From all published accounts the information obtained from conscientious ATF employees has provided a valuable and devastating indictment of the extent of that agency's involvement in the "Fast and Furious" debacle, in which thousands of firearms were allowed to pass into Mexico over the objections of both law-abiding gun stores and those same rational ATF agents. ultimately causing the deaths of countless Mexican citizens as well as two American law-enforcement officers. The complete story is detailed beginning here for those who need to catch up on the facts of the case.
Well, the top brass at that odious department, true to their jack-booted nature, have apparently decided to try to put a stop to such inconvenient whistleblowing. Acting ATF Director B. Todd Jones on July 9 released a video message to all ATF employees, warning them in part that "Choices and consequences means simply that if you make poor choices, that if you don't abide by the rules, that if you don't respect the chain of command, if you don't find the appropriate way to raise your concerns to your leadership, there will be consequences, because we cannot tolerate -- we cannot tolerate -- an undisciplined organization,".
Well, Mr. Jones, the American public cannot "tolerate" an "undisciplined" and rogue government organization that deliberately breaks its own country's laws as well as those of a neighboring country, directly causing the deaths of at least hundreds of innocent people, and then shamelessly tries to cover up its illegal actions by refusing to respond to a legitimate Congressional subpoena seeking to investigate those activities. Make sure and address that simple concept in your next propaganda video, sir.
What Jones also conveniently forgets is that ATF agents and even some Justice department lawyers did indeed attempt on multiple occasions to address their concerns with their superiors, only to have their "complaints dismissed or ignored". Thus, they were forced to go to bloggers David Codrea and Mike Vanderboegh as well as members of Congress to get the story out once it became clear that Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry had been shot and killed with one of the thousands of firearms that the ATF had incompetently "lost".
Congressman Darrell Issa and Senator Charles Grassley have warned Jones in no uncertain terms that intimidation of legitimate whistleblowing activities will not be tolerated. The ATF responded thusly:
"ATF spokeswoman Ginger Colbrun, though, said the video clip was 'taken out of context.'
She said the message was one of eight internal videos released since March that address topics ranging from "trust" to "mission" to "morale."
This one dealt with "choices and consequences," but she said it wasn't meant to "discourage" legally protected activities."
The ATF and Justice Department brass in both Arizona and Washington made the deliberate "choice" to break the law. It's past time they received some "consequences" of their own.
Showing posts with label Update. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Update. Show all posts
Sunday, July 22, 2012
Wednesday, July 06, 2011
He's not going quietly
Acting ATF director Ken Melson is reported to have met on Monday, July 4 with congressional investigators and told them that the Justice Department is actively obstructing the probe into Project Gunwalker, the absolute disaster of a botched "sting" operation that has directly resulted in the deaths of two American law-enforcement officers as well as those of countless innocent Mexican citizens.
Gee, no wonder Eric "Neutral, leaning towards favorable" Holder and the other top brass at Justice appear to have wanted Melson gone in the worst way. Too bad for them the acting director has chosen not to be the fall guy for the ones who apparently really thought up and implemented this scheme and has decided to go down swinging.
Oh, and get this - Melson is also said to have stated that the prime target of the scheme, a previously deported drug dealer, is an FBI informant. Talk about a classic case of one hand at a massive government agency not knowing what the other is up to, mostly because of turf wars and other maddening intra-departmental squabbling. As former senator Tom Daschle once famously stated, though, "You can't professionalize until you Federalize". Right.
It's about time that someone has finally gone on record as stating that the obvious attempted coverup of this mess is coming from the highest levels of Justice, presumably because the authorization for and administration of the failed operation came from the very same offices. It otherwise wouldn't make a lick of sense for those in charge to try to obstruct the investigation, since if it really were just some rogue subordinates who were responsible for Gunwalker the easiest and safest course of action would be full disclosure and punishment for those involved, leaving Holder, Lanny Breuer and others at the top of Justice smelling like a rose. The fact that those higher-ups are making such a risky move does more than anything else to leave the blame arrow pointed directly at them.
Mr. Melson's official interview with the inspector general is today. It will be interesting to see what other interesting nuggets of information are going to be shortly coming out.
Gee, no wonder Eric "Neutral, leaning towards favorable" Holder and the other top brass at Justice appear to have wanted Melson gone in the worst way. Too bad for them the acting director has chosen not to be the fall guy for the ones who apparently really thought up and implemented this scheme and has decided to go down swinging.
Oh, and get this - Melson is also said to have stated that the prime target of the scheme, a previously deported drug dealer, is an FBI informant. Talk about a classic case of one hand at a massive government agency not knowing what the other is up to, mostly because of turf wars and other maddening intra-departmental squabbling. As former senator Tom Daschle once famously stated, though, "You can't professionalize until you Federalize". Right.
It's about time that someone has finally gone on record as stating that the obvious attempted coverup of this mess is coming from the highest levels of Justice, presumably because the authorization for and administration of the failed operation came from the very same offices. It otherwise wouldn't make a lick of sense for those in charge to try to obstruct the investigation, since if it really were just some rogue subordinates who were responsible for Gunwalker the easiest and safest course of action would be full disclosure and punishment for those involved, leaving Holder, Lanny Breuer and others at the top of Justice smelling like a rose. The fact that those higher-ups are making such a risky move does more than anything else to leave the blame arrow pointed directly at them.
