Davin News Server

On Wed, 21 May 2025 12:04:59 -0700,  Alan says...  

> > So what?  Democrats do that all the time.
> > 
> 
> Give an example.

I can't give one. 

Subject: LOL... Rudy Canoza... So Stupid... Thinks Trump started the DOJ, FBI, IRS and other agencies, down the road to 
weaponization 
From: AlleyCat <katt@gmail.com>

Date: 


Barack Obama Administration (2009-2017):             

The Obama administration continued to face questions regarding surveillance and the independence of law enforcement.

NSA Surveillance Leaks (Snowden):
Edward Snowden's leaks revealed the vast scope of NSA surveillance programs, including the collection of metadata from phone 
calls and internet communications. This reignited the debate about government overreach and led to accusations that intelligence 
agencies were collecting data on ordinary citizens, which some considered a "weaponization" of surveillance tools.


IRS Scandal:
The IRS was accused of targeting conservative political groups for extra scrutiny when they applied for tax-exempt status. While 
not an intelligence agency, this was seen by critics as an example of a federal agency being "weaponized" for political purposes.


"Unmasking" in Intelligence Reports:
Towards the end of the Obama administration and into the Trump administration, there were accusations of "unmasking" U.S. 
citizens in intelligence reports. "Unmasking" refers to the process of revealing the identity of a U.S. person whose 
communications were incidentally collected during foreign intelligence surveillance. While often legitimate, critics alleged that 
these requests could be politically motivated.


IRS Targeting Controversy:

The Allegation:
This is perhaps the most prominent and widely discussed accusation of weaponization during the Obama administration. The IRS was 
accused of unfairly scrutinizing conservative and Tea Party groups applying for tax-exempt status, delaying their applications, 
and demanding excessive information. Critics saw this as an attempt to suppress political opposition.

Details:
In 2013, the IRS admitted that it had used keywords like "Tea Party, " "Patriot, " and "9/12" to flag groups for extra scrutiny. 
While the IRS initially claimed it was lower-level employees, and later internal reports indicated "ineffective management" and 
that some liberal groups were also flagged (though conservative groups were disproportionately affected), the controversy led to 
apologies from the IRS, congressional hearings, and an FBI investigation (which found no evidence of criminal wrongdoing).

"Weaponization" Angle:
Republicans and conservative groups strongly argued that this was a clear case of a federal agency being weaponized against 
political opponents of the Obama administration, violating their First Amendment rights. The fact that a significant donor to 
Barack Obama was initially tapped to lead the Justice Department's investigation into the matter further fueled these 
accusations.


"Fast and Furious" Gun-Running Scandal:

The Allegation:
This was a U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) operation that allowed firearms to be illegally sold to 
straw purchasers, with the intent of tracking them to Mexican drug cartels. However, many of the weapons were lost, some 
appearing at crime scenes, including the killing of a U.S. Border Patrol agent.

Holder's Role:
Attorney General Eric Holder faced intense scrutiny for the operation and for allegedly withholding documents from Congress 
during its investigation. This culminated in a House of Representatives vote to hold Holder in contempt of Congress in 2012, 
marking the first time a sitting U.S. Attorney General had been held in contempt.

"Weaponization" Angle:
While not directly about targeting political opponents domestically, critics saw the DOJ's handling of the scandal and Holder's 
resistance to congressional oversight as an abuse of power and a failure to be transparent, which some interpreted as the Justice 
Department operating outside proper checks and balances.


DOJ's Stance on Voting Rights and Civil Rights Division:

The Allegation:
Critics, particularly conservatives, accused Holder's Justice Department of politicizing the Civil Rights Division, especially 
regarding voting rights enforcement. They alleged that the DOJ aggressively pursued certain cases while dismissing others based 
on political ideology.

Specific Examples:

New Black Panther Party case (2009):
The DOJ dropped a civil complaint against members of the New Black Panther Party accused of voter intimidation in Philadelphia 
during the 2008 election. This decision was heavily criticized by conservatives, who saw it as politically motivated.

