Dr. Paul Chabot, P.h.D for US Congress - California District 31

Dear All,

It is not often that Americans have a clear choice when selecting a candidate to represent them in the US Congress, House of Representatives. 

Today, the Citizens in California’s District 31 have that choice.

Candidate Dr. Paul Chabot has spent his entire life in preparation for this moment to serve you.

His preparation includes the following service to America:

1.     "Presidential Fellow" for the President Bill Clinton White House.

2.     "Senior Advisor" for the President Bush White House.

3.     He has also served in the:

a.     Pentagon,

b.    US State Department,

c.      US Congress,

d.    US Department of Justice,

e.      California’s Governor’s Office as a three-term parole board commissioner; unanimously confirmed by the California Senate.

4.     Paul is also a US Naval and Defense Intelligence Officer serving the nations war effort in Iraq; in the field of battle along with units of the “Special Forces” to gather intelligence on the enemy including the terrorist group - Al Qaeda.

5.     He also authored the book, “Eternal Battle Against Evil” 

To protect our society and her children from the scourge of drug abuse, Dr. Chabot founded the Coalition for a Drug Free California.  CDFC is among the largest efforts in the State of California and is gaining attention nationwide.

Ronald L. Kirkish
[Publisher of "The Truth and Nothing but the Truth"]

 

Dr. Paul Chabot, Ph.D., Naval Officer   Candidate for the US House of Representatives CA. 31st  Congressional District   Having been involved in volunteer police work for over 19-years, I have worked for positive change in our communities.  In high school at the age of 16, I became a Sheriff Explorer Scout. Like any young kid, I was excited about the opportunity to sit in a real police car and turn on the lights and sirens. After five-years as an Explorer going on ride-alongs with full-fledged Deputies, I paid my way through the Reserve Sheriff's Academy in the evenings while attending college at Cal State University San Bernardino. It took over a year, but I eventually completed all three levels of police training so that I could serve as a Reserve Deputy Sheriff.  In 1995, I was sworn in as Reserve Deputy Sheriff and assigned to Central Station. I patrolled the unincorporated areas of the county in and around San Bernardino.   Like a regular full-time deputy, I responded to calls and witnessed firsthand the best and worst of people. There were many long and hot days but I always appreciated the ability to help protect my community, especially the children.  Serving as a Reserve in law enforcement, and in the military, where I also serve has been the cornerstone of my personal and professional development, for nearly 2-decades. I earned basic military pay while on duty and no-pay as a reserve deputy sheriff. I served not for the money, but for the mission - to protect and to serve. One of the most humbling experiences in life is asking others for help, and that's why I'm writing this letter. I'm now polling in first place among all seven candidates. What typically, and sadly happens in a campaign is that a first-place polling candidate will often come under attack from other campaigns lacking honor, ethics and integrity. This race is no different. A mailer was sent out by one of my opponents who chose to make up a career I never had. They altered my physical appearance in another attempt to deceit the voters. They discredited my true service, which is that of a United States military officer, veteran and unpaid volunteer Deputy Sheriff Reserve.  If a candidate is willing to go this far by discrediting a veteran, how far will they go when in office? We have enough problems in America today with corrupt politicians and selfish insiders who care only about their personal gain by stepping on the back of others. I will fight to bring integrity back to public office, but I can't do it alone. That's why, now more than ever, I need your donation so I can respond accordingly to these attacks. I polled the highest in a recent democrat poll of all voters - and I'm a Republican. I also earned the highest percentage of Republican and Democrat votes among my two GOP opponents combined. This poll sent a strong message to my opponents; I can not only win the highest amount of Republican votes, but I can also earn a percentage of the Democrat votes which negates the Democrat voter registration advantage in this district. Help me fight on and finish strong. Please go my website and donate right now at www.PaulChabot.com and click the donate tab. Or contact me with how to send a check at paul@paulchabot.com.  Yours truly, Paul     www.PaulChabot.com   Paul Chabot, 40, is a military officer, small business owner and law enforcement veteran. He has the real life experience to truly understand the challenges Californians face. He is a proven leader with a track record of getting things done. Paul Chabot served in the Clinton White House as a Presidential Fellow and later in the Bush White House as a Senior Advisor. He also served in the Pentagon, U.S. State Department, U.S. Congress, U.S. Department of Justice and in the California Governor's Office as a three-term parole board commissioner, unanimously confirmed by the Senate. He has 13-years of military experience and deployed with Special Operation Forces to Iraq in 2008. Paul has a B.A. from Cal-State San Bernardino, a Masters in Public Administration from the University of Southern California and a Doctorate in Executive Leadership from the George Washington University.  He resides in Rancho Cucamonga with his wife and four children.