Mr. Melson's official interview with the inspector general is today. It will be interesting to see what other interesting nuggets of information are going to be shortly coming out.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Start making the popcorn
John Solomon of The Daily Beast is reporting that the Senate Judiciary Committee has reached a deal that will allow Ken Melson, the acting head of the ATF, to testify before that body next month about the disastrous "Project Gunwalker" debacle that has claimed the lives of at least two U.S. law enforcement agents as well as those of countless innocent Mexican citizens.
Since Mr. Melson has already stood up for himself by refusing to be the fall guy and resign his position amid the fallout from the botched "investigation", he will presumably be quite eager to explain in great detail exactly who among his superiors at Justice (and at State, since this mess involved an international border) knew about and authorized allowing thousands of straw-purchased guns to be sent to Mexico over the objections of street-level ATF agents and even the gun dealers themselves.
Bob Owens of Pajamas Media theorizes about the possible repercussions from Melson's upcoming appearance. We think Owens's third scenario is the one most likely to come about - that Attorney General Eric "Neutral, leaning towards favorable" Holder will ultimately be held accountable over this. Why? We think it's because Senator Chuck Grassley smells important blood in the water, otherwise he wouldn't have paid the relatively high price he did (releasing holds on three Obama nominees) for securing Melson's on-the-record testimony. Representative Darrell Issa is also apparently convinced (and is working like mad to prove) that Holder perjured himself when he testified in front of Issa that he didn't know about the failed scheme until it broke in the national news.
Be sure to tune in for this particular hearing. We look forward to watching the roaches scurry away from the light.
Since Mr. Melson has already stood up for himself by refusing to be the fall guy and resign his position amid the fallout from the botched "investigation", he will presumably be quite eager to explain in great detail exactly who among his superiors at Justice (and at State, since this mess involved an international border) knew about and authorized allowing thousands of straw-purchased guns to be sent to Mexico over the objections of street-level ATF agents and even the gun dealers themselves.
Bob Owens of Pajamas Media theorizes about the possible repercussions from Melson's upcoming appearance. We think Owens's third scenario is the one most likely to come about - that Attorney General Eric "Neutral, leaning towards favorable" Holder will ultimately be held accountable over this. Why? We think it's because Senator Chuck Grassley smells important blood in the water, otherwise he wouldn't have paid the relatively high price he did (releasing holds on three Obama nominees) for securing Melson's on-the-record testimony. Representative Darrell Issa is also apparently convinced (and is working like mad to prove) that Holder perjured himself when he testified in front of Issa that he didn't know about the failed scheme until it broke in the national news.
Be sure to tune in for this particular hearing. We look forward to watching the roaches scurry away from the light.
Thursday, June 09, 2011
Health care "reform" is on the ropes
The chances of unconstitutional Obamacare remaining the law of the land aren't looking too good these days:
"Judges on a federal appeals court panel on Wednesday repeatedly raised questions about President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, expressing unease with the requirement that virtually all Americans carry health insurance or face penalties."
Dear Leader's choice to defend the case once again isn't helping matters any, either:
"Acting U.S. Solicitor Neal Katyal sought to ease their concerns by saying the legislative branch can only exercise its powers to regulate commerce if it will have a substantial effect on the economy and solve a national, not local, problem."
First of all, it's not "regulating" free commerce if you make people buy something they don't want to own. That would be "forcing" government-mandated commerce.
Secondly, who would get to decide what constitutes a "national problem? Congress, of course, the very same body that would then supposedly solve those dire issues by requiring that people purchase something. Nope, no conflict of interest there.
Thirdly, Mr. Katyal's overbroad argument could be stretched in any number of ways to justify forcing Americans to do any number of things they don't wish. How about solving a "national problem" of an overabundance of orange juice, for example, by making people buy a certain quantity every month, thus avoiding a price plunge and keeping a multi-billion dollar industry in business? Especially if, you know, some of the growers, producers and distributors are big donors to whatever party happened to be in control at the time.
In the same vein, maybe Congress could require that every household buy oneGovernment General Motors car every two years, which would make GM profitable and protect the taxpayers' current (forced) investment in the company.
What about making people buy $500 or so worth of U.S. made electronic devices every year to stimulate the economy and help harden that industry against cheap foreign competition? Such a mandate would certainly have a "substantial effect on the economy".
The possibilities for abusing this kind of unlimited and unchecked power are endless, which is precisely why the Founders expressly limited the authority of the Federal government in the first place. The health care law needs to be overturned for lots of reasons, but protecting the citizens from a predatory Congress intent on arbitrarily picking their pockets "for your own good" by making them purchase whatever that body wishes to is the most critical one.
"Judges on a federal appeals court panel on Wednesday repeatedly raised questions about President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, expressing unease with the requirement that virtually all Americans carry health insurance or face penalties."
Dear Leader's choice to defend the case once again isn't helping matters any, either:
"Acting U.S. Solicitor Neal Katyal sought to ease their concerns by saying the legislative branch can only exercise its powers to regulate commerce if it will have a substantial effect on the economy and solve a national, not local, problem."
First of all, it's not "regulating" free commerce if you make people buy something they don't want to own. That would be "forcing" government-mandated commerce.
