The Gabrielle Giffords shooting was all a giant conspiracy!

Did you know the shooting of Rep Gabrielle Giffords and others was all a fake government conspiracy done by actors? Because according to some nutballs, it is. And the supporters are now harassing survivors of the attack!

Such obviously fantastic claims would usually not merit the attention of law enforcement, but they have in this instance because some believers have been confronting, and alarming, some of the people associated with the case in recent weeks.

Manuel J. Johnson, a spokesman for the F.B.I., said the bureau was aware of the site, but he declined to say whether an investigation was under way. One shooting victim said he notified the F.B.I. recently after two men showed up at his Tucson home claiming to be investigators and saying they were trying to determine whether the shooting was a hoax.

“They tried to get into my home,” said the victim, who asked that he not be identified because it might attract more such visitors. “They wanted to know if I had any pictures. They said they didn’t believe the event took place.”

The victim said that when he pressed the visitors for identification, one of them presented a business card that listed the Texas conspiracy site, which describes the shooting as an exercise conducted by the Department of Homeland Security. Other people connected to the case, including hospital personnel, victims’ relatives and possible trial witnesses, have received similar visits or seen their images on the Web site, officials said.

The site, which solicits donations from visitors to help with its “investigation,” shows pictures of people who appeared on television after the shooting — including the suspect, Jared L. Loughner — and claims they resemble photographs of Tucson-area actors found on the Internet.

“We are only trying to uncover the truth and give the information to the Citizens,” the site says. “We would love nothing more than to debunk our own theory.”

Ed Chiarini, who runs the site, identifies himself as an inventor and Web entrepreneur. He could not be reached for comment.

Ed Chiarini is this guy

And here is an example story


Subject: Wedding Ring Is In For Repairs…

Like the Bible says, “There is none so blind as those

who refuse to see.”

Wedding ring is in for repairs – Another piece falls into place.

In a press conference last week Obama was not wearing his wedding
ring nor was he wearing his watch when noticed, his staff said his
ring was out for repairs.

No reason was given for the missing watch. So it’s just a coincidence that Muslims are forbidden from wearing jewelry during the month of Ramadan (ninth month of the Islamic calendar, lasting from 29 to 30 days).

Can’t possibly be that, because although he hasn’t gone to a
Christian church service since entering the White House, we know he’s a committed Christian “cause he said so during he campaign!”
………..And I’ve got a bridge to nowhere to sell you also.

This is the same president that spent the Christmas holidays in
Hawaii to avoid religious obligations as PRESIDENT at the White
House. His children do not receive Christmas presents.

Let’s just face the facts and quit trying to tell the truth, we have
a muslim for president in the White House, and he has no

knowledge of American history.

Colbert’s Super PAC

Stephen Colbert stopped by the FEC to form a SuperPAC.

Why should you care? Because what he’s doing is brilliant and has real world consequences.

On Friday, May 13th, Colbert and his lawyer showed up at the Federal Election Commission building in D.C. to formally request an advisory opinion for the Colbert Super PAC, which if created will be an independent expenditure Political Action Comittee able to accept unlimited corporate, individual, political committee and labor contributions.

This is a real request, says Colbert “I’m making an actual request. I want to find out whether I actually have to list Viacom and the fact that I have a show as a gift in-kind,and if I don’t, I can’t wait to use the resources of my show.”

The Lawful In-kind Contribution:
If Stephen Colbert forms a PAC and then references or uses material from the PAC on his show, there is a question whether Viacom (his corporate parent) must report the time used to talk about the PAC as an In-kind Contribution to the PAC. The FEC created this rule to prevent free advertising of PACs by shows. There is an exemption, called the Press Exemption, which is why Karl Rove can get paid by Fox News and go on Fox News and blabber on and on about American Crossroads with no repercussions, Fox News is a press entity and is exempt. Colbert is seeking clarity as to whether Viacom can count as a press entity.

It is possible the FEC will do ruling here that may strike down the press exemption, or alter it in ways that affect Fox News and their paid contributors who also run PACs like Karl Rove and Sarah Palin. In that event, Colbert has already won, hurting an enemy while producing bits for his own show. Colbert also exposes the lax of regulations and oversight at the FEC on forming PACs and SuperPACs. If Colbert is allowed the Press Exemption, he has free reign to create a multitude of content that will have implications in the 2012 campaign and beyond.

For example, this will allow Colbert to produce commercials to air in markets of close races. Due to the Colbert satire angle, expect them to be “pro-GOP” in a sense of them being anything but. Colbert’s name will ensure viral internet propagation of the commercials, and they’ll also be used as material for The Colbert Report. The commercials won’t even have to air to be seen thousands of times in the districts they are targeting. The 2012 campaign season promises to be more entertaining that 2008 ever was.

Colbert’s success in getting his PAC started will inspire others to do similar work. I am not sure who could set up something as large as his PAC has the potential to be in time for 2012, but I expect there will be a few copycats of varying degrees of seriousness.