Where is honor at the VA?

[The Hill] By Robert B. Charles - Bio - May 21, 2014, 11:00 am

Charles ran a House oversight subcommittee for five years, served as assistant secretary of State under Colin Powell, and was a Naval Intelligence Officer, USNR, for ten years.  He currently runs a consulting firm in Washington D.C. 

Secretary of Veterans Affairs (VA) Eric Shinseki is a man of honor, who ought to be politically bullet proof. 

A four-star general, two combat tours in Vietnam, a former wartime chairman of the Joint Chiefs and land mine survivor, his military career is the definition of high-integrity leadership. 

But he is not bullet proof.  Here is why.

General Shinseki has been head of the VA since 2009. 

Between April 2009 and today, there have been ten semi-annual Inspector General’s (IG) reports done on the VA. 

Another is now pending.

Each is a damning six- month compilation.

1. In the very first report, Shinseki learned of 102 individual IG reports on major VA problems. 
2. In his second, he learned of 133 new problems.  
3. In his third 120,
4. fourth 143,
5. fifth 140,
6. sixth 161,
7. seventh 140,
8. eighth 159,
9. ninth 164,
10. tenth 185. 

 So, the number of problems and investigations on his watch has been rising, not falling.

What did five years of mounting investigations reveal?  A lot. 

The first consolidated semi-annual IG report – five years ago – reported to the general that “An OIG audit determined the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) lacks an effective method to track and report unused appointments, particularly those canceled in advance and those never scheduled.” 

So, within his first six months, the general knew VHA had major scheduling, appointment allocation, and wait time problems. 

What is the current investigation about? 

VHA wait times alleged to have been the proximate cause of veteran deaths. 

Ironically, the cover of that first IG report? 

An Arlington headstone.

What did the second report find?

Among other system failures, “noncompliance” across the VA with critical “directives.”

“VHA’s failure to comply on such a large scale suggested fundamental defects in organizational structure.” 

Again, the process by which the VA managed all appointments and information technology was found deeply flawed. 

Wrote the IG, of the system for veterans’ medical appointments:  “Oversight … was ineffective,” thus “VA expended over $70 million” but “does not have a deployable [appointments system].”

Worse, there was “a fundamental inability on the part of [the VA] to properly manage [important] IT projects internally.”

Nor could the VA leadership, including the general, have missed this point. 

In March of 2009, there was a media bombshell: The multi-million dollar project “to develop a core computer application to schedule patient appointments at hospitals run by the VA has all but collapsed, and senior executives are worried about the repercussions it could cause on the Hill … according to an internal memo.”

So, there it was:  Leadership knew the system was failing veterans.

The third IG report?

“Many veterans do not receive timely medical examinations because VA medical facilities do not commit sufficient medical resources to them” and “program weaknesses persist.” 

The fourth and fifth amplified. 

In the sixth, mishandling of medical systems in “16 regional offices,” and a return to the failed appointments system:  Specifically, the VA “made little interim progress in one key area—ensuring contact with patients during the time interval between acceptance into a mental health residential rehabilitation program and the start of the program.” 

In other words, appointments for mental health were a continuing problem. 

Suicides were rising.

Seven?  The general’s VA “lacked financial and budgetary controls,” had “ineffective oversight and stewardship of VA funds.”

More Arlington headstones. 

Eight? “At 5 years after separation, 3.7 percent of [veterans were] experiencing … homelessness,” and “were more likely to be diagnosed with mental disorders …”

Nine? Hundreds more arrests, more systemic problems. 

Ten?  More non-compliance, negligence and criminal issues.

So, here comes the five-year head of VA to testify before Congress. 

And what does he say? 

He says that learning of mismanagement now “makes him mad as hell.” 

He fires a senior administrator.  President Obama’s staff says he has “complete confidence,” but is “outraged” by failures at his VA.  