Secondly, who would get to decide what constitutes a "national problem? Congress, of course, the very same body that would then supposedly solve those dire issues by requiring that people purchase something. Nope, no conflict of interest there.
Thirdly, Mr. Katyal's overbroad argument could be stretched in any number of ways to justify forcing Americans to do any number of things they don't wish. How about solving a "national problem" of an overabundance of orange juice, for example, by making people buy a certain quantity every month, thus avoiding a price plunge and keeping a multi-billion dollar industry in business? Especially if, you know, some of the growers, producers and distributors are big donors to whatever party happened to be in control at the time.
In the same vein, maybe Congress could require that every household buy one
What about making people buy $500 or so worth of U.S. made electronic devices every year to stimulate the economy and help harden that industry against cheap foreign competition? Such a mandate would certainly have a "substantial effect on the economy".
The possibilities for abusing this kind of unlimited and unchecked power are endless, which is precisely why the Founders expressly limited the authority of the Federal government in the first place. The health care law needs to be overturned for lots of reasons, but protecting the citizens from a predatory Congress intent on arbitrarily picking their pockets "for your own good" by making them purchase whatever that body wishes to is the most critical one.
Friday, June 03, 2011
Missing the point entirely
"President Obama's solicitor general, defending the national health care law on Wednesday, told a federal appeals court that Americans who didn't like the individual mandate could always avoid it by choosing to earn less money."
Neal Kumar Kaytal apparently managed to keep a straight face when he made this ludicrous argument before the Sixth U.S. Court of Appeals on Wednesday. How is encouraging people to earn less money (and thus pay less taxes) so that they can receive expensive government-funded (and ironically taxpayer-financed) health care for "free" going to solve anything, much less our nation's current bankrupt status?
We also fail to see how this sort of juvenile reasoning would address the primary issue at hand, which is that Obamacare forces citizens to buy a product or service regardless of whether they wish to own or use it. Such a practice, regardless of what one may believe about the nobility of it, is illegal because that sort of coercion isn't one of the clearly enumerated powers given to the Federal government by the Constitution.
"Throughout the oral arguments, Kaytal struggled to respond to the panel's concerns about what the limits of Congressional power would be if the courts ruled that they have the ability under the Commerce Clause to force individuals to purchase something."
Because he and his boss Dear Leader firmly believe there should be no such limits or checks on the power government can exercise over the peasants. If this law is allowed to remain in place Congress would be able to point to it whenever they arbitrarily decided to saddle Americans with whatever requirements they wished - the most-used recent example being if they required people to purchase and eat broccoli because it would reduce health care costs to the government. Regardless of any supposedly beneficial merits of the law, the sort of unbridled authority it represents is why it needs to be immediately thrown out as unconstitutional.
"In arguments before the Fourth Circuit last month, Kaytal also struggled with a judge's question about what to do with the word “regulate,” to the point where the judge asked him to sit down to come up with an answer."
We are positive we would trip haplessly over our words as well had we been asked to argue this indefensible position. Nice try, Mr. Kaytal, although we believe your pitiful efforts ultimately and deservedly will be for naught.
Neal Kumar Kaytal apparently managed to keep a straight face when he made this ludicrous argument before the Sixth U.S. Court of Appeals on Wednesday. How is encouraging people to earn less money (and thus pay less taxes) so that they can receive expensive government-funded (and ironically taxpayer-financed) health care for "free" going to solve anything, much less our nation's current bankrupt status?
We also fail to see how this sort of juvenile reasoning would address the primary issue at hand, which is that Obamacare forces citizens to buy a product or service regardless of whether they wish to own or use it. Such a practice, regardless of what one may believe about the nobility of it, is illegal because that sort of coercion isn't one of the clearly enumerated powers given to the Federal government by the Constitution.
"Throughout the oral arguments, Kaytal struggled to respond to the panel's concerns about what the limits of Congressional power would be if the courts ruled that they have the ability under the Commerce Clause to force individuals to purchase something."
Because he and his boss Dear Leader firmly believe there should be no such limits or checks on the power government can exercise over the peasants. If this law is allowed to remain in place Congress would be able to point to it whenever they arbitrarily decided to saddle Americans with whatever requirements they wished - the most-used recent example being if they required people to purchase and eat broccoli because it would reduce health care costs to the government. Regardless of any supposedly beneficial merits of the law, the sort of unbridled authority it represents is why it needs to be immediately thrown out as unconstitutional.
"In arguments before the Fourth Circuit last month, Kaytal also struggled with a judge's question about what to do with the word “regulate,” to the point where the judge asked him to sit down to come up with an answer."
We are positive we would trip haplessly over our words as well had we been asked to argue this indefensible position. Nice try, Mr. Kaytal, although we believe your pitiful efforts ultimately and deservedly will be for naught.
Friday, May 27, 2011
Jack-Booted followups
1. In response to national criticism over their abusive treatment of a law-abiding resident who dared to exercise his rights by walking to a local auto parts store while legally openly carrying his holstered pistol the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Police have now announced that they will prone out at gunpoint "inconvenience" any other person who dares to do the same thing:
For posting a legally-made recording on the Internet.
