Sarah Palin To Become FOX News Contributor, Have Own Show

Sarah Palin To Become FOX News Contributor, Have Own Show

January 11th, 2010 Posted By Erik Wong.


The Washington Post:

Sarah Palin, who regularly rips the media, is becoming a television pundit at a place where she’s likely to feel at home.

A Fox News executive says the network will shortly announce that the former vice-presidential nominee is signing on as a contributor.

Palin, who resigned as governor of Alaska last summer, will appear as a commentator on various Fox shows. She will also host an occasional program that will examine inspirational tales involving ordinary Americans.

Palin will join Mike Huckabee as a Fox contributor who was also involved in the 2008 campaign. The exposure can only help Palin if she decides to pursue a 2012 presidential bid.

At the moment, Palin makes pronouncements mainly through her Facebook page. The Fox connection would give her a platform on the nation’s top-rated cable news channel.

Palin is extremely popular with her conservative base, which has fueled the sales of her best-selling memoir. But she is a divisive political figure who not only draws the ire of liberals but some Republicans, including staffers who deal with her during her run as John McCain’s running mate. Steve Schmidt, a top McCain strategist, said on “60 Minutes” last night that “there were numerous instances that she said things that were — that were not accurate that ultimately, the campaign had to deal with.”

Hiring Palin could further boost the popularity of Rupert Murdoch’s network among conservative viewers. The network already employs former Bush White House aide Karl Rove and former House speaker Newt Gingrich as highly visible commentators.

Culture of Corruption Watch: White House, Dems stand behind Geithner in AIG/backdoor bank bailout cover-up

Lead Story

Culture of Corruption Watch: White House, Dems stand behind Geithner in AIG/backdoor bank bailout cover-up

By Michelle Malkin  •  January 11, 2010 03:47 PM

Photoshop/CoC card set credit: Tennyson Hayes

Late last week, Bloomberg News reported that the New York Federal Reserve Bank — then under the leadership (or rather, lack of leadership) of Tim Geithner — presided over a systemic effort in the fall of 2008 to suppress public disclosure of ailing insurer AIG’s backdoor bailout payments to banks (I lambasted the corruptocrat NYFed/Geithner regime over the suppression on Fox & Friends last Thursday here):

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York, then led by Timothy Geithner, told American International Group Inc. to withhold details from the public about the bailed-out insurer’s payments to banks during the depths of the financial crisis, e-mails between the company and its regulator show. AIG said in a draft of a regulatory filing that the insurer paid banks, which included Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Societe Generale SA, 100 cents on the dollar for credit-default swaps they bought from the firm. The New York Fed crossed out the reference, according to the e-mails, and AIG excluded the language when the filing was made public on Dec. 24, 2008. The e-mails were obtained by Representative Darrell Issa, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

The New York Fed took over negotiations between AIG and the banks in November 2008 as losses on the swaps, which were contracts tied to subprime home loans, threatened to swamp the insurer weeks after its taxpayer-funded rescue. The regulator decided that Goldman Sachs and more than a dozen banks would be fully repaid for $62.1 billion of the swaps, prompting lawmakers to call the AIG rescue a “backdoor bailout” of financial firms. “It appears that the New York Fed deliberately pressured AIG to restrict and delay the disclosure of important information,” said Issa, a California Republican. Taxpayers “deserve full and complete disclosure under our nation’s securities laws, not the withholding of politically inconvenient information.”

Treasury Secretary Geithner’s defense?

He says he had no clue.

Late Friday night, the NYFed sent a letter to GOP Rep. Darrell Issa of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform underscoring how in the dark Geithner was:

1-8-10 Baxter Letter to Issa – AIG-Geithner see below

The ignorance card has worked well for the hapless tax cheat. It got him nominated and confirmed to his present position. And it’s saving his hide now. The White House and the Democrat majority are standing by Geithner.

Snap a picture of this Culture of Corruption group hug:

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner retains the confidence of President Barack Obama as he faces questions about why the Federal Reserve Bank of New York tried to withhold details of the government’s financial-industry rescue, administration officials said.

Aides to top congressional Democrats also said that Geithner has support on Capitol Hill as lawmakers prepare hearings into why the New York Fed in December 2008 asked American International Group Inc. to scale back disclosures of the government’s $182.3 billion bailout of the New York-based insurer. The Treasury Department said Geithner, 48, recused himself from such deliberations after Obama picked him to be Treasury chief the previous month.

But House Republicans are turning up the heat. Crank it higher:

Following the release of e-mails revealing the New York Federal Reserve’s apparent efforts to suppress disclosure to federal regulators of AIG bank payments during the financial crisis, the lead House Republican on the Joint Economic Committee is calling for a Joint Economic Hearing into the matter – with Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner as the lead witness.