Really?

After five years of systemic disconnect and program failure, after breaking trust with nearly 65 million patriotic and ailing American veterans, the head of the VA is “mad as hell?” 

The president is “outraged?”  Really? 

I am sorry.  My father died in a VA hospital. 

Too many of my relatives are at Arlington to accept this.

Responsibility for systemic failure goes to the top. 

The president has too much pride or too little shame to accept responsibility for another systemic failure, let alone to resign. 

But General Shinseki, you are a man of honor – still. 

Is it not a little late to get “mad as hell,” in view of the last five years and all those IG reports? 

Why must so many good men and women suffer so much, after defending us with their lives, limbs, hearts and minds? 

Where is honor at the VA?

Surely we can do better.  We must.

RESEARCH SUGGESTS POT NOT AS BENIGN AS MOST BELIEVE

May 20, 2014 - Ray Lozano - RayLozano.com -  CEO, Prevention Plus - 909-855-6871

 

 

 

 

Editorial by Ray Lozano  - View My Testimonials

Legalized pot continuously makes headway in most regions of the country.

However, this expanding culture of acceptance will ignore the actual science.

Plus, the science informs us that smoking pot is plain dangerous.

According to new evidence, this holds true even amongst casual users.

And, a second, brand new study highlights pot’s dangerous effects upon the heart.

In a minute, we’ll get more into both these new studies.

However, prior to us getting into the science, let us back up and take a look at the problem from a point of view that is logical.

And we will begin with a basic contradiction to the legalized pot argument…

If smoking a single burning plant leaf (i.e., tobacco) in excess is so poor for your health, how might smoking an additional burning plant leaf (pot) be beneficial for your health?

The harms of taking in combustion products are similar or the same.

It’s true, tobacco businesses place dangerous additives within many mass-produced cigarettes.

However, whole leaf, natural tobacco cigarettes are broadly available.

And whole leaf, natural tobacco is exclusively used in cigars that you do not inhale in any instance.

But the government has concentrated on the dangerous effects of taking in the smoke of a burning tobacco leaf [plus, lately, on nicotine] as taken in excess.

Not the additives.

No one may certify pot as ‘organic’ as we cannot know if artificial chemicals are present, even if it’s unintentional).

There’s an additional simplistic contradiction at the base of this politically correct argument…

If the nanny states have a desire to ban so many behaviors due to them supposedly harming your health, how can most of the same politically correct crowd extol the virtues of legalizing pot?

I personally am in favor of getting big government out of our lives and business of regulating morality and behavior via the tax code or penal code. It is a big waste of taxpayer money.

Plus, it will contribute to the incompetence, intrusiveness, and costs of government.

However, while we’re still stuck with big government–just attempt to be consistent.

Treat the smoke from a single burning plant the same as another.

Now–placing aside posturing and political correctness, what are the real scientific and medical facts regarding smoking pot?

For multiple years, we did not have enough studies concerning the effects of smoking pot…for one simplistic reason.

Individuals didn’t have a desire to disclose lighting up an illegal substance.

And, researchers could hardly produce research in which they asked the participants to consume an illegal substance.

Now that smoking pot is ironically legal in most places…we’re at last starting to see how harmful it actually is.

Earlier in the year, a report came out on the neuropsychiatric issues related to heavy pot use amongst the youth.

However, one new report from the ongoing research at Northwestern and Harvard and Universities is more worrisome.

It exhibits that 18- to 25-year-old youth who consume pot, even recreationally, have marked irregularities in regions of their brains which regulate motivation.

Shocked?

For the ones who believe smoking pot, even within moderation, cannot possibly be dangerous…they must rethink this (that is, if they’re still able to).

According to Assistant Professor at the Harvard Medical School, Anne Blood, within a TIME magazine feature story, there’s this general perspective available that consuming pot recreationally isn’t an issue–that it’s a safe drug.

We’re seeing this isn’t the case.

In the new study, scientists assessed the brains of forty students from the area of Boston who casually smoked pot–on average, 4 times a week.

The scientists compared these students to those who never smoked pot.

The researchers specifically assessed two important portions of the brain–the nucleus accumbens and the amygdala.

These brain regions affect judgment.