Ah, nothing like a little malicious prosecution to intimidate the peasants into giving up their freedoms. Perhaps it's time for some of those residents to "inconvenience" the department with a civil-rights lawsuit seeking to immediately halt this outrageously thuggish and abusive behavior.
We have been enthusiastic (and lucrative) visitors to that city in the past. We will not go there again until that rogue agency is reminded that their job description does not include making up laws as they go along.
2. Steven Taubenkibel, a public information officer with the Washington, D.C. Metro Transit Police, laughably insists that our eyes deceive us and that the disabled man two of his agency's officers were recorded body-slamming to the pavement while arresting the suspect for drinking in public in fact "fell"" out of his mobility scooter because he was resisting.
Sure he did. How clumsy of him. It's a good thing those cops were right there to catch him and assist him gently to the ground.
Taubenkibel is also refusing to release the names of the officers involved in the incident, even though that information is usually immediately publicly available. Maybe he will argue that once again we're seeing things and that the two fully-uniformed cops were in fact undercover and thus cannot be named.
The infuriating fallout from these two incidents firmly underscores the vital role citizens play in police accountability when they are able to freely practice their right to photograph and audio/video record government workers in public. The age of departments getting away with "it didn't happen if we say it didn't" is over, and that is a very good thing.
"The warning comes after Mark Fiorino, a suburban Philadelphia IT worker, posted an audiotape to YouTube of his tense, 45-minute encounter with police in February over his exposed handgun. The video went viral and captured national attention.
After Fiorino released the audiotape, he was charged with disorderly conduct and reckless endangerment. He now faces up to two years in prison."
For posting a legally-made recording on the Internet.
Ah, nothing like a little malicious prosecution to intimidate the peasants into giving up their freedoms. Perhaps it's time for some of those residents to "inconvenience" the department with a civil-rights lawsuit seeking to immediately halt this outrageously thuggish and abusive behavior.
We have been enthusiastic (and lucrative) visitors to that city in the past. We will not go there again until that rogue agency is reminded that their job description does not include making up laws as they go along.
2. Steven Taubenkibel, a public information officer with the Washington, D.C. Metro Transit Police, laughably insists that our eyes deceive us and that the disabled man two of his agency's officers were recorded body-slamming to the pavement while arresting the suspect for drinking in public in fact "fell"" out of his mobility scooter because he was resisting.
Sure he did. How clumsy of him. It's a good thing those cops were right there to catch him and assist him gently to the ground.
Taubenkibel is also refusing to release the names of the officers involved in the incident, even though that information is usually immediately publicly available. Maybe he will argue that once again we're seeing things and that the two fully-uniformed cops were in fact undercover and thus cannot be named.
The infuriating fallout from these two incidents firmly underscores the vital role citizens play in police accountability when they are able to freely practice their right to photograph and audio/video record government workers in public. The age of departments getting away with "it didn't happen if we say it didn't" is over, and that is a very good thing.
Monday, May 09, 2011
It's about time
ICE is finally beginning to address the demand side of the illegal immigration dilemma.
This kind of aggressive enforcement against employers who knowingly break the law in order to obtain cheap labor will do more than just about anything else to help resolve the issue in a humane and efficient fashion.
This kind of aggressive enforcement against employers who knowingly break the law in order to obtain cheap labor will do more than just about anything else to help resolve the issue in a humane and efficient fashion.
Wednesday, May 04, 2011
Watch him squirm
Attorney General Eric "Neutral, leanings towards favorable" Holder positively wilts under questioning by Rep. Darrell Issa yesterday about his and his minions' neck-deep involvement in "Project Gunwalker", a failed attempt at a sting operation that directly led to the deaths of at least two U.S. federal law-enforcement officers as well as untold thousands of Mexican citizens:
That sure is a lot of brow-furrowing and mealy-mouthed "I don't know" and "I'm not sure" statements from someone who is putatively in charge of the entire Department of Justice.
Holder: "The notion that somehow or other this Justice Department is responsible for those deaths that you mentioned, uh, that assertion's offensive."
Issa: "But what if it's accurate, Mr Attorney General?"
The A.G. never answered that particular question.
That sure is a lot of brow-furrowing and mealy-mouthed "I don't know" and "I'm not sure" statements from someone who is putatively in charge of the entire Department of Justice.
Holder: "The notion that somehow or other this Justice Department is responsible for those deaths that you mentioned, uh, that assertion's offensive."
Issa: "But what if it's accurate, Mr Attorney General?"
The A.G. never answered that particular question.
Tuesday, May 03, 2011
The rest of the story?
At least one apparently longtime credible source is alleging to NewsFlavor that it was in fact CIA head Leon Panetta and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who gave the go-ahead for the raid on Osama Bin Laden, specifically overriding Dear Leader and his incompetent political minion Valerie Jarrett:
"Please get this out ASAP. Want specific people to know we know.
RE Osama Bin Laden. Significant push to take him out months ago. Senior WH staff resisted. This was cause of much strain between HC and Obama/Jarrett. HC and LP were in constant communication over matter – both attempted to convince administration to act. Administration feared failure and resulting negative impact on president. Intel disgusted over politics over national security. Staff resigned/left. Check timeline to corroborate."
...
"IMPORTANT SPECIFIC: When 48 hour go order issued, CoC was told, not requested. Administration scrambled to abort. That order was overruled. This order did not originate from CoC. Repeat – this order did not originate from CoC. He complied, but did not originate."