Colbert is quoted as saying “I believe the Citizens United decision was the right one, there should be unlimited corporate money, and I want some of it. I don’t want to be the one chump who doesn’t have any.”
Then Colbert spoke:

“As we stand here on this historic site, where 250 years ago today George Washington filed his papers to form his independent expenditures non-connected political action committee, we are also standing at an American crossroads — not to be confused with American Crossroads, the name of Karl Rove’s ‘Super PAC,” Colbert told the crowd. “I mean a metaphorical crossroads, because the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United has proved that unlimited corporate money equals free speech. But by the transitive property of elections, does it not also follow that no corporate money equals silence?”

“I want to form Colbert Super PAC for all the PAC-less Americans, to give you a voice in the form of my voice,” Colbert said.

Colbert told the crowd he’d be offering handshakes at $1 a pop and collected fists full of cash as he darted into an awaiting SUV.

Background from episodes of Colbert Report (thanks Lansdowne):
March 10th
Inspired by ads from Tim Pawlenty and his PAC, Colbert decides to form his own.

March 30th
Colbert asks former FEC chair Trevor Potter about PACs and prepares to submit his paperwork.

April 14th part 1
Parent company Viacom urges Colbert to cease PAC activities as it would be an illegal ‘in kind’ contribution of corporate resources.

April 14th part 2
Trevor Potter returns to help Colbert submit the necessary cover letter to turn his PAC application into a SuperPAC application, which allows for corporate donations.

April 28th
Colbert discusses the differences between PACs and SuperPACs. Interview with Russ Feingold about impacts of the Citizens United ruling.

May 11th
Viacom still is reluctant to allow Colbert to continue PAC activities as they would have to disclose details about its contribution of airtime and resources. Trevor Potter then helps Colbert in obtaining a ‘media exemption’ which allows for journalistic organizations to report on PAC activities without considering the airtime a contribution.

Investment freedoms

I’ll start by following up on a post Tars made about the debt ceiling because the fun isn’t over!  The ceiling is going to be hit again on the 16th (according to a letter Timmy Geithner sent to congress).  If you weren’t sure that this was all completely cynical, even Chamber of Commerce is getting nervous now.  Still, the whole dysfunctional government that responds only to cash thing leaves us with a political problem.  It looks like Boehner doesn’t have control of the GOP caucus and all of the freshmen that came in on a wave of campaign contributions from the financial sector believe they’ll lose in next year’s primaries if they don’t vote against raising it.

With all of this going on in the background, the “Freedom to Invest Act of 2011” has been introduced in the House.  If you’re wondering how corporate America could possibly get more investment freedoms, it’s because they want to bring the money they have in tax havens back to the U.S.  They claim that if they’re allowed to do so, they’ll invest.  This is a blatant lie.

Doug Henwood quotes the Financial Times, saying that they’re spending it on buy-backs:

The rise in buy-backs and deals marks a turning point in the credit cycle, as companies become more willing to invest their cash and borrow more money. Since the 2008 financial crisis, many companies have been hoarding cash and building up ever greater treasure chests and rainy-day funds.

This is exactly what they did the last time they were given a tax break to “repatriate” earnings held offshore.  For the repeat, they’ve created a hilarious little website (I found it on the Adobe blog) to promote the idea, complete with a picture of blue-collar workers at the top.  The slogan, “Let’s invest the money here at home–not spend it overseas,” is beautiful because it was earned overseas in the first place, which is why it’s in a tax haven.

Mission: Freepossible

Mission: Freepossible! Good morning, Mr. Phelps. You mission, should you choose to accept it, is to read this thread with posts by Dengar01, who goes nuts upon seeing his Muslim neighbor have cars in his driveway, so he calls the cops, the FBI, takes covert photographs of license plates, and then dresses in all black with black facepaint to go on a commando/photographing raid that results in his neighbors spotting him and Dengar01 running away. Although Dengar01 is calling the cops, one things we should call the cops on Dengar01 before he goes all John Ringo on an unsuspecting family that had guests over for dinner.

Dengar01 gets suspicious as his neighbor has people over. Did I mention his neighbor is Muslim??? And, in an area with a lot of Muslim people, another Muslim family had people over. Coincidence…or bin Laden Revenge????

Dengar01 begins to get worried…

Then he and his sister take photographs of cars and his neighbor’s house. Which might be a reason why he doesn’t have contact with this neighbor, because he’s always accusing him of Jihad.

Dengar01 then flips out on people who dare question him. Also Dengar01 reveals…..something when he mentions how few people came to his mother’s funeral.

Continue reading

Wingnut Web – Osama Was Already Dead Edition

As news of Osama bin Laden’s death reached the world, all of Twitter became a long-running late night talk show monologue as we waited for Obama’s speech officially announcing it. But there are those with no sense of humor, no jaded sarcasm as the world changes around them. They are bitter, they are crazy, and they know that Kenyan Muslim is pulling the wool over their eyes! We go now to…

First reply, also LOL at Obama’s real name being Tim

You raise a valid point with the naming of Tim Osman

Only nine layers? I’ll pass…

Continue reading