Also, they assist you in weighing the downsides against upsides of partaking within a pleasurable activity.

For instance, as you age you know ingesting a donut or staying up really late to watch your favorite television show may provide you pleasure.

However, it has consequences.

However, smoking cannabis destroys these brain areas.

As a matter of fact, the scientists found substantial brain changes to these regions within the students who consumed cannabis.

Even amongst the ones who smoked only one time per week!

Within the second new research study, scientists connect smoking pot with a greater risk of cardiovascular diseases.

This study was published recently within the Journal of the American Heart Association.

From 2006 to 2010, the nationwide Addictovigilance Network within France received almost 2,000 reports of severe marijuana-associated health issues.

And 35 of these reports were regarding cardiovascular complications.
 
This amount may not sound very high. However, here are a couple of intriguing points…

Between 2006 and 2010, the cardiovascular complication proportions associated with marijuana more than tripled.

And, the scientists estimate up to 95% of cases are never reported.

Therefore the numbers, realistically, are potentially a lot higher.

Cardiovascular complications which were reported are severe in nature.

They involved:

·        Lower limb peripheral vascular diseases

·        Cerebral artery spasms

·        Transient cortical blindness

·        Acute cerebral angiopathies

·        Heart rate disorders

·        Acute coronary syndromes

Therefore even if the new report is merely the tip of the iceberg, still, we ought to add severe cardiovascular complications to our list of well-known effects of smoking pot.

According to authors, practitioners ought to be alert to the fact that marijuana might be a possible triggering factor for cardiovascular complications within the youth.

Now, let us place all these research discoveries together.

(Not likely to occur in the medical or mainstream media.)

We have lung complications, brain complications, and currently cardiovascular complications.

I wonder if those serious and sudden cardiovascular complications are really producing permanent brain damage, by decreasing blood flow to sensitive tissues in the brain?

Indeed, decrease in brain blood flow typically does happen within a cardiovascular event.

Plus it may trigger permanent damage.

Now, let’s be clear–smoking pot for its relief of pain benefits ought to be weighed against the drug’s side effects. (As with any additional substance utilized as a medicine).

Therefore, an individual who has cancer who smokes pot for pain relief is not as concerned with its side effects, particularly at an older age.

However, the acceptance of medical cannabis has contributed to the thought that recreational use is fine…or even healthy…for everybody.

But, the facts are: Smoking pot is dangerous to your health.

Solid research currently connects its use with diseases of the heart, lung, mind, and brain.

For more information go to www.raylozano.com

"Judicial Watch" finds Obama Admin Email confirming the White House Lied about Benghazi to Save the Presidents Rear-End

Dear All,

Below, is an article just published in the Washington Times that confirms the Obama Administrations intentionally covered up the truth in regards to the tragic Benghazi Affair where US Ambassador Stevens and three others were killed. 

 Sadly, my thoughts go to the families of Ambassador Chris Stevens and the three men who died in Benghazi on 9/11/2012 and how they must feel tonight; knowing that their President and Secretary of State, instead of telling the American people the truth, had the audacity to lie to them and cowardly deciding to not provide them the full facts; just so the they could protect the president’s political rear-end for re-election. 

Just for the record, here is what then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had to say to a congressman only two days after the attack:

Ill. Rep.: Clinton yelled at congressman for calling Benghazi a terrorist attack

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/16/illinois-lawmaker-hillary-clinton-screamed-closed-/

And then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton angrily had this to say during testimony before a congressional hearing on the Benghazi tragedy:

 Hillary Clinton/Ron Johnson Engage in Heated Exchange at Benghazi Hearing (Video)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/23/hillary-clinton-ron-johnson_n_2533819.html
Excerpt: "With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans," Clinton responded, raising her voice at Johnson, who continued to interrupt her. "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator."

 “NEVER FORGET” – The families of the dead deserved much better.......as did the Citizens of the United States.

 Ron Kirkish

 Email ensuring ‘Obama looked good’ was post-Benghazi priority

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/29/email-ensuring-obama-looked-good-was-post-benghazi/

By Cheryl K. Chumley – The Washington Times, Tuesday, April 29, 2014

Key communication chiefs at the White House waged an all-out strategy to rally behind President Obama and help him push the mantra that the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attacks on the U.S. facility in Benghazi were due to an Internet video — and not policy failure, a watchdog revealed.