A very thorough and plausible-sounding followup interview of the same source is here.
(We note with wry amusement that the accompanying picture of the war room clearly shows that the president had to cut short his weekly golf outing in order to go play Commander-in-Chief. That must have irritated him to no end.)
This is a very interesting scenario if proven true, and sadly one which makes much more sense given the known personalities and political tendencies of both Clinton and Obama. We had been wondering where the president had suddenly found the guts to make such a quick and pointed military decision when we are so accustomed to seeing him do precisely the opposite over and over by waffling and wavering over every issue, especially those involving national security. This kind of aggressive operation seems much more like Hillary than anyone else in that administration, and if that's indeed the case she deserves the resulting kudos and praise, not Dear Leader.
Now we just need an inquisitive mainstream media reporter to follow up on this story. There's got to be at least one of them out there.
"Please get this out ASAP. Want specific people to know we know.
RE Osama Bin Laden. Significant push to take him out months ago. Senior WH staff resisted. This was cause of much strain between HC and Obama/Jarrett. HC and LP were in constant communication over matter – both attempted to convince administration to act. Administration feared failure and resulting negative impact on president. Intel disgusted over politics over national security. Staff resigned/left. Check timeline to corroborate."
...
"IMPORTANT SPECIFIC: When 48 hour go order issued, CoC was told, not requested. Administration scrambled to abort. That order was overruled. This order did not originate from CoC. Repeat – this order did not originate from CoC. He complied, but did not originate."
A very thorough and plausible-sounding followup interview of the same source is here.
(We note with wry amusement that the accompanying picture of the war room clearly shows that the president had to cut short his weekly golf outing in order to go play Commander-in-Chief. That must have irritated him to no end.)
This is a very interesting scenario if proven true, and sadly one which makes much more sense given the known personalities and political tendencies of both Clinton and Obama. We had been wondering where the president had suddenly found the guts to make such a quick and pointed military decision when we are so accustomed to seeing him do precisely the opposite over and over by waffling and wavering over every issue, especially those involving national security. This kind of aggressive operation seems much more like Hillary than anyone else in that administration, and if that's indeed the case she deserves the resulting kudos and praise, not Dear Leader.
Now we just need an inquisitive mainstream media reporter to follow up on this story. There's got to be at least one of them out there.
Friday, April 01, 2011
More odious details emerge from the "fog" of Obamacare
"Investigators for the House Energy and Commerce Committee have discovered that a little-known provision in the national health care law has allowed the federal government to pay nearly $2 billion to unions, state public employee systems, and big corporations to subsidize health coverage costs for early retirees. At the current rate of payment, the $5 billion appropriated for the program could be exhausted well before it is set to expire."
Byron York has the details.
In a nutshell, American workers will now be forced to pay for the health care expenses of others who have chosen to retire early (mostly union members and public employees - in other words, core Democratic supporters), and it's not going to help save the taxpayers any money. As a matter of fact, the program almost certainly will end up blowing past its multi-billion dollar budget well before its scheduled expiration in January 2014.
No wonder liberal Democrats such as Nancy Pelosi wanted to hurriedly ram this 2000+ page Ponzi scheme through Congress before anyone got a chance to read it at all, much less thoroughly.
According to Pelosi, we just had "to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy". Well, the peasants are certainly finding out to their utter disgust exactly what's in it, but the controversy sure isn't going away anytime soon.
We wonder what else will be rearing its collectivist head out of that utter morass of a law before it can be repealed by the new Congress.
Byron York has the details.
In a nutshell, American workers will now be forced to pay for the health care expenses of others who have chosen to retire early (mostly union members and public employees - in other words, core Democratic supporters), and it's not going to help save the taxpayers any money. As a matter of fact, the program almost certainly will end up blowing past its multi-billion dollar budget well before its scheduled expiration in January 2014.
No wonder liberal Democrats such as Nancy Pelosi wanted to hurriedly ram this 2000+ page Ponzi scheme through Congress before anyone got a chance to read it at all, much less thoroughly.
According to Pelosi, we just had "to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy". Well, the peasants are certainly finding out to their utter disgust exactly what's in it, but the controversy sure isn't going away anytime soon.
We wonder what else will be rearing its collectivist head out of that utter morass of a law before it can be repealed by the new Congress.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
It wasn't a suggestion, fellows
"A spokesman for the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform has confirmed that Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Assistant Director Kenneth Melson did not produce documents and information related to the unfolding Project Gunrunner story that were requested 'as soon as possible, but no later than 5:00 p.m. on March 30, 2011' by Chairman Darrell Issa."
(Codrea)
We find it amazingly ironic that a thuggish government agency so historically eager to put average gun stores (most of which try their level best to comply with the Byzantine, arbitrary and ever-changing ATF rulebook) out of business over the most minor of paperwork errors has the unmitigated gall to completely stonewall a Congressional committee trying to answer the simple question of "Who in the ATF administration signed off on actively allowing thousands of known straw-purchased firearms to be smuggled into Mexico for the purpose of arming the drug cartels in that country, causing the deaths of untold Mexican citizens and at least two U.S. law-enforcement officers?"
