Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Blogs: New York Times vindicates Andrew Breitbart - Kevin Robillard - POLITICO.com
“Today Andrew Breitbart is smiling, and probably amazed,” the Washington Examiner’s Byron York wrote on Twitter. “New York Times goes deep into Pigford scandal.”
Lee Stranahan, a Breitbart disciple who also investigated the Pigford case, was jubilant.
“I wish to God that Andrew Breitbart were alive to see this,” Stranahan wrote. “He fought this fight for years, was totally right and never got credit for it.”
“NYTimes Confirms: Massive Fraud at USDA in Pigford; Breitbart Vindicated,” blared the headline on Breitbart’s eponymous website.
The Times’ A1, above-the-fold story — which involved Freedom of Information Act requests, interviews with former administration officials and database work — shows how political appointees in the Obama administration’s Justice and Agriculture Departments turned a potential government court victory into $1.3 billion settlement for Hispanic and female farmers — some of whom never even claimed discrimination in court. The story also detailed how the feds relied on a flawed payout system for black farmers that was ripe with fraud and revealed that career officials in the Agriculture Department had opposed the program.
The original black farmers’ case, called Pigford v. Glickman, and the unfair treatment of many of the original plaintiffs in the lawsuit became a personal cause for Breitbart, who died in 2012 of a heart attack. The conservative provocateur published a December 2010 report about the case, entitled “The Pigford Shakedown,” and also spoke about the program at CPAC and other events.
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, who the Times portrays as a driving force behind the settlement, said the payments were justified and fraud was minimal. “We weren’t just writing checks for the heck of it,” Vilsack told the paper. “People were not treated fairly and, in fact, even today there are damages as a result of folks who weren’t treated fairly.”
Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey noted the ultimate vindication is still out of reach.
“Perhaps now that The New York Times has exposed this, a few lawmakers might get shamed into doing something about it,” he wrote. “That would really put a smile on Andrew’s face.”
Even a blind hog finds an acorn every now and then. But, it still doesn't prove he can see.
Even a blind hog finds an acorn every now and then. But, it still doesn't prove he can see.
Even a blind hog finds an acorn every now and then. But, it still doesn't prove he can see.
I know, I really wish I could witness the gnashing of teeth, renting of clothing, and wails of despair as Breitbart is proven right, once again.
And by the New York Times.
Blogs: New York Times vindicates Andrew Breitbart - Kevin Robillard - POLITICO.com
“Today Andrew Breitbart is smiling, and probably amazed,” the Washington Examiner’s Byron York wrote on Twitter. “New York Times goes deep into Pigford scandal.”
Lee Stranahan, a Breitbart disciple who also investigated the Pigford case, was jubilant.
“I wish to God that Andrew Breitbart were alive to see this,” Stranahan wrote. “He fought this fight for years, was totally right and never got credit for it.”
“NYTimes Confirms: Massive Fraud at USDA in Pigford; Breitbart Vindicated,” blared the headline on Breitbart’s eponymous website.
The Times’ A1, above-the-fold story — which involved Freedom of Information Act requests, interviews with former administration officials and database work — shows how political appointees in the Obama administration’s Justice and Agriculture Departments turned a potential government court victory into $1.3 billion settlement for Hispanic and female farmers — some of whom never even claimed discrimination in court. The story also detailed how the feds relied on a flawed payout system for black farmers that was ripe with fraud and revealed that career officials in the Agriculture Department had opposed the program.
The original black farmers’ case, called Pigford v. Glickman, and the unfair treatment of many of the original plaintiffs in the lawsuit became a personal cause for Breitbart, who died in 2012 of a heart attack. The conservative provocateur published a December 2010 report about the case, entitled “The Pigford Shakedown,” and also spoke about the program at CPAC and other events.
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, who the Times portrays as a driving force behind the settlement, said the payments were justified and fraud was minimal. “We weren’t just writing checks for the heck of it,” Vilsack told the paper. “People were not treated fairly and, in fact, even today there are damages as a result of folks who weren’t treated fairly.”
Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey noted the ultimate vindication is still out of reach.
“Perhaps now that The New York Times has exposed this, a few lawmakers might get shamed into doing something about it,” he wrote. “That would really put a smile on Andrew’s face.”
I know, I really wish I could witness the gnashing of teeth, renting of clothing, and wails of despair as Breitbart is proven right, once again.
And by the New York Times.
Blogs: New York Times vindicates Andrew Breitbart - Kevin Robillard - POLITICO.com
Today Andrew Breitbart is smiling, and probably amazed, the Washington Examiners Byron York wrote on Twitter. New York Times goes deep into Pigford scandal.
Lee Stranahan, a Breitbart disciple who also investigated the Pigford case, was jubilant.
I wish to God that Andrew Breitbart were alive to see this, Stranahan wrote. He fought this fight for years, was totally right and never got credit for it.
NYTimes Confirms: Massive Fraud at USDA in Pigford; Breitbart Vindicated, blared the headline on Breitbarts eponymous website.
The Times A1, above-the-fold story which involved Freedom of Information Act requests, interviews with former administration officials and database work shows how political appointees in the Obama administrations Justice and Agriculture Departments turned a potential government court victory into $1.3 billion settlement for Hispanic and female farmers some of whom never even claimed discrimination in court. The story also detailed how the feds relied on a flawed payout system for black farmers that was ripe with fraud and revealed that career officials in the Agriculture Department had opposed the program.
