden’s goals?”

Brzezinski then laughed off Biden’s wandering hands, describing her “friend” as “extremely affectionate, extremely flirtatious in a completely safe way.”

Still, others are more puzzled. Fox News host Tucker Carlson asked former Clinton Adviser Richard Goodstein “have you ever sniffed a stranger’s hair? What is that?” Even liberal late-night comedian Stephen Colbert piled on Biden. “Generally, the only people who come up from behind, put their arms around you, smell your hair and kiss your head are dead husbands teaching you pottery,” he jibed.

(NO, IT’S NOT AN APRIL FOOL’S JOKE.) – Facebook plans to curate ‘high quality’ news for its users from ‘trusted outlets’

Screen Shot 2019-04-02 at 10.40.40 AM

Mark Zuckerberg is considering hiring human “editors” to hand-pick “high-quality news” to show Facebook users in an effort to combat fake news — and no, it’s not an April Fool’s joke.

In his ongoing quest to satisfy the political censorship demands of Western governments, Zuckerberg told German publishing house Axel Springer that he is considering the introduction of a dedicated news section for the social media platform, which would potentially use humans to curate the news from “broadly trusted” outlets. Zuckerberg said Facebook might also start paying news publishers to include their articles in this dedicated news section in an effort to reward “high-quality, trustworthy content.”

With social media censorship already at worryingly high levels, who will decide which outlets are “broadly trusted” and which are untrustworthy? What qualifies one outlet as more “trusted” than another? Will Zuckerberg make the criteria public?

Collective punishment? Zuckerberg’s call for internet regulation is aimed at competitors – analyst

Fresh from the anti-climactic Russiagate saga and long-awaited Mueller report, will Facebook penalize all the outlets that incessantly pushed the Trump/Russia “collusion” narrative and hyped fake “bombshells” for more than two years sans evidence, or will the likes of MSNBC and Rachel Maddow automatically earn “trusted status? The answer to that question is blindingly obvious.

Facebook’s efforts to combat fake news are reminiscent of other recent efforts from apps like NewsGuard, the US government-linked app which rates news websites according to their “trustworthiness” and, unsurprisingly, targets alternative media sites which do not strictly adhere to establishment narratives. If recent history is any indicator, Facebook’s own efforts to rate news will also fall directly in line with US government objectives.

The social media giant has been rightly accused of blatant censorship on multiple occasions in recent memory — and there doesn’t seem a way that a group of Facebook-hired editors could be trusted to curate the news for anyone, unless it took some serious steps to address its various biases. In fact, even if it did that, isn’t hiring human editors with their own political biases and preferences to sift through all the available news and select the stories deemed fit for public consumption just an Orwellian idea in the first place?

Facebook should probably already be aware of the pitfalls when it comes to hiring human editors for such purposes. During the 2016 US presidential election, the company’s solution to political bias in its trending news section was to fire the human editors responsible for it. Maybe Zuckerberg thinks this time it will be different? Or maybe, and more likely, this is just another PR effort to placate the pro-censorship crowd on Capitol Hill.

There is no shortage of examples of Facebook censorship at this point. Last year, the platform inexplicably took down the English-language page belonging to left-leaning, Venezuela-based news network Telesur — and deleted the page belonging to Venezuela Analysis, another left-leaning outlet offering commentary critical of Washington’s foreign policy in Latin America. The pages were later restored, but Facebook was not forthcoming with an explanation.

Changes made to Facebook algorithms to combat “fake news” in 2017, saw traffic to multiple socialist and government accountability websites plummeting — including Police the Police (a page exposing US police brutality) and the Free Thought Project (which promotes government transparency). Alternative news websites like Truth-out.org, Democracy Now and Alternet also suffered as a result of those algorithm changes.

More recently, Facebook suspended popular pages run by Maffick Media, which is 51 percent owned by RT’s video agency Ruptly. Coincidentally, the content on those pages is also highly critical of the US government. Funnily enough, Facebook isn’t often caught censoring popular pages whose content is Washington-friendly. The Maffick pages were later restored, but Facebook forced them to include more explicit information about their funding, which in itself is no big deal, but it is a requirement curiously not demanded of US government-funded or linked pages.

ALSO ON RT.COMZuckerberg asks governments for more internet regulation in self-flagellation exercise

Not only has Facebook been accused of censorship, however, it has also been found to be working at the behest of certain governments — but again, only Washington-friendly ones, of course.

The Intercept reported last year that Facebook met with Israeli government officials and complied with orders to delete the accounts belonging to certain Palestinian activists. Facebook quickly bowed to Israel’s demands after threats that it would be forced into complying with the deletion orders by law if it failed to do so voluntarily.

But things don’t look to be getting any better on the Facebook censorship front since then. A journalist for Israeli news outlet +972 Magazine tweeted on Monday that Facebook was now punishing news sites (in the form of lower views) for publishing content that “could be a negative experience” for users — whatever that means. The content in question was an article by the magazine about Gaza’s Great Return march and the casualties inflicted on protesters by the Israeli army.