The fact that the ATF brass, led by Acting Director Ken Melson, has blatantly ignored the lawful requests of both a House of Representatives committee chairman as well as the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee speaks volumes about the depth of their involvement in this ongoing scandal.
A personal question for Mr. Melson - is covering the rear ends of Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer, Attorney General Eric "Neutral, leaning towards favorable" Holder, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano and possibly President Obama himself really worth losing your career (and now very possibly your freedom) over?
(Codrea)
We find it amazingly ironic that a thuggish government agency so historically eager to put average gun stores (most of which try their level best to comply with the Byzantine, arbitrary and ever-changing ATF rulebook) out of business over the most minor of paperwork errors has the unmitigated gall to completely stonewall a Congressional committee trying to answer the simple question of "Who in the ATF administration signed off on actively allowing thousands of known straw-purchased firearms to be smuggled into Mexico for the purpose of arming the drug cartels in that country, causing the deaths of untold Mexican citizens and at least two U.S. law-enforcement officers?"
The fact that the ATF brass, led by Acting Director Ken Melson, has blatantly ignored the lawful requests of both a House of Representatives committee chairman as well as the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee speaks volumes about the depth of their involvement in this ongoing scandal.
A personal question for Mr. Melson - is covering the rear ends of Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer, Attorney General Eric "Neutral, leaning towards favorable" Holder, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano and possibly President Obama himself really worth losing your career (and now very possibly your freedom) over?
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Someone has to say it
Ross Zimmerman, whose son Gabe was murdered in the recent Tucson tragedy, is now being heartlessly used as a poster boy by the execrable Michael Bloomberg's "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" campaign to lobby for "reasonable" gun control measures. Unfortunately for him (and them), though, Zimmerman has no earthly idea about what exactly he's supposed to be advocating for:
"'I'm not educated on the details of the gun laws,' he told HuffPost on Monday, 'but there are some things that are pretty obvious, like background checks.'" (emphasis ours)
We are truly saddened by and sympathetic to that father's unimaginable loss, but once a person attempts to milk a personal tragedy for political reasons he or she becomes fair game for criticism.
Perhaps Mr. Zimmerman should get some knowledge on the subject before he begins agitating for yet more useless laws that would not have stopped his son's murderer that day. Otherwise he becomes just another Rep. Carolyn "The Shoulder Thing That Goes Up" McCarthy (D-NY), a person similarly (and regrettably, of course) affected by gun violence who somehow feels that sad fact gives her a free license to not bother to "educate" herself about items and products about which she knows nothing except that they somehow "look" evil to her, which then becomes her sole reason for trying to deny ownership of them to law-abiding individuals:
As everyone with a smidgen of factual knowledge about the incident knows, the cowardly shooter Loughner before his horrific act was an individual who had neither a criminal record nor a mental-health diagnosis that would have disqualified him from any sort of background check, including the very one he passed when purchasing his firearm. How would subjecting law-abiding individuals to yet another unnecessary government intrusion (a double-background check?) into their lives have prevented the massacre? One simply cannot prevent every bad thing in the world from happening. That's the price of living in a free society.
"[Zimmerman] said he hoped the rally would help address the need to create programs in Tucson that help gun sellers identify mentally unstable individuals."
He (and by extension the shills who are cynically using him) apparently believes that gun-store owners now have to be licensed as interventional psychiatrists before being allowed to open their doors. Isn't the federal government, by the way, the very entity that, through its cumbersome HIPAA law, made such health records so very hard for anyone to access without a direct doctor-patient relationship or a signed waiver from the patient? Unintended consequences, indeed.
"'It was a diverse group of people who got shot ... so families are grieving in diverse ways,' [Zimmerman] said."
We're extremely sorry, but we simply fail to see what such meaningless PC pap has to do with the debate at hand.
"'I'm not educated on the details of the gun laws,' he told HuffPost on Monday, 'but there are some things that are pretty obvious, like background checks.'" (emphasis ours)
We are truly saddened by and sympathetic to that father's unimaginable loss, but once a person attempts to milk a personal tragedy for political reasons he or she becomes fair game for criticism.
Perhaps Mr. Zimmerman should get some knowledge on the subject before he begins agitating for yet more useless laws that would not have stopped his son's murderer that day. Otherwise he becomes just another Rep. Carolyn "The Shoulder Thing That Goes Up" McCarthy (D-NY), a person similarly (and regrettably, of course) affected by gun violence who somehow feels that sad fact gives her a free license to not bother to "educate" herself about items and products about which she knows nothing except that they somehow "look" evil to her, which then becomes her sole reason for trying to deny ownership of them to law-abiding individuals:
As everyone with a smidgen of factual knowledge about the incident knows, the cowardly shooter Loughner before his horrific act was an individual who had neither a criminal record nor a mental-health diagnosis that would have disqualified him from any sort of background check, including the very one he passed when purchasing his firearm. How would subjecting law-abiding individuals to yet another unnecessary government intrusion (a double-background check?) into their lives have prevented the massacre? One simply cannot prevent every bad thing in the world from happening. That's the price of living in a free society.
"[Zimmerman] said he hoped the rally would help address the need to create programs in Tucson that help gun sellers identify mentally unstable individuals."