In a letter to Democratic Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney of New York, U.S. Congressman Kevin Brady (R-TX) urges that Geithner testify before the committee and that Congress determine his “knowledge and complicity in the furtive efforts to discourage full disclosure to the SEC” of AIG payments to its banking counterparties.

“Given that Tim Geithner insisted on the sweetheart deals to the banks through AIG its not a stretch to believe he wanted them concealed, especially as he went through his vetting process in the Senate,” says Brady, who has called on the Treasury Secretary to resign for his failures as leader of economic recovery for the Obama Administration.

Brady says lawmakers should be concerned that this continues a pattern of lack of transparency by Geithner. The special inspector of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) has repeatedly criticized the Treasury Department for rejecting recommendations for more public transparency of TARP funds and for paying 100 cents on the dollar to AIG counterparties for nearly worthless credit-default swaps – a directive that cost taxpayers billions of dollars.

Democrat Rep. Edolphus Towns of N.Y. is also perking up his ears:

House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Ranking Member Darrell Issa (R-CA) welcomed Committee Chairman Edolphus Towns’ (D-NY) interest in new questions raised by Issa’s investigation surrounding Tim Geithner and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s decision to pay billions of dollars to AIG counterparties.

“The week of January 18th, the Oversight Committee will hold a hearing in which Secretary Geithner and NYFRB General Counsel Thomas Baxter will be invited to appear,” Issa said. “Both Republicans and Democrats on this Committee have been waiting for more than a year to get answers from Secretary Geithner. The documents my investigation has produced show that AIG was pressured by the FRBNY to conceal information related to Mr. Geithner’s decision to pay billions of taxpayer dollars to counterparties of AIG’s credit default swaps – including Goldman Sachs, Société Générale, and Deutsche Bank – to retire the swaps at 100 cents on the dollar, instead of demanding any concessions from these firms. This decision was the subject of a report by the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (“SIGTARP”) and the source of much public outrage.”

Issa added, “Should Secretary Geithner or anyone else this Committee wants to hear from decline the invitation to appear, they should be subpoenaed.”

And Issa gets to the heart of the matter:

“In the case of Secretary Geithner, he was presiding over unprecedented taxpayer-funded bailouts that would have tremendous consequences for the incoming Administration. Are we really to believe that Geithner “played no role in, and had no knowledge of” the AIG counterparty deal and the New York Fed’s effort to prevent AIG from disclosing details of a deal that ended up costing taxpayers tens of billions of dollars? If true, Secretary Geithner is admitting that as an unprecedented effort to stabilize Wall Street and the financial services sector was underway, he recused himself, thereby raising new questions on his competency.

If he truly played no role at all in any of this, I wonder if Secretary Geithner shares Tom Baxter’s understanding that he shouldn’t be informed about a deal that involved tens of billions of taxpayer dollars? Does he agree with the NYFRB’s attempts to pressure AIG to withhold disclosure of the counterparty deal of their SEC filings? Shouldn’t the standard for someone in his position be to instruct his subordinates to inform him as much as possible?

Remember: By his own admission, as I reported in Culture of Corruption, Geithner called his oversight of the financial meltdown during his NYFed tenure “inadequate.” He fostered Citigroup’s spending binge and engineered its $52 billion federal bailout, helped structure the $30 billion Bear Stearns bailout, and twiddled his thumbs in the corner while his staff directed AIG to hide details of the bank swaps that cost taxpayers an extra $13 billion on top of the $182 billion in public bailout funds it eventually reaped.

Despite all that, the White House and the Democrat majority, with cooperation from 10 Senate Republicans, put this fox in charge of the Treasury henhouse (don’t we have enough of those on the Hill?).

If these Beltway creatures refuse to drain the swamp, voters must do it themselves.

As commenter Flyoverman said in a thread earlier this morning: “The only ethics committee with any clout is an informed electorate.”

Obama never thought much of Biden

Obama never thought much of Biden

Rick Moran

Another juicy tidbit from Game Change via Jonathan Martin of Politico:

Of all the freshly revealed anecdotes, though, none may be as eye-opening as the previously-unknown friction between the president and vice-president – which on Saturday a Biden spokesman dismissed as “rumors.” The tensions began in September of 2008 word got back to Obama’s campaign headquarters that Biden had told reporters on his campaign plane that he was more qualified than his running mate to be president.”A chill set in between Chicago and the Biden plane,” Halperin and Heilemann write in the book, to be released Monday. “Joe and Obama barely spoke by phone, rarely campaigned together.”


