Thomas Burrell, head of the Black Farmers Agricultural Association, Inc., is not ready to leave the Pigford settlement business without a fight.

Despite recent court setbacks, he is still threatening legal action. The fact that Burrell is calling out President Barack Obama seems to signal that Burrell feels he has to play hardball and threaten the tacit agreement that was made between candidate Obama and a number of self-styled “black leaders” about the Pigford settlement and the African-American vote several years ago.

This recent news report from Tennessee shows Burrell and local clergymen taking public aim at the President. Burrell correctly points out that the Pigford 2 settlement for black farmers has a number of restrictions on it that new settlements for women and Latino farmers do not have. The disparity is actually somewhat bizarre, and will be the topic of further reporting in the future.

However, Burrell’s refusal to go down quietly on the issue signals a potential problem for Barack Obama’s 2012 campaign strategy that would be missed by many observers who don’t understand the connection between Obama and Pigford.

(more…)

The last thing I want for my dear readers is to burden them with the human filth that confronts me daily. But periodically, one of the voices in the comments section of our times comes to life right in front of me in such a way that I’m compelled to make an example of him.

After exposure of Palin-hater and hateful Bristol Palin confronter Stephen Hanks, it dawned on me that maiming and shaming is the only means to put rabid leftists in their place. Miraculously, perhaps over the sheer economics of his misbehavior, Hollywood talent manager Hanks has apologized for accosting 21-year-old Bristol Palin for the sin of being the daughter of a prominent public figure.

The gentleman you see in the picture below rudely intruded in my personal space on the event of my great friend from college Paul Raff’s Birthday lunch at the Brentwood Country Mart (I had the always delicious carnitas tacos and Paul had the chicken chipotle sandwich, extra green sauce). Everything was swell at our fiesta para dos until a cowardly anonymous buffoon disturbed the peace. After overhearing my private discussion, he yelped from 10 yards away, “Waaa, waaa, waaa!! Waaa, waaa, waaa!!”

I curiously responded, “Excuse me, are you talking to me?”

Said cowardly anonymous buffoon replied, “I know who you are. Waaa, waaa, waaa!! Waaa, waaa, waaa!! Always complaining, always complaining.”

It was clear he wanted a public confrontation, and a public confrontation he got. With my hands behind my back (to make it perfectly clear that I was a taking a non-violent tact) and our faces two feet from one another, he attempted to make the conflict about politics, ACORN, and Sherrod. He was trembling worse than Matt Damon after the Red Sox collapse. When it became clear he was light on facts, things got personal. He said, “I know why you act like you do. People in your High School didn’t like you and now you’re taking it out on the rest of us. You were a little guy who got beat up.”

I informed said cowardly anonymous buffoon (who apparently has access to a time-machine) that I played defensive line on Varsity football. “Who was beating me up?,” I said. Who do you know that I know? Who do you know who said this?”

(more…)

“No it wasn’t deceptive, that’s what everybody’s saying about it. I saw the first version of it, and it told pretty much the whole story, of how that woman had gone through an epiphany of understanding how race works.”

Related:
Nolte: Who Got to Chris Matthews?: ‘Hardball’ Defense of Breitbart Memory-Holed (July 30, 2010)
Marlow: WaPo’s Kurtz “dishonestly suggests Matthews had gotten his facts wrong regarding Breitbart including footage of Shirley Sherrod’s redemption” (August 3, 2010)

NOTE: Due to a technical problem, most of the videos that were supposed to be part of this article were not visible. These videos are a crucial part of this piece because they constitute the proof of every statement made in video. These videos are now functional.

***

What drove Glenn Beck to tell an increasingly large series of lies about his participation in the Shirley Sherrod story that broke back in July, 2010?

Why would he tell both TV and live audiences things like this….

Shirley Sherrod, is the next example. We didn’t rush to condemn her. This is another seemingly “redistribution of wealth” woman — who I would bet that I vehemently disagree with on probably everything. But she asked for the rest of the tape to be heard, the farmers in the story backed her up. It was a turning point story. We defended her and said her side of the story demanded to be heard — because context matters…

or this?

