Friday, October 9, 2015

#DHS Outs #McCarthy

Elmers and McCarthy -- reportedly closed door sessions were not just political strategy   [GotNews]


Click here for related story [NY Post]

Hmmmmm. 
The political game of feints and jabs on the Hill just took a new turn.
The buzz has been over why McCarthy dropped out of contention for the Speakers position, and of course, there's been enough finger pointing to put a few eyes out.
But, the New York Post now reports that allegations of McCarthy's affair with Renee Elmers [R-NC] were the real cause. [Both have denied the allegation.] Normally, we would not repeat such tawdry accusations, but, in this case, due to the circumstances, we'll make an exception.
[Whowhatwhy.org]
Now, this would be standard political subterfuge, normally expected among political foes. But, in this case, it turns out the allegations were posted on Wikipedia, by, ummm, 
-- none other than the Department of Homeland Security, which has had more than its share of scandal in recent years.
Seems the perp was unaware that posting to Wikipedia tracks back to the Internet [IP] address of the person/organization posting. In this case, the poster was located in the DHS office in Springfield, Va.  
Oops! Call in the Hatch Act police.
[FYI, the Hatch Act outlaws "pernicious political actives"]
This Kabuki drama now takes a decidedly new twist, which will very likely result in an inquiry/investigation/inquisition by both Parties in Congress as to why DHS is slandering politicians via the Media.
It's annoying enough that NSA is eavesdropping on Congress, and that CIA has been spying on Congress, but, heaven forbid, we certainly can't have DHS joining in the political fray of slander, back-stabbing, and innuendo.
These nasty situations inevitably result in a uniting of the political Parties against a common foe -- in this case, the Administration, which may have used a national security organization to slander [expose?] a Congressman.  
It's not that Congresspersons or Senators [or Presidents] do not have affairs [we would be surprised if they weren't having affairs; it's what they do!]; but, by golly, they don't want such news leaking back to their constituents who expect their political representatives to exercise at least a modicum of marital fidelity, or sobriety while representing their constituents.
Now, the search begins for the perp, and who put him/her up to this mischief.
The last iteration of such political engagement by a national security organization resulted in the Church and Pike Committees gutting the Intelligence Community.  Will Congress go after DHS with the same zeal?