Screen Shot 2019-04-02 at 10.42.59 AM

With such a terrible track record when it comes to political bias and willingness to censor news and information, don’t be surprised if Facebook’s planned “dedicated news section” of “high-quality” information turns out to be a failure.

Danielle Ryan

Big League Politics Editor Patrick Howley: Obama and Brennan’s Crime of the Century Included Coercing A Supreme Court Justice

By

Big League Politics Editor-in-Chief Patrick Howley joined host Matt Locke on the syndicated Conservative Cartel radio show (12-3 PM on Mojo 5-0 Radio) to discuss his landmark piece on the “Crime of the Century” carried out by Barack Obama and Deep State conspirators against President Donald Trump.

It turns out the Russia Collusion Hoax even included the attempted coercion of a Supreme Court justice by two Obama administration intel officials.

READ THE FULL REPORT: HOW OBAMA, HILLARY, AND BRENNAN CARRIED OUT THE CRIME OF THE CENTURY

 

CAUGHT ON TAPE: DNC Chair Says ‘Cowards’ Who Support Trump ‘Will Be Judged Harshly’

By

Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez said that Republican supporters of President Donald Trump are “cowards” for backing up President Trump’s America First agenda, which aims to fight back against the corruption of the Washington establishment.

BLP reported:

Speaking at a function for left wing group Demand Action, the DNC’s chairman complained that Christianity was hurting Democrats because people who go to church tend to be instilled with Republican values.

“And I had someone in northwest Wisconsin tell me: ‘You know what? For most of the people I know, their principle sources of information are Fox News, the NRA newsletter and the pulpit on Sunday.’ And it should come as a surprise to no-one that our message doesn’t penetrate,” Tom Perez said.

How dare those conservative Republicans believe in God! It’s bad for leftist messaging, after all.

“It should come as a surprise to no-one that that person has elevated the issue of courts to the top because that person on the pulpit is saying ‘ignore everything else that this person has done and is doing, we have to focus on one issue of Roe vs. Wade.’ And people buy it. Because that’s their only source,” he continued.

Perez obviously has not stepped into a church in a while. As noted by the few outspokenly pro-life pastors, getting most Christian pastors to discuss, much less denounce abortion is a difficult task. They fear alienating their major donors, board members and their church membership by being too politically controversial, regardless of the Bible’s teachings. In fact, it is one of the toughest issues plaguing Evangelical Christianity today.

“If you haven’t noticed, there’s a blood-filled gap between what the church believes and what the church does,” said a recent Relearn Church article. “Unfortunately, this inconsistency isn’t exclusive to abortion. Because of the church’s lethargy in effecting culture, it has lost much of its moral high ground in just about every politically charged topic of our time.”

Perez’s speech highlights how out of touch Democrats truly are with ordinary Americans. His idea of Christianity is exactly what one would expect of a non-Christian – that everyone who goes to church is brainwashed by conservative talking points. In reality, the Christianity has sadly become much more progressive in America.

Perhaps the reason the Democrats “message doesn’t penetrate” is not because of the church, but because they are out touch with ordinary Americans.

WEALTHY SAN FRANCISCO LIBERALS FIGHT HOMELESS SHELTER BEING BUILT NEAR THEIR MANSIONS

Wealthy San Francisco Liberals Fight Homeless Shelter Being Built Near Their Mansions

Neighborhood that cast most votes for Hillary doesn’t want poor people anywhere near their gated enclave

 | Infowars.com – APRIL 1, 2019

A wealthy liberal neighborhood in San Francisco whose residents cast the most votes for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election is fighting against a proposal to build a new homeless shelter near their gated mansions.

Mayor London Breed has sponsored legislation to fast track a homeless shelter that would house 200 people. However, wealthy liberals living in the affected area have set up a GoFundMe to stop the project which has already hit $80,000 of its $100,000 target.

The GoFundMe page cites concerns over “public safety, drug use, and other problems that a large shelter may bring to the community,” as well as the fact that “a third of the homeless are drug users and some are sex offenders”.

Records show that Mission Bay, one of the areas most heavily targeted by organizers of the GoFundMe, was the most pro-Hillary neighborhood in the entire city of San Francisco, laying down 1,680 Clinton/Kaine votes out of 1,893 ballots cast.

The resident who started the GoFundMe is from South Beach, another area that heavily voted for Hillary Clinton.

Wealthy residents even turned out to protest against the homeless shelter last month, citing worries about “crime and sanitation”.

The homeless shelter would be located a stone’s throw from Google’s San Francisco offices and Gap’s headquarters.

The story once again illustrates how while liberals will virtue signal all day about their concern for the poor and needy, when it comes down to actually doing something about it, they either go AWOL or advocate for the exact opposite.

As Tucker Carlson’s latest bestselling book documents, Democrat politicians who preach the loudest about the needs of minorities and the poor also routinely choose to live in the wealthiest, whitest areas possible – as far away from the poor as they can.