I have a story I want to share with you that I haven’t shared yet. Do you know why I didn’t do the Shirley Sherrod story? Did anyone think that story was uncommon for the people that we have in the White House? That there might be some prejudice that is happening? No. I stood in my office with my entire team, and I said, “something’s wrong, don’t do this story.”That’s what saved me: the Sword of the Spirit.

As you’ll see, both of those statements are totally false. Glenn Beck not only didn’t initially defend Sherrod but he actually dropped the entire context that Sherrod’s video clip was originally presented in. Close to a year later, Beck still hasn’t been honest about his initial context dropping attacks on Sherrod.

So – why? Did Beck start spinning a story and was unable to discern truth from fiction? Did he enjoy the praise he got from left wing sources, who believed his spin?

(more…)

Hitler represents of one of the most atrocious periods in the history of the entire world.  His twelve year reign had a profound impact on the lives of many.  Throughout the years of 1933 and 1945, Hitler invaded ten countries , including Poland, where one side of my stepfather’s family lived until 1940, when they were forcefully removed and put into concentration camps.  The first husband of his mother was a Polish officer, and shortly after Hitler and Stalin signed the Nazi Soviet Non-Aggression pact, he and other Polish officers were taken from their families, brought into the Katyn Forest, and summarily executed – simply for being Polish officers.

Under the Nazi regime, it is estimated that as many as between 11 million and 17 million civilians were killed – nearly 6 million of those exterminated solely for being Jewish.  It’s been only 78 years since Hitler and the Nazi regime’s rise to power, and their reign remains an open wound  – in the context of history, this is still a very recent occurrence.  Survivors of this period are still with us today, as are first and second generation family members , many of whom are right here in the United States.

That’s why on May 18^{th ,} when I saw a post in the Guardian titled Andrew Breitbart’s ‘Electronic Brownshirts’, my hair stood on end.  Who could write such a title?  The author turned out to be none other than Amy Goodman, who hosts the famously popular daily progressive news program “Democracy Now“, and is also frequently referred to as a respected “progressive journalist“, investigative reporter and peace advocate.  It was a post in defense of the controversial labor studies course that was the recent focus of a BigGovernment expose.

As someone who writes and conducts research for Andrew Breitbart, I could not immediately move past that title.  Here, it brought back conversations I’d had with family members about this period in history, people who lived through that time.  And reading the title back, it just seemed so repulsive, so disrespectful – as though I too was just smeared as a “Brownshirt”.  Granted, I have no connection to the story about the labor studies course, but if Andrew is associated as a Brownshirt, we’re all associated as Brownshirts. At least, that’s how the title alone read.

Why would someone like Goodman, who is supposedly respected in her profession, go to such extremes to draw a modern day comparison to such horrors ––she is obviously intelligent enough to know that her actions and words demean the experiences lived by real victims and remaining survivors.

As I trudged through her post, I realized that the headline was not just selected by Ms. Goodman, but that the phrase “electronic brownshirts” was actually muttered by Judy Ancel, director of the University of Missouri-Kansas City’s institute for labor studies.

(more…)

There are number of factors that could lead to the Pigford scandal becoming a political issue in Iowa, of all places. The state’s demographics – about 95% Caucasian – might make this seem unlikely but it’s very interesting how many of the major political players in the Pigford scandal are from the heartland state.

1) One of the major Senate proponents of Pigford is Republican Chuck Grassley

2) The major political opponent of Pigford is Republican representative Steve King

3) USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack, a Democrat, is also the former governor of Iowa who also served in the state legislature with Steve King. Vilsack has made Pigford a priority in his administration and has opposed any efforts to investigate fraud in the settlement.

4) Vilsack was also the fall guy in the forced resignation of Shirley Sherrod; Mrs. Sherrod has stated publicly that she believes the White House was behind her firing because she was told this by USDA Undersecretary Cheryl Cook. Vilsack has denied White House involvement. The White House and the USDA both had good reasons for not wanting publicity about Pigford and Mrs. Sherrod; she, her husband Charles and the New Communities farm that she helped manage were by far the largest single recipients of Pigford money, getting over $13 million.