But when Biden, at an October fund-raiser in Seattle, famously predicted that Obama would be tested with an international crisis, the then-Illinois senator had had enough.”How many times is Biden gonna say something stupid?” he demanded of his advisers on a conference call, a moment at which most people on the call said the candidate was as angry as they had ever heard him.

For his part, the authors write, Biden wasn’t pleased with the campaign’s direction.

After a prep session for a “Meet the Press” appearance following the Democratic convention, Biden was incredulous when he was briefed by campaign aides about the ticket’s tax policy. He told them: “Well, it’s your campaign. I’ll say what you want me to say. But after Election Day, all bets are off.”

Following his campaign plane braggadocio about being more qualified than the man who put him on the ticket, Biden’s access to the press was limited and he grilled new staffers that were assigned to him to try and determine if they were part of his team or loyal to Chicago.

Biden’s access to the press is still limited. But that hasn’t stopped the human gaffe machine from delivering a jaw dropper every once and a while.

Will Obama keep Biden as Veep in 2012? Now that this information is out, I don’t see how he can.

Page Printed from: at January 11, 2010 – 07:38:02 PM EST

Obama Delivers on His Transparency Promise: We’re Seeing Straight Through Him

Obama Delivers on His Transparency Promise: We’re Seeing Straight Through Him

January 11th, 2010

by Doug Giles, Townhall

 The Real Obama is shining through

“Since a politician never believes what he says, he is surprised when others believe him.”

—Charles de Gaulle

I’m hearing nada from the likes of Matthews, Maddow and Olbermann regarding Obama lying to us with his many empty yet unctuous campaign promises to allow “we the plebes” a peek into the claymation of his health care crap via CSPAN.

Why the silence, sweeties? Oh, I remember why: You’re a spigot for the Obama chum slick. Silly me.

Now, you just know the aforementioned tres Chihuahuas of faux facts would have been on Bush like a condom full of PETN in Umar’s undies if Dubya would have parlayed that smack on the general populace and then failed to deliver in an oh-so-odious and obvious Obama-like way

However, when Obama lies to us all … I hear crickets … nuttin’ but crickets … from these deeply biased chicks on their severely unwatched propaganda programs.

Read More:

Obama White House likely to lose jobs debate as economists predict double-digit unemployment rate

Obama White House likely to lose jobs debate as economists predict double-digit unemployment rate

January 11th, 2010

By Jon Ward, The Daily Caller

 Obama has killed jobs, instead of creating them

The bloody-knuckled brawl this year over whether President Obama is bringing back jobs will go a long way toward deciding whether Democrats in Congress retain their hold on power past this year’s midterm elections. At this point, according to economists, it’s a fight that is stacked against the White House.

Even if the economy begins to show modest job growth, as it is expected to soon, the overall unemployment rate is likely to stay at its current level of 10 percent, or continue to rise, according to most economic experts.

“I would expect it to start drifting steadily up to 10.5 percent,” the president of the nonpartisan Economic Policy Institute, Lawrence Mishel, said.

That is a major problem for a White House that promised just a year ago that the unemployment rate would not rise above 8 percent as long as Congress passed the $787 billion stimulus bill.

“To show that the recovery is not a jobless recovery they need to get it back to where they initially projected it, around 8 percent,” the director of the New America Foundation’s economic growth program, Sherle Schwenninger, said.

All evidence suggests that will be an extremely tall order.

The Senate is set to take up a $154 billion jobs bill — the Congressional Budget Office scored it at $180 billion — passed out of the House in December. Mr. Mishel said that even with a $400 billion second stimulus, which he favors, the unemployment rate would likely only come down to 9.7 percent or so by the fall.

Read More:

Palin attacks ‘Game Change’ account

Palin attacks ‘Game Change’ account
By: Mike Allen
January 9, 2010 12:55 PM EST
Sarah Palin is pushing back against the blistering account of her campaign in “Game Change,” the hotly awaited campaign book by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin.

Her spokeswoman, Meghan Stapleton, said in a statement: “The Governor’s descriptions of these events are found in her book, ‘Going Rogue.’ Her descriptions are accurate. She was there. These reporters were not.”

The statement was provided to CBS’s “60 Minutes,” which includes material about the former Alaska governor in a segment about “Game Change.” Correspondent Anderson Cooper interviewed Steve Schmidt, top strategist on the McCain-Palin campaign, who said a campaign aide preparing her for the debate with Joe Biden “told us the debate was going to be a debacle of historic and epic proportions.”

“She was not focused … not engaged,” Schmidt told Cooper. “She was not really participating in the prep.” Schmidt confronted Palin and, he said, “She said, ‘You know, I think that’s right.’”