"Race-neutrality" in enforcement:
Some former DOJ attorneys and critics argued that the Civil Rights Division abandoned its previous policy of race-neutral 
enforcement, prioritizing cases based on racial outcomes rather than strict adherence to the law.

"Weaponization" Angle:
These actions were cited as evidence that the DOJ was being used to advance a specific political and racial agenda, rather than 
impartially enforcing the law.


Leak Investigations and Treatment of Journalists:

The Allegation:
The Obama administration, under Eric Holder, pursued an unprecedented number of leak investigations, prosecuting more 
whistleblowers and sources under the Espionage Act than all previous administrations combined. The Justice Department also 
engaged in controversial tactics, such as secretly obtaining phone records of Associated Press journalists and designating a Fox 
News reporter as a "co-conspirator" in a leak case.

"Weaponization" Angle:
While framed by the administration as necessary for national security, press freedom advocates and civil liberties groups heavily 
criticized these actions as a "war on whistleblowers" and a significant threat to press freedom. They argued that the government 
was "weaponizing" its investigative powers to control information and punish dissent, chilling speech and reporting.


Specific Cases Mentioned (Presidential Library Outhouse, Rodeo Clown):

You are referring to allegations that Eric Holder's DOJ pursued seemingly trivial or politically motivated cases. While the 
specifics of these particular examples ("guy who built the presidential library which was an outhouse, and a rodeo clown") are 
not widely documented as major Justice Department priorities or controversies that gained national attention in the same way as 
the IRS scandal or Fast and Furious, they align with a broader narrative propagated by critics:
that the DOJ under Holder was overly aggressive or selectively applied justice.

It's important to note that such specific, seemingly minor cases, if they occurred, would likely be handled at a local U.S. 
Attorney's office level. However, if they were perceived as disproportionate or politically motivated, they would feed into the 
larger narrative of politicization and "weaponization." Without more specific details or widespread reporting on these exact 
incidents being directed from the top levels of the DOJ for political reasons, it's harder to confirm them as explicit examples 
of "weaponization" in the systemic sense, but they certainly would be used by critics to support their arguments.

In summary:
The Obama administration, particularly the Justice Department under Eric Holder, faced substantial accusations of 
"weaponization" related to:

The IRS targeting of conservative groups:
1. The handling of the "Fast and Furious" operation and subsequent congressional oversight.
2. Perceived politicization of the Civil Rights Division and voting rights enforcement.
3. An aggressive stance on leak investigations that critics argued chilled press freedom.


These controversies, while often defended by the administration as legitimate actions or isolated incidents, fueled a narrative 
among critics that federal agencies were being used for political purposes, contributing significantly to the ongoing debate 
about the "weaponization" of government.

=====================================================

The Biden Administration regarding "Weaponization":


FBI and Catholics:

The Claim:
Critics, particularly from conservative media and Republican politicians, have accused the FBI under the Biden administration of 
targeting "traditionalist Catholics" as potential domestic terrorists.

Specifics:
This accusation stems from a leaked internal FBI memo from the Richmond field office in January 2023. The memo, titled "Interest 
of Racially or Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremists in Radical-Traditionalist Catholic Ideology, " suggested that some 
"radical-traditionalist Catholic" individuals or groups could be linked to racially or ethnically motivated violent extremism 
(RMVEs) and recommended "threat mitigation" efforts, including outreach to dioceses to develop sources.

FBI/DOJ Response:
The FBI quickly retracted the memo, stating it 'did not meet our exacting standards" and was not reflective of FBI policy. 
Director Christopher Wray stated he was "aghast" by it. An internal Justice Department Inspector General report, released in 
April 2024, concluded that the memo violated professional standards but found no evidence of 'malicious intent" or that anyone 
was ordered to investigate Catholics based on their religion. It noted the memo relied on biased sources like the Southern 
Poverty Law Center.

Political Framing:
Despite the retraction and internal review, critics continue to cite this memo as evidence of anti-Catholic bias and 
"weaponization" of the FBI against religious groups. They argue that even if unintended, the memo's existence points to a broader 
problem within the agency.