5) Vilsack’s USDA also did an end run around the court decision and created their own expedited process to give money to women and Hispanic farmers — and significantly, women and Hispanics who claim to have attempted to farm. This “attempted to farm” distinction is exactly what led to significant fraud in Pigford.

6) Sec. Vilsack and Sen. Grassley have both praised “Dr.” John Boyd and have advocated using Boyd for outreach in the Pigford, women and Hispanic farmers cases. For more on John Boyd watch the segment from my documentary Pigford Blues.

(more…)

John Hawkins of RightWing News recently interviewed Andrew Breitbart about his new book.  It’s a fun interview and a great read!

I always find it fascinating when people who used to be liberal say they turned to the right. That happened with you. Can you tell us about it?

Well, it’s a cliché from the left to the right. And it’s usually a story of opportunism in those few cases where the people move from the right to the left. It’s almost embarrassing to go back into my liberal background because it was about as shallow a belief system as humanly possible. It was go-along to get-along social. It was living in Los Angeles, being young, and single, and flowing with the trendy liberal crowd.

When I started to work in Hollywood at a fairly low level delivering scripts around town, listening to AM talk radio, I at first listened to it as a novelty. But I started to have certain things in my life going on such as living in a rent controlled apartment, having listened to the Clarence Thomas hearings, the OJ Simpson trial — I just started to see trends in my personal experiences that ran so contrary to what the media narratives were. At first I was flummoxed by it and then I just started to listen to certain people on the radio who were more clear thinking than the professors that I had in college.

I remember thinking when I was in college that a lot of these known Chomsky-like, verbose high lefty thinkers made absolutely no sense but I thought that was my problem. So when I started to listen to conservative thinkers and to read conservative thinkers, there was a clarity of thought. It wasn’t muddled. It wasn’t confusing. It started to make sense at an intellectual level and tie into the values that my parents gave me when I was a young kid that I diverted from when I was in high school.

So it was basically a reconnecting with everything that my parents attempted to instill in me in my youth. It has made me sleep a lot better at night, being centered and oriented with human nature as opposed to living in a world of self loathing nihilism, trying to undo human nature, and trying to create a path towards an unrealistic utopia.

Now, you were recently banned from the front page of The Huffington Post….

Oh, the tragedy of my life.

(Laughs) It is, it is. Apparently you made some sort of ad hominem attack on Van Jones and The Huffington Post has a policy against that. It must have been in place for at least two minutes or so before you were banned. Can you talk about that?

Read the entire review at RightWing News.

Check out Andrew’s list of upcoming appearances and other press coverage.

John Stossel to Al Pires, lead attorney in the Pigford settlement: “How do you know they’re farmers?”
Answer: [long pause] “They fill out the forms… We HOPE they tell the truth.”

More at Stossel’s blog:

Want to get a check from the government for $50,000? If you’re black and willing to say you once “attempted to farm,” the money could be yours.

Why? In the 80’s and 90’s, some Black farmers were allegedly discriminated against by the Agriculture Department. Department loan officers supposedly did the opposite of what Shirley Sherrod was accused of:   they granted government-subsidized farm loans to whites but not to blacks.

Government shouldn’t be giving out government subsidized loans to anyone.  But that’s another story for another time.

When some black farmers sued, claiming discrimination, the USDA agreed to pay $50,000 to every black person who was discriminated against.

According to the census, there were 18,000 black farmers in the country when the lawsuit was filed. But 97,000 black “farmers” have applied for the money. (more…)

Pigford documentarian Lee Stranahan had an exclusive interview with congressman Steve King at his Capitol Hill office Tuesday where King explains an area where he and Shirley Sherrod agree — that the Obama White House was responsible for Sherrod’s resignation and that USDA secretary acted as the fall guy.

(more…)

From David Weigel’s report for Slate:

On Saturday, [Shirley] Sherrod finally sued Breitbart. I talked to Breitbart about the suit today. “The National Black Farmers Association is holding a press conference tomorrow,” he argued, citing an event that the organization is holding at the National Press Club. “They’re trying to put Humpty Dumpty back together again.”