Key to the messaging: Making sure the president appeared strong in the face of adversity, the nonprofit Judicial Watch found, in a recently received FOIA request.

Judicial Watch found — after sifting through documents that were requested from the Department of State on June 21, 2013 — an email from Ben Rhodes, then-White House deputy strategic communications adviser, that showed he joined with others to devise a public relations campaign to “reinforce” Mr. Obama’s statements that an anti-Islam video spurred the attacks.

The main point of the White House team’s strategy was to paint the terrorist attack as being “rooted in an Internet video and not a failure of policy,” Judicial Watch said in an emailed release. Meanwhile, the State Department — at the same time that message was being shaped — initially considered the incident simply an “attack,” and perhaps even a kidnap try, the watchdog said.

The email from Mr. Rhodes, dated Sept. 14, 2012, read in part: “Goal: … To underscore that these protests are rooted in [an] Internet video and not a broader failure or policy.”

Mr. Rhodes also went on, Judicial Watch reported: “[W]e’ve made our views on this video crystal clear. The United States government had nothing to do with it. We reject its message and its contents. We find it disgusting and reprehensible. But there is absolutely no justification at all for responding to this movie with violence. And we are working to make sure that people around the globe hear that message.”

In the email, Mr. Rhodes also advises key White House and administration officials to make sure they presented Mr. Obama as “steady and statesmanlike” whenever speaking of the crisis. Another “goal,” he said, in his email, was to “reinforce the president and administration’s strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges,” Judicial Watch reported.

The recipients of the email included White House press secretary Jay Carney and then-White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer, along with several others, Judicial Watch said.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said the latest email only proves that the White House’s main concern in the wake of the Benghazi attack that left four Americans dead was image — more than truth.

“Now we know that Obama White House’s chief concern about the Benghazi attack was making sure that President Obama looked good,” he said in a statement.

Four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, died in the terror attack.

   

OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE MEMBERS DEMAND ANSWERS ABOUT DOJ ROLE IN TARGETING CONSERVATIVE GROUPS WITH THE IRS - "THE TOWNHALL"

Dear All,

 

It is now becoming undeniably and perfectly clear that President Obama lied once again to the Citizens of America when he pointed his finger at Fox News' Bill O'Reilly during a interview and indignantly  stated, “there is not one scintilla of truth that the IRS did anything scandalous or illegal”.  Same as when former President Richard Nixon held a national news conference and stated, “The President is not a Crook”; when up against the Watergate Scandal.

 

And then after Lois Lerner (the then Director of the IRS) opined that she was not guilty of any wrong doing, she  took the 5th (twice) so she couldn’t be forced to testify before the Congressional Oversight Committee for the Department of Justice.

 

Earlier, the Congressional Oversight Committee for the Department of Justice voted to hold USAG Holder in “Contempt of Congress” and just two weeks ago they did the same for Lois Lerner.

 

The noose is slowing tightening around the necks of these two individuals and the Obama Administration.

 

Ron Kirkish

Oversight Committee Members Demand Answers About DOJ Role in Targeting Conservative Groups With the IRS

 

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2014/04/24/oversight-demands-answers-about-doj-contact-with-irs-n1828795

 

Katie Pavlich | Apr 24, 2014

 

House Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa and sixteen Committee members are demanding answers from Attorney General Eric Holder after it was revealed last week, through a series of emails, former IRS official Lois Lerner was in contact with the Director of the Election Crimes Branch of the Department of Justice Public Integrity Section Richard Pilger about prosecuting tax exempt groups.  A newly released email obtained by Judicial Watch through a Freedom of Information Request shows someone instructed Pilger to run the idea of prosecution by Lerner, but it is unclear who the instruction came from.

“When you have a moment, would you call me? I have been asked to run something by you," a May 8, 2013 email from Pilger to Lerner states.

Shortly after Pilger's contact, Lerner forwarded the following email to Nicole Flax, the former chief of staff to former IRS Commissioner Steven Miller, who visited the White House 118 times between 2010 and 2011 when the bulk of the IRS targeting of conservatives took place.