He (and by extension the shills who are cynically using him) apparently believes that gun-store owners now have to be licensed as interventional psychiatrists before being allowed to open their doors. Isn't the federal government, by the way, the very entity that, through its cumbersome HIPAA law, made such health records so very hard for anyone to access without a direct doctor-patient relationship or a signed waiver from the patient? Unintended consequences, indeed.
"'It was a diverse group of people who got shot ... so families are grieving in diverse ways,' [Zimmerman] said."
We're extremely sorry, but we simply fail to see what such meaningless PC pap has to do with the debate at hand.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
The dominoes are falling "faster and furiouser"
A second brave and conscientious ATF agent named Rene Jaquez has come forward and confirmed to CBS News that his agency indeed not only sat back and did nothing, but in fact actively enabled thousands of straw-purchased firearms to be smuggled across the border into Mexico as part of something named "Operation Fast and Furious" but which writer David Codrea, who along with blogger Mike Vanderboegh first broke the story, more accurately termed "Project Gunwalker". Some of those very weapons were later found at the murder scenes of both a U.S. Border Patrol officer as well as an ICE agent operating in that country.
This "operation" apparently was some sort of hare-brained scheme from incompetent government bureaucrats to track the weapons all the way to their supposed delivery to Mexican drug cartels, allegedly in order for the Obama Administration to have something to point at when agitating for more gun control for law-abiding Americans, who of course have nothing to do with such illegal acts.
The only problem with this crazy plan (besides getting their own colleagues killed by their utter negligence, of course) is that gunrunning, or being an accomplice to gunrunning, happens to be against the law, even for imperial Federal agencies. We won't even mention the fact that the the American people tend to frown on their "authorities" sparking an international diplomatic incident with a neighboring country, as Mexico is quite rightly hopping mad at not being informed of this Three Stooges operation, which has no doubt contributed to untold thousands of their citizens being killed and wounded because of the ATF's passive arming of the drug lords down there.
Agent Jaquez, who is based in El Paso, Texas and Ciudad Juarez, Mexico (a completely different ATF office from John Dodson, the other whistleblower in Phoenix, by the way, yet their stories are identical. This tends to lend credence to both their accounts), also links more government offices to the breaking scandal:
"But ATF wasn't working alone on the case known as "Fast and Furious." Documents show ATF had conference calls with "DHS" (Homeland Security). "USMS" (U.S. Marshals) and DEA. An "ICE," or Customs agent, was on ATF's Fast and Furious team. They were advised by an "AUSA," or Assistant U.S. Attorney under the Justice Department."
It would seem that Janet Napolitano and Eric "Neutral, leaning toward favorable" Holder have some serious 'splaining to do. Perhaps we should let Mexico extradite them in order for that nation to get to the bottom of the story?
This "operation" apparently was some sort of hare-brained scheme from incompetent government bureaucrats to track the weapons all the way to their supposed delivery to Mexican drug cartels, allegedly in order for the Obama Administration to have something to point at when agitating for more gun control for law-abiding Americans, who of course have nothing to do with such illegal acts.
The only problem with this crazy plan (besides getting their own colleagues killed by their utter negligence, of course) is that gunrunning, or being an accomplice to gunrunning, happens to be against the law, even for imperial Federal agencies. We won't even mention the fact that the the American people tend to frown on their "authorities" sparking an international diplomatic incident with a neighboring country, as Mexico is quite rightly hopping mad at not being informed of this Three Stooges operation, which has no doubt contributed to untold thousands of their citizens being killed and wounded because of the ATF's passive arming of the drug lords down there.
Agent Jaquez, who is based in El Paso, Texas and Ciudad Juarez, Mexico (a completely different ATF office from John Dodson, the other whistleblower in Phoenix, by the way, yet their stories are identical. This tends to lend credence to both their accounts), also links more government offices to the breaking scandal:
"But ATF wasn't working alone on the case known as "Fast and Furious." Documents show ATF had conference calls with "DHS" (Homeland Security). "USMS" (U.S. Marshals) and DEA. An "ICE," or Customs agent, was on ATF's Fast and Furious team. They were advised by an "AUSA," or Assistant U.S. Attorney under the Justice Department."
It would seem that Janet Napolitano and Eric "Neutral, leaning toward favorable" Holder have some serious 'splaining to do. Perhaps we should let Mexico extradite them in order for that nation to get to the bottom of the story?
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Here we go again
Dear Leader and his minions are apparently exploring ways to once again blatantly ignore the codified system of lawmaking that has served this country quite adequately for well over 200 years now.
This time it appears that the administration will soon attempt to unilaterally impose new gun control laws by executive fiat, despite Congress and the peasants being on record as overwhelmingly against such actions:
"For gun control advocates, however, executive action remains a more promising -- albeit more limited -- vehicle for reform than Congress. On Monday, The Huffington Post first reported that the Justice Department was convening meetings with groups from across the ideological spectrum in an effort to chart potential policy changes to Second Amendment law."
That's funny - the NRA, toothless fossil that it is, has admirably declined to meet with Justice on the issue and no other prominent gun-rights groups appear to have been invited to the pow-wow, despite their politely asking to be included (so that they can discuss the ATF's naked complicity in allowing thousands of straw-purchased guns to be "walked" across the border to Mexico, among other things). How, then, are all points of view across the "ideological spectrum" being represented at these meetings?