The book reports that Senate Majority Harry Reid (D-Nev.) had referred privately to Barack Obama early in his campaign as a “light-skinned” African American “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.”

Reid issued a statement of apology Saturday: “I deeply regret using such a poor choice of words. I sincerely apologize for offending any and all Americans, especially African Americans, for my improper comments. I was a proud and enthusiastic supporter of Barack Obama during the campaign and have worked as hard as I can to advance President Obama’s legislative agenda.

“Moreover, throughout my career, from efforts to integrate the Las Vegas strip and the gaming industry to opposing radical judges and promoting diversity in the Senate, I have worked hard to advance issues important to the African-American community.”

© 2009 Capitol News Company, LLC

Obama Aids the Enemy He Will Not Name

Obama Aids the Enemy He Will Not Name

By Pamela Geller

White House National Security Adviser James Jones warned that Americans would feel “a certain shock” after reading the report on the Islamic jihadist who hid bombs in his crotch and tried to blow up Northwest Flight 253 in Detroit on Christmas Day.

Well, I was shocked.
The loudest (deafening, actually) part of Obama’s remarks Thursday o n the war on the West is what he didn’t say. Not once in Obama’s self-aggrandizing speech on the Muslim Christmas bomber did he ever mention jihad or Islam.
And that is whom we are at war with.
To say that al-Qaeda alone is the enemy is just more obfuscation and deception. It’s bureaucratic boilerplate.
Imagine, if you will, during, say, World War II, if the Axis press accounts of Allied military operations refused to use the word America or United States.
For example, a D-Day report would go like this: On June 6, 1944, nearly 160,000 Iowans, New Yorkers, Jerseyans, Alaskans, Texans, and some black and white folks landed along a 50-mile stretch of heavily-fortified sandy coastline to fight Nazi Germany on the beaches of Normandy, France. More than 5,000 ships and 13,000 aircraft filled with all kinds of people supported the D-Day invasion, and by day’s end, Floridians had gained a foothold in Normandy.
Obama would speak only about “al-Qaeda.”
Al-Qaeda is a manifestation of devout Islam. Just as Hamas, Hezb’allah, al-Muhajiroun, The Armed Islamic Group, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, MILF, CAIR, ISNA, Fatah, the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya, the Armed Islamic Group of Algeria…
It is Islam.
And by refusing to name the enemy, Obama has perpetrated yet another devastating attack on American security.
He is by far the most secretive and opaque president we have ever had the bad judgment to elect. While Obama and his gang of thieves hide behind closed doors to pass secret health care legislation that will enslave Americans under the Stalin-like propaganda chimera of “reform,” he has opened to our mortal enemies a veritable treasure trove of intelligence.
On December 29, and very much under the radar, (he was sunnin’ and funnin’ in Hawaii at the time), Obama declassified just about everything he possibly could. All of it will help foreign governments and Obama’s Communist-Socialist associates in the U.S. This executive order is a tsunami info-dump of newly declassified data — material that was classified before June 29, 1985. It is all about to be made public — despite the danger this poses to U.S. national security — 180 days from the signing of the Executive Order.
The age of the documents doesn’t automatically diminish the national security risk. Many of the individuals and organizations this material will cover are still very much with us. And Obama’s new regulations also make it tougher to classify documents. “When determining to originally classify information, if there is significant doubt about the need to classify the information, it shall not be classified.” Why not err on the side of caution, especially in a time of war?
The new rules stipulate that “information in permanently historically valuable records exempted from automatic declassification at 25 years must be declassified at 50 years unless it concerns: a confidential human source, a human intelligence source, or key design concepts of weapons of mass destruction.” Reassured? Don’t be. The definition of “weapons of mass destruction” has also been changed so as to allow for the declassification of more documents.
Obama will also establish a new National Declassification Center (NDC), whose job will be to “streamline declassification processes. …The President has committed the NDC to process over 400 million records by 2013 and so this center will be very large scale in nature.”
Worst of all, the new regulations specifically describe processes by which “classified information originating in one agency may be disseminated by any other agency to which it has been made available” to foreign governments.
Imagine: We can’t see health care legislation, but our enemies can see…everything from twenty-five years ago.
This breach of national security is a treacherous act, a gift to our enemies, and fodder for a propaganda press. 
Imagine such an action in a time of war.
But since Obama won’t even say who we’re at war against, it isn’t surprising.

Graphic by Big Fur Hat.

Pamela Geller is the editor and publisher of the Atlas Shrugs website and is former associate publisher of the New York Observer. She is the author (with Robert Spencer) of the forthcoming book The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America (Simon & Schuster).

Page Printed from: at January 11, 2010 – 10:34:39 AM EST