Why? Because Dillard’s owns it’s own property and wrote a contract saying it had the right of refusal to any redevelopment and they don’t want to play with the new guy.

Between fracking and this old Longmont has become a hotbed.

MS. PSAKI: Well, we don’t take positions on any candidates, as you know, and we hope that the upcoming elections will be free, fair and transparent and will represent the will of the Iranian people. So we wouldn’t wade into decisions made by the government. Of course, broadly, we hope that women around the world participate in politics and elected office, but beyond that I don’t think I have anything specific for you.

QUESTION: Taking the word “fair” — if you’re being fair, it would seem to exclude 50 percent of the population from an election, would already mean that it is not a fair election.

MS. PSAKI: Well, we don’t weigh in on to specific candidates and the candidates that are chosen through the process in Iran. Of course, of course, broadly speaking we do want women to participate in elections around the world and rise up in elected office.

Seriously worth a read this morning just for the funny papers parts of it.

First they came for Fox News, and they did not speak out—because they were not Fox News. Then they came for government whistleblowers, and they did not speak out—because they were not government whistleblowers. Then they came for the maker of a YouTube video, and—okay, we know how this story ends. But how did we get here?

This quote is from the Wall Street Journal. Bold is mine. And may I say outrageous.

The Senate panel, in a report released Monday, said that Apple used technicalities in Irish and U.S. law to pay little or no corporate taxes on $74 billion over the past four years. The report focused on the tax implications of Apple’s use of overseas entities. The report found no evidence that Apple did anything illegal.

Sen. Carl Levin (D., Mich.), chairman of the investigations panel, on Tuesday accused Apple of employing “alchemy” and “ghost companies” to escape tax collectors in the U.S. and Ireland, the base of the firm’s international operations outside the Americas.

“Apple has sought the Holy Grail of tax avoidance,” said Mr. Levin. “Apple is exploiting an absurdity, one that we have not seen other companies use.”

And as long as we’re on Rand Paul, how about this quote in bold:

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) blasted members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Tuesday, which voted overwhelmingly to arm elements of the Syrian opposition in a bill co-sponsored by Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN). “This is an important moment,” Paul said, addressing his Senate colleagues. “You will be funding, today, the allies of al Qaeda. It’s an irony you cannot overcome.”

Oddly enough even after this report, where the UN determines it was the rebels using the chemical weapons, the US govt has decided to fund the rebels. Based on what?

PJ Media recognizes this is largely hearsay, but the two diplomats sounded quite credible. One of them was in a position of responsibility in a dangerous area of Iraq in 2004.

We will report more as we learn it.

Stay Tuned.

And from the National Review we have
Notes on Dan Pfeiffer.
A good rant on Benghazi.

And from the NYpost….Rich Lowry on the IRS
and John Podhoretz on those reporters from Fox getting investigated for “crimes” of journalism.

Not illegal? How about unconstitutional? I’m no constitutional scholar, but if the federal government is treating groups differently based upon their political beliefs, you have A) an equal protection clause violation and B) a violation of the First Amendment, as you’re impeding the right of one particular group of Americans to peaceably assemble, express their views, and communicate their grievances to the government.

An observation: One of the reasons that this went on, as long as it did (starting in March 2010), and as pervasively as it did, is that apparently no one within the Internal Revenue Service who heard about it thought it was wrong, and that no one thought their superiors — i.e., the secretary of the Treasury and the president — would object.

In the meantime be sure to read Kim Strassel who notes:

Mr. Obama didn’t need to pick up the phone. All he needed to do was exactly what he did do, in full view, for three years: Publicly suggest that conservative political groups were engaged in nefarious deeds; publicly call out by name political opponents whom he’d like to see harassed; and publicly have his party pressure the IRS to take action.

Mr. Obama now professes shock and outrage that bureaucrats at the IRS did exactly what the president of the United States said was the right and honorable thing to do. “He put a target on our backs, and he’s now going to blame the people who are shooting at us?” asks Idaho businessman and longtime Republican donor Frank VanderSloot.

And also note this piece of ridiculousness from the Washington Post Editor because it’s truly unbelievable! In a comparison with Richard Nixon, the editorialist notes the subversion of the RBI, the IRS and other government agencies and the “electoral process to his nefarious purposed”. He then goes on to note how this Obama thing is not the same. Why? Because Obama SAYS it’s not the same! That is is. That’s all they got. It boggles the mind.

STANDING BEFORE reporters Thursday, President Obama declined an invitation to compare the recent scandals weighing down his administration with those that forced President Nixon to resign in 1974. So allow us to do the work for him: There is no comparison.

Nixon, in a series of crimes that collectively came to be known as Watergate, directed from the White House and Justice Department a concerted campaign against those he perceived as political enemies, in the process subverting the FBI, the IRS, other government agencies and the electoral process to his nefarious purposes. Mr. Obama has done nothing of the kind. Nor is there much to support a lesser “unifying theory” of this week’s scandals, which is that together they prove Mr. Obama guilty of a grand overreach of federal power.

Are they trying to say no one signed a subpoena to tap phones within the halls of Congress!!? Give me a break.