Once again, just as we've seen on so many other occasions and issues, the Constitution appears to be nothing more than an inconvenient speed bump to whatever current agenda this president sees fit to implement, no matter the legality of his actions.
This time it appears that the administration will soon attempt to unilaterally impose new gun control laws by executive fiat, despite Congress and the peasants being on record as overwhelmingly against such actions:
"For gun control advocates, however, executive action remains a more promising -- albeit more limited -- vehicle for reform than Congress. On Monday, The Huffington Post first reported that the Justice Department was convening meetings with groups from across the ideological spectrum in an effort to chart potential policy changes to Second Amendment law."
That's funny - the NRA, toothless fossil that it is, has admirably declined to meet with Justice on the issue and no other prominent gun-rights groups appear to have been invited to the pow-wow, despite their politely asking to be included (so that they can discuss the ATF's naked complicity in allowing thousands of straw-purchased guns to be "walked" across the border to Mexico, among other things). How, then, are all points of view across the "ideological spectrum" being represented at these meetings?
Once again, just as we've seen on so many other occasions and issues, the Constitution appears to be nothing more than an inconvenient speed bump to whatever current agenda this president sees fit to implement, no matter the legality of his actions.
Monday, March 14, 2011
From the Department of Glaringly Obvious Headlines
"Promises, Promises: Little transparency progress"
Two years into Dear Leader's term of office and the Associated Press isn't particularly impressed with his administration's oft-stated vow of "transparency", particularly when it comes to Freedom of Information Act requests.
Oddly enough, the AP reports that one of the hardest challenges is simply trying to take a gander at the very process of supposedly opening up the government to its own citizens:
"The Obama administration censored 194 pages of internal e-mails about its Open Government Directive that the AP requested more than one year ago. The December 2009 directive requires every agency to take immediate, specific steps to open their operations up to the public. But the White House Office of Management and Budget blacked-out entire pages of some e-mails between federal employees discussing how to apply the new openness rules, and it blacked-out one e-mail discussing how to respond to AP's request for information about the transparency directive."
The worst offender for invoking the "deliberative process" exemption was, naturally enough, the Homeland Security Department. That office accounted for over 80% of such uses government-wide, despite Obama ordering agencies to only use that excuse when absolutely necessary.
Just imagine how maddening the process must be for the information they don't want getting out in circulation.
Two years into Dear Leader's term of office and the Associated Press isn't particularly impressed with his administration's oft-stated vow of "transparency", particularly when it comes to Freedom of Information Act requests.
Oddly enough, the AP reports that one of the hardest challenges is simply trying to take a gander at the very process of supposedly opening up the government to its own citizens:
"The Obama administration censored 194 pages of internal e-mails about its Open Government Directive that the AP requested more than one year ago. The December 2009 directive requires every agency to take immediate, specific steps to open their operations up to the public. But the White House Office of Management and Budget blacked-out entire pages of some e-mails between federal employees discussing how to apply the new openness rules, and it blacked-out one e-mail discussing how to respond to AP's request for information about the transparency directive."
The worst offender for invoking the "deliberative process" exemption was, naturally enough, the Homeland Security Department. That office accounted for over 80% of such uses government-wide, despite Obama ordering agencies to only use that excuse when absolutely necessary.
Just imagine how maddening the process must be for the information they don't want getting out in circulation.
Wednesday, March 09, 2011
Events are moving quickly in the ATF scandal
The publishers of GUNS magazine have decided that David Codrea's upcoming June "Rights Watch" column on the ATF's "Project Gunwalker" debacle is too important and timely to wait for publication so they have posted it on their website for all to read right now for free.
Codrea, along with blogger and activist Mike Vanderboegh, has been on this story from the very beginning, and it's mostly due to their unrelenting efforts that the major media is now picking up the story.
The very worst part of this whole incident, at least in our eyes, is that several stand-up gun shops apparently alerted the ATF on many occasions to suspicious multiple transactions at the time they were made, and in every case the merchants were informed in no uncertain terms to let the sales go through. And gun shops are the scapegoats getting blamed for the flow of guns to Mexico?
Actually, if the facts check out, it looks like the BATFE (and, by extension, the Eric Holder-led Justice Department) was more responsible than anyone for the recent increased illicit trade in firearms.
The article is well worth your attention. Don't eat lunch beforehand.
Codrea, along with blogger and activist Mike Vanderboegh, has been on this story from the very beginning, and it's mostly due to their unrelenting efforts that the major media is now picking up the story.
The very worst part of this whole incident, at least in our eyes, is that several stand-up gun shops apparently alerted the ATF on many occasions to suspicious multiple transactions at the time they were made, and in every case the merchants were informed in no uncertain terms to let the sales go through. And gun shops are the scapegoats getting blamed for the flow of guns to Mexico?
Actually, if the facts check out, it looks like the BATFE (and, by extension, the Eric Holder-led Justice Department) was more responsible than anyone for the recent increased illicit trade in firearms.
The article is well worth your attention. Don't eat lunch beforehand.
Utter chaos
Prince George's County, Maryland (the place where we grew up but have zero desire to visit, let alone ever return for good) isn't even coming close to making a dent in apprehending the embarrassing number of criminals with outstanding