Prosecution of Donald Trump:

The Claim:
Donald Trump and his supporters consistently argue that the multiple criminal indictments and investigations against him are 
politically motivated and constitute a "weaponization" of the Justice Department under the Biden administration.

Specifics:
Trump faces various federal and state charges, including: Federal Charges (brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith, appointed by 
Attorney General Merrick Garland):

Mar-a-Lago Documents Case:
Allegations of mishandling classified documents after leaving office and obstructing justice.

January 6th/Election Interference Case:
Allegations related to efforts to overturn the 2020 election results and the events of January 6, 2021.


State Charges:

New York (Manhattan D.A.):
Charges related to hush-money payments during the 2016 campaign.

Georgia (Fulton County D.A.):
Racketeering and other charges related to election interference in Georgia.


Arguments for "Weaponization":

Timing and Political Impact:
Critics argue that the timing of these indictments, especially during an election cycle, is designed to interfere with Trump's 
presidential campaign.

"Two-tiered Justice System":
Trump and his allies frequently claim that he is being targeted while others (like Hunter Biden or Hillary Clinton) receive 
preferential treatment from the DOJ.

Biden's Statements:
While the White House maintains the independence of the Justice Department, some of Biden's public comments critical of Trump 
have been cited by critics as evidence of political influence.


Broader Context of "Weaponization" Claims:

It's important to understand that "weaponization of government" has become a very common and politically charged term, especially 
in the current polarized environment. Both sides of the political spectrum tend to accuse the other of using federal agencies to 
target opponents when investigations or actions are taken against their interests or allies.

House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government:
Republicans in the House of Representatives established this subcommittee specifically to investigate alleged abuses of power by 
the executive branch against American citizens, with a focus on the Biden administration's actions. They have issued reports and 
held hearings on these matters.

Executive Orders:
There have even been discussions and proposed executive orders (from a future potential Trump administration, for example) to 
address "ending the weaponization of the federal government, " demonstrating how central this concept is to the current political 
discourse.

In summary, regarding the Biden administration, the "weaponization" claims primarily revolve around the FBI's actions related to 
the "traditionalist Catholic" memo (which was retracted and internally reviewed) and the various prosecutions of Donald Trump. 
While the administration maintains the independence and integrity of its law enforcement and intelligence agencies, these actions 
remain a significant point of contention and a key part of the current political debate about the role and power of the federal 
government.

===============================================================================

"Trump Derangement Syndrome" Is a Real Mental Condition

All you need to know about "Trump Derangement Syndrome," or TDS.

"Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) is a mental condition in which a person has been driven effectively insane due to their dislike 
of Donald Trump, to the point at which they will abandon all logic and reason."

Justin Raimondo, the editorial director of Antiwar.com, wrote a piece in the Los Angeles Times in 2016 that broke TDS down into 
three distinct phases or stages:

"In the first stage of the disease, victims lose all sense of proportion. The president-elect's every tweet provokes a firestorm, 
as if 140 characters were all it took to change the world."

"The mid-level stages of TDS have a profound effect on the victim's vocabulary: Sufferers speak a distinctive language consisting 
solely of hyperbole."

"As TDS progresses, the afflicted lose the ability to distinguish fantasy from reality."

The Point here is simple: TDS is, in the eyes of its adherents, the knee-jerk opposition from liberals to anything and everything 
Trump does. If Trump announced he was donating every dollar he's ever made, TDS sufferers would suggest he was up to something 
nefarious, according to the logic of TDS. There's nothing - not. one. thing. - that Trump could do or say that would be received 
positively by TDSers.

The history of Trump Derangement Syndrome actually goes back to the early 2000s - a time when the idea of Trump as president was 
a punch line for late-night comics and nothing more.

Wikipedia traces its roots to "Bush Derangement Syndrome" - a term first coined by the late conservative columnist Charles 
Krauthammer back in 2003. The condition, as Krauthammer defined it, was "the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people 
in reaction to the policies, the presidency - nay - the very existence of George W. Bush."