According to Breitbart, the lawsuit is a massive and expected distraction.

“Those including Ms. Sherrod, who continue to uphold the grotesque premise that the Pigford settlement helped the black farmers, are fully aware that the Pigford house of cards is falling around them,” said Breitbart. “The NBFA is having a press conference three days after I was served. The timing is not a coincidence. Their press statement said that there’s an emerging crisis. We are the emerging crisis. Lee Stranahan is the emerging crisis. Internal investigations by the federal government are the emerging crisis. This lawsuit is a last-ditch attempt to shock me into silence, and it won’t work.” (more…)

From the Albany Herald:

Shirley Sherrod, ousted from her position with the U.S. Department of Agriculture after an internet video produced by conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart surfaced, has filed suit in District of Columbia Superior Court alleging defamation, false light and infliction of emotional distress.

Breitbart confirmed that his company, breitbart.com, LLC,had been served with a copy of the suit over the weekend. In addition to Breitbart, producer Larry O’Conner and an unknown ‘John Doe’ are also named in the suit.

Sherrod resigned as Georgia’s Director of Rural Development after the video clip appeared last July. The edited clip showed a speech she gave at an NAACP function where Sherrod spoke of not offering her full help and support to a white farmer, Roger Spooner, in 1986.

(more…)

From Georgia’s Albany Herald:

In April of 1999, Judge Paul L. Friedman of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia approved a settlement agreement and consent decree in Pigford v. Glickman, a class action discrimination suit between the U.S. Department of Agriculture and black farmers.

The suit claimed that the agency had discriminated against black farmers on the basis of race and failed to investigate or properly respond to complaints from 1983 to 1997.

According to a report from the Congressional Research Service, “For many years, black farmers had complained that they were not receiving fair treatment when they applied to local county committees (which make the decisions) for farm loans or assistance. These farmers alleged that they were being denied USDA farm loans or forced to wait longer for loan approval than were non-minority farmers.”

“Many black farmers contended that they were facing foreclosure and financial ruin because the USDA denied them timely loans and debt restructuring.”

To date, more than $1 billion has been paid in $50,000 increments to more than 13,000 black farmers. The rub is, according to Buena Vista farmer Eddie Slaughter, many of the recipients of the settlement money are not farmers at all.

According to a July 2010 report by Kate Pickert in Time.com, the largest single settlement under Pigford went to Shirley and Charles Sherrod, who were awarded $150,000 each for pain and suffering and $13 million for the defunct New Communities Inc. farms.

(more…)

As we have been chronicling in our Pigford coverage this week, the amount of evidence suggesting massive fraud is staggering and will continue to build and build.

Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack came out last week to say there have only been three cases of fraud out of the 20,000 claims.

Well Mr. Vilsack, why don’t you try this on for size?  And by the way, we will be bringing more crime rings your way very soon.

All excerpts from the Mississippi Clarion Ledger in Jackson, Mississippi:

Suspect admits she OK’d slaying

Date:  Jan 13, 2006

By Jimmie Gates

Two days after she denied knowing that federal witness Clovis Reed would be killed, Levon Edmond admitted Thursday that she agreed to the slaying and alleged one of her accomplices had killed another woman earlier.

The second woman’s body is buried in the same area where Reed’s headless and handless corpse was found in Simpson County in 2003, Edmond told U.S. District Judge Henry T. Wingate.

(more…)

WASHINGTON (AP) – American Indians and black farmers will be paid $4.6 billion to address claims of government mistreatment over many decades under landmark legislation President Barack Obama signed Wednesday.

The legislation “closes a long and unfortunate chapter in our history,” Obama said. “It’s finally time to make things right.”

At a signing ceremony at the White House the president declared that approval of the long-delayed legislation “isn’t simply a matter of making amends, it’s about reaffirming our values on which this nation was founded: the principles of fairness and equality and opportunity.”

