Andrew Breitbart Vindicated
Pigs do fly!
This has got to be one of the most stunning confirmations of media bias, and one of the greatest vindications of conservative media. The New York Times finally noticed the Pigford scandal when they reported Friday that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has likely enabled massive fraud in the Pigford series of legal settlements, in which black, Hispanic, female and Native American farmers have claimed to be victims of past discrimination.
The name “Pigford” comes from the 1997 Pigford v. Glickman lawsuit that got the whole thing rolling.
A succession of courts — and finally the Supreme Court — had rebuffed a bunch of bogus pleas. Instead of an army of potential claimants, the government faced just 91 plaintiffs. On the heels of the Supreme Court’s ruling, interviews and records show, the Obama administration’s political appointees at the Justice and Agriculture Departments engineered a stunning turnabout: they committed $1.33 billion to compensate not just the 91 plaintiffs but thousands of Hispanic and female farmers who had never claimed bias in court.
Think the left was fishing for votes? Andrew Bretibard did. He originally exposed this over two years ago, in which he claimed this program to compensate black farmers for discrimination “became a runaway train, driven by racial politics, pressure from influential members of Congress and law firms that stood to gain million in fees.
Ever since the Clinton administration agreed in 1999 to make $50,000 payments to thousands of black farmers, the Hispanics and women had been clamoring in courtrooms and in Congress for the same deal, and it looks like they are going to get it, courtesy of you Jane and Joe Taxpayer.
The cost of the settlements, which could exceed $4.4 billion, is the result of a process that “became a runaway train, driven by racial politics, pressure from influential members of Congress and law firms that stand to gain more than $130 million in fees,” the Times notes.
Among those influential members of Congress was then-Senator Barack Obama, who made Pigford payouts a priority in exchange for political support for his 2008 presidential campaign among a coveted group of black voters in the rural South, the Times reports.
As president, Obama continued to support payouts for new groups of claimants while abandoning a review process that had been used to fight fraud. The aim was “buying the support” of minorities, according to the Times, while middlemen created a “cottage industry” in defrauding the government.
This is the New York Times, now reporting this. Good thing they didn’t tell its readers about this before the election! They might have gotten some funny ideas about holding Barack Obama accountable.
The deal, several current and former government officials said, was fashioned in White House meetings despite the vehement objections — until now undisclosed — of career lawyers and agency officials who had argued that there was no credible evidence of widespread discrimination. What is more, some protested, the template for the deal — the $50,000 payouts to black farmers — had proved a magnet for fraud.
In the article, claimants described how, at packed meetings, lawyers’ aides would fill out forms for them on the spot, sometimes supplying answers “to keep the line moving,” as one put it. Continue reading