The original black farmers case, called Pigford v. Glickman, and the unfair treatment of many of the original plaintiffs in the lawsuit became a personal cause for Breitbart, who died in 2012 of a heart attack. The conservative provocateur published a December 2010 report about the case, entitled The Pigford Shakedown, and also spoke about the program at CPAC and other events.
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, who the Times portrays as a driving force behind the settlement, said the payments were justified and fraud was minimal. We werent just writing checks for the heck of it, Vilsack told the paper. People were not treated fairly and, in fact, even today there are damages as a result of folks who werent treated fairly.
Hot Airs Ed Morrissey noted the ultimate vindication is still out of reach.
Perhaps now that The New York Times has exposed this, a few lawmakers might get shamed into doing something about it, he wrote. That would really put a smile on Andrews face.
and your point is?
oh yeah, "the lawsuit became a personal cause for Breitbart"
laugh2 in a Blog post on Politico?
A Washington Examiner (read right wing whack rag) Tweets (read nitwit speak) and his tweet becomes a story by a former 'citizen journalist'
Kevin Robillard - POLITICO.com
and
Byron York
---------------------------
Why does this story seem as twisted as Breitbart The Dead Blogger?
I know, I really wish I could witness the gnashing of teeth, renting of clothing, and wails of despair as Breitbart is proven right, once again.
And by the New York Times.
and your point is?
oh yeah, "the lawsuit became a personal cause for Breitbart"
does it matter?
see, just when you had the chance to actual say something honest and meaningful like; ' I never liked brietbart, but he had this one down cold'....
why don't you start another gop hates or exploits this one or that thread, take what mid you have off of things....
A Washington Examiner (read right wing whack rag) Tweets (read nitwit speak) and his tweet becomes a story by a former 'citizen journalist'
Kevin Robillard - POLITICO.com
and
Byron York
---------------------------
Why does this story seem as twisted as Breitbart The Dead Blogger?
I see.. so you just simply dismiss the article because the reporter was conservative. Very disingenuous. It shows your lack of an argument.
A Washington Examiner (read right wing whack rag) Tweets (read nitwit speak) and his tweet becomes a story by a former 'citizen journalist'
Kevin Robillard - POLITICO.com
and
Byron York
---------------------------
Why does this story seem as twisted as Breitbart The Dead Blogger?
I see.. so you just simply dismiss the article because the reporter was conservative. Very disingenuous. It shows your lack of an argument.
The story warrants as much attention as it gets outside of right wing world
and your point is?
oh yeah, "the lawsuit became a personal cause for Breitbart"
does it matter?
see, just when you had the chance to actual say something honest and meaningful like; ' I never liked brietbart, but he had this one down cold'....
why don't you start another gop hates or exploits this one or that thread, take what mid you have off of things....
This is the background:
The compensation effort sprang from a desire to redress what the government and a federal judge agreed was a painful legacy of bias against African-Americans by the Agriculture Department. But an examination by The New York Times shows that it 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. In the past five years, it has grown to encompass a second group of African-Americans as well as Hispanic, female and Native American farmers. In all, more than 90,000 people have filed claims. The total cost could top $4.4 billion http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/26/us/farm-loan-bias-claims-often-unsupported-cost-us-millions.html
Breitbart was always making mountains out of molehills. Good riddance
A Washington Examiner (read right wing whack rag) Tweets (read nitwit speak) and his tweet becomes a story by a former 'citizen journalist'
Kevin Robillard - POLITICO.com
and
Byron York
---------------------------
Why does this story seem as twisted as Breitbart The Dead Blogger?
I see.. so you just simply dismiss the article because the reporter was conservative. Very disingenuous. It shows your lack of an argument.
The story warrants as much attention as it gets outside of right wing world
I know, I really wish I could witness the gnashing of teeth, renting of clothing, and wails of despair as Breitbart is proven right, once again.
And by the New York Times.
Blogs: New York Times vindicates Andrew Breitbart - Kevin Robillard - POLITICO.com
Today Andrew Breitbart is smiling, and probably amazed, the Washington Examiners Byron York wrote on Twitter. New York Times goes deep into Pigford scandal.
Lee Stranahan, a Breitbart disciple who also investigated the Pigford case, was jubilant.
I wish to God that Andrew Breitbart were alive to see this, Stranahan wrote. He fought this fight for years, was totally right and never got credit for it.
NYTimes Confirms: Massive Fraud at USDA in Pigford; Breitbart Vindicated, blared the headline on Breitbarts eponymous website.
The Times A1, above-the-fold story which involved Freedom of Information Act requests, interviews with former administration officials and database work shows how political appointees in the Obama administrations Justice and Agriculture Departments turned a potential government court victory into $1.3 billion settlement for Hispanic and female farmers some of whom never even claimed discrimination in court. The story also detailed how the feds relied on a flawed payout system for black farmers that was ripe with fraud and revealed that career officials in the Agriculture Department had opposed the program.
The original black farmers case, called Pigford v. Glickman, and the unfair treatment of many of the original plaintiffs in the lawsuit became a personal cause for Breitbart, who died in 2012 of a heart attack. The conservative provocateur published a December 2010 report about the case, entitled The Pigford Shakedown, and also spoke about the program at CPAC and other events.
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, who the Times portrays as a driving force behind the settlement, said the payments were justified and fraud was minimal. We werent just writing checks for the heck of it, Vilsack told the paper. People were not treated fairly and, in fact, even today there are damages as a result of folks who werent treated fairly.
Hot Airs Ed Morrissey noted the ultimate vindication is still out of reach.
Perhaps now that The New York Times has exposed this, a few lawmakers might get shamed into doing something about it, he wrote. That would really put a smile on Andrews face.