Rich leftists also regularly fight to avoid black and minority children being sent to the same schools that their white children attend, such as when liberal comedian Samantha Bee and her husband tried to prevent the introduction of low income children to the school in New York that their kids attended.

As ever with these hypocrites, it’s do as I say, not as I do.

Meanwhile, thanks to San Francisco’s “progressive” policy of handing out needles to drug addicts, the city’s population of drug addicts now outnumbers its high school students.

San Francisco’s junkie population – many of whom live on the streets and use sidewalks as outdoor toilets – now stands at 24,500, an increase of 2,000 drug users since 2012 and 8,500 more people than the city’s 16,000 high school students.

Despite this increase, the city handed out a record 5.8 million free syringes last year – about 500,000 more than in 2017. There were 9,659 calls complaining about needles littering the streets in 2018, an increase of a third on 2017 numbers.

SUBSCRIBE

CONFIRMED: Ilhan Omar Facing Campaign Finance Violation Probe. Here Are The Complaints Filed Against Her.

By AMANDA PRESTIGIACOMO

Sinclair reporter James Rosen confirmed Monday morning that authorities recently completed investigations into two complaints concerning campaign finance violations against Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar.

The two complaints against the controversial figure were filed last year by Minnesota state lawmaker Rep. Steve Drazkowski, a Republican. Drazkowski claims Omar spent thousands of dollars on a divorce attorney and personal travel expenses.

“In referring Omar to the Minnesota Campaign Finance Board, Drazkowski alleged that Omar improperly spent close to $6,000 in campaign funds for personal use, including payments to her divorce attorney and for travel to Boston and Estonia,” says the report.

Rosen notes that Drazkowski’s filings follow “an earlier episode in which Omar repaid $2,500 for honoraria she received for speeches at colleges that receive state funding, a violation of ethics rules for Minnesota lawmakers.”

“I had observed a long pattern,” said Drazkowski. “Representative Omar hasn’t followed the law. She’s repeatedly trampled on the laws of the state in a variety of areas, and gotten by with it.”

The Republican lawmaker maintained that Omar has been allowed to skate in the face of her controversial actions by strategically using her identity as a shield.

“There’s a political fear that people have of being called a name, being called a bigot, being called racist, being called Islamophobic,” he said.

When Omar was questioned about the probe into the alleged finance violations on Thursday, she refused to respond. Earlier this year, the Democrat denied the alleged indiscretions, though the complaints were still unconfirmed to the public at the time.

“The Omar Committee’s 2017 year-end report shows several noncampaign disbursements for out-of-state travel for Rep. Omar to attend various events,” reads a notification allegedly from the finance board posted on Drazkowski’s website.

“The information on the committee’s 2017 year-end report does not indicate how attendance at these events would have helped Rep. Omar in the performance of her legislative duties,” another notification says.

The results of the investigations are expected to soon be released, Sinclair reports.

Despite her many controversies, Omar has become a key figure for the Democrat Party.

The Democrat has found herself under fire on more than one occasion for past and present comments she’s made about Jews and Israel. In March, for example, Omar suggested Jewish Americans have “dual loyalty” after she was criticized for past comments perceived as anti-Semitic.

“Lawmakers must be able to debate w/o prejudice or bigotry. I am saddened that Rep. Omar continues to mischaracterize support for Israel. I urge her to retract this statement and engage in further dialogue with the Jewish community on why these comments are so hurtful,” said Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY), who is Jewish.

“Our democracy is built on debate, Congresswoman!” Omar responded on Twitter. “I should not be expected to have allegiance/pledge support to a foreign country in order to serve my country in Congress or serve on committee. The people of the 5th elected me to serve their interest. I am sure we agree on that!”

CNN didn’t get ‘anything’ wrong in Russiagate reporting, host claims. It didn’t?

CAP

The host of CNN’s State of the Union, Jake Tapper, tried to defend the network’s coverage of Russiagate, claiming it actually got nothing wrong. The bold claim, however, was challenged by other journalists.

Tapper made the controversial remark while talking to acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney on Sunday.

“I’m not sure what you’re saying the media got wrong. The media reported the investigation was going on. Other than the people in the media on the left, not on this network, I don’t know anybody that got anything wrong,” Tapper stated.

CAP

Mulvaney shot back at what he called Tapper’s personal “recollection of history.”

“Face it, the media got this wrong. It’s okay. People get stuff wrong all the time, just not at this level,” he said.

Tapper’s defense of the ‘balanced’ CNN coverage raised a few eyebrows among the journalist community, as some took to Twitter to challenge the claim and bring up embarrassing retractions of the stories on ‘collusion’ the network had to make.

CAP

Others pointed out previous statements by Tapper himself.

CAP

CAP

And even accused him of reporting fake news.

CAP

CAP

Many users took issue with the overall tone of the coverage, as well as opinions expressed by CNN guests who pushed the conspiracy theory really hard.

CAP

CAP

Some joked that Tapper’s remark was proof that he was among those viewers who stopped watching CNN as it obsessed over the disproven ‘Trump-Russia collusion’.

CAP

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