"I got a call today from Richard Pilger Director Elections Crimes Branch at DOJ ... He wanted to know who at IRS the DOJ folk s [sic] could talk to about Sen. Whitehouse idea at the hearing that DOJ could piece together false statement cases about applicants who "lied" on their 1024s --saying they weren't planning on doing political activity, and then turning around and making large visible political expenditures.

DOJ is feeling like it needs to respond, but want to talk to the right folks at IRS to see whether there are impediments from our side and what, if any damage this might do to IRS programs.

I told him that sounded like we might need several folks from IRS," Lerner wrote in a May 8, 2013 email.

Flax responded by saying she not only wanted to help, but wanted to rope in the Criminal Division of DOJ.

"I think we should do it – also need to include CI [Criminal Investigation Division], which we can help coordinate.

Also, we need to reach out to FEC.

Does it make sense to consider including them in this or keep it separate?" Flax responded on May 9, 2013.

In another email more than a month before the exchange with DOJ, Lerner detailed how a single prosecution of just one tax-exempt group would essentially send a chilling affect across all [conservative] groups.

"One IRS prosecution would make an impact and they wouldn’t feel so comfortable doing stuff.

So, don’t be fooled about how this is being articulated – it is ALL about 501(c)(4) orgs and political activity," she wrote on March 27, 2013 adding, "There are several groups of folks from the FEC world that are pushing tax fraud prosecution for c4s who report they are not conducting political activity when they are (or these folks think they are).

One is my ex-boss Larry Noble (former General Counsel at the FEC), who is now president of Americans for Campaign Reform.

This is their latest push to shut these down."

Just two days after these emails were exchanged between DOJ, Lerner and Flax, news the IRS inappropriately targeted conservative groups surfaced.

"Mr. Pilger’s communications with Ms. Lerner are also striking for their timing.

They show that the IRS and the Justice Department were actively considering efforts to target tax-exempt organizations just two days before Ms. Lerner’s public apology for the targeting.

This information certainly undermines the sincerity of Ms. Lerner’s apology, but it calls into question your reaction that targeting was “outrageous” and “unacceptable.”

These comments ring hollow in light of evidence that your subordinates apparently colluded with the IRS to target nonprofit groups less than a week before.

We are severely disappointed in the Department’s apparent contribution to the Administration’s targeting of tax-exempt applicants," a letter sent directly to Holder from Issa and other Committee members states.

"This e-mail is shocking on several levels.

As an initial matter, this e-mail is further evidence that the Administration’s targeting and inappropriate treatment of conservative tax-exempt applicants was the result of political pressure from prominent Democrats to “fix the problem” posed by the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision.

Information obtained by the Committee shows that beginning in 2010, the President and congressional Democrats loudly and aggressively criticized the Court’s decision and conservative nonprofit groups that they believed would benefit from it."

"This e-mail makes clear that the Justice Department, like the IRS and the Securities and Exchange Commission, played a role in a government-wide effort to target political speech.

Certainly, as is apparent in this e-mail, the Department felt the need to do something in response to Democratic rhetoric against nonprofit political speech.

More unbelievably, this e-mail also suggests that the Department actually considered prosecuting nonprofit groups for their political activities.

Even more astounding, the Department considered prosecuting these groups for actions that are legal for 501(c)(4) nonprofits under federal tax law – that is, engaging in political speech.

The Department’s use of alleged false statement on the tax-exempt application is an unfortunate instance of prosecutorial “gotcha,” targeting these victims for supposed “lies” about activities that they are legally allowed to do.

In this way, the tactics suggested by Mr. Pilger appear to be nothing more than harassment by the Justice Department of groups engaged in otherwise lawful activity."

Issa and members are demanding to know who at DOJ gave the instructions to ask the IRS to look into prosecutions and asking for documentation surrounding the communication.

The Committee is also asking for Pilger to be available for a transcribed interview. 

All documents and communications referring or relating to 501(c)(4) tax-exempt organizations or applicants for 501(c)(4) tax-exempt status for the period January 1, 2009, through the present.

All documents and communications between or among Lois Lerner and employees of the Department of Justice for the period January 1, 2009, through the present.

All documents and communications referring or relating to the potential prosecution of tax-exempt organizations for alleged false statements made on Internal Revenue Service forms for the period January 1, 2009, through the present.

 Documentation must be produced by DOJ by May 5, 2014.