Obama promised during his campaign to work toward resolving disputes over the government’s past discrimination against minorities. The measure he signed settles a pair of long-standing class-action lawsuits. The measure also settles four long-standing disputes over Native American water rights in Arizona, New Mexico and Montana. (more…)

One key to understanding the Pigford travesty is realizing how Barack Obama came to the point where today he is giving away billions in taxpayer dollars for potentially fraudulent Pigford-related claims. What may have begun as a legitimate 100 million dollar effort to repair genuine damages caused by alleged USDA discrimination evolved into what amounted to a pay-for-play scam with two linked goals – to defeat Hillary Clinton in the Democrat primary, then get Barack Obama elected president. The Hill, not Big Government, let that cat out of the bag back in April of 2009:

Supporters of Obama’s presidential campaign argued the then-Illinois senator’s move to resolve late Pigford claims would endear him to Southern black voters during the tough Democratic primary race against former Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.). At the time of the bill’s introduction in 2007, Obama was finding his footing as a candidate and polls suggested he was struggling to attract black voters. He later won almost unanimously among this group against Clinton and then in the general election against Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

Now Obama may have to face off with several of his own campaign supporters over how best to compensate discrimination claims by black farmers. Clay, Davis and Thompson endorsed Obama during the presidential primaries.

Just as Obama is today caving to Republicans on a a tax deal, instead of standing up for American taxpayers regarding potential Pigford-related fraud, Obama is also opting to write a check for billions American taxpayers can ill afford – all to satisfy what can rightfully be called a campaign debt. (more…)

From a USDA employee with close to 30 years experience:

Pigford was a nightmare. There was lots of money to be made—most of it by the trial lawyers. There were legitimate claims. It happens that people do sometimes discriminate and those people should be compensated. But really everyone was put in the crosshairs. They were indicting the entire USDA.

Lawyers were churning applications. My name starts turning up on documents as someone who denied someone services. Trouble was those people were hundreds of miles away. I think there was something like 700 forms filed with my name on them—it was outrageous. I had never heard of any of them. I discovered that my name had been put on leaflets, which charges that I was a racist, and people just put my name on Pigford applications. I finally had to get black farmers to vouch for me. They all said I treated everyone fairly, which is what I tried to do. (more…)

In our report, we document two organizations, the Black Farmers and Agriculturists Association and the National Black Farmers Association.  These two groups round up tens of thousands of Pigford litigants and then lobby politicians with promises of votes and campaign cash in exchange for championing and funding their causes such as Pigford.

These two groups, and the Pigfored issue, hold huge sway over the rural black vote, and as you can see from this letter from the President of the BFAA John Boyd, Boyd is eager to get rewarded for helping to put President Obama into office.

Boyd’s reward comes today as President Obama signs Pigford II funding into law, and the circle of quid pro quo is complete.

The Dept. of Agriculture has claimed that there were only three cases of fraudulent claims filed for Pigford settlement money. Jimmy Dismuke, one of the original farmers who brought suit against the USDA, told Big Government that he was personally aware of many more cases that the FBI investigated and documented in Arkansas, but for political purposes they have not been made public.

From an anonymous source in the capitol:

These are redacted Pigford applications that are all done by the same lawyer.  All of the claimants come from Arkansas (two are related) and the stories they write on the application are clearly boilerplate, probably done by the same paralegal.  Some of the words are even misspelled consistently through the documents.

We don’t know the outcome of these apps but if they were successful claims it shows how little the claimants actually had to provide to get $50K.  This is the kind of information that we can’t wait to subpoena.

*** (more…)

Although the Pigford settlement story is a complex one that has major political implications, at the heart of it is a very simple question: does the settlement contain a significant amount of fraud?

If the Obama administration is telling the truth and there are only three cases of fraud out of 15,000 settled claims, then there’s no story here. If the fraud does exists, the attempt to silence people like Rep. Steve King or Andrew Breitbart aren’t just wrong but are a clear sign that some people will say anything to keep the truth about Pigford from coming out.

But you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.  Eventhough the mainstream media has been silent on this story, there are witnesses. One brave whistleblower is Arkansas farmer Jimmy Dismuke, who recently sat down for an extensive, exclusive interview about Pigford. That entire interview will be made available on BigGovernment in the near future but today’s clip is powerful testimony about how simple it was for people — and by extension, their lawyers — to collect those $50,000 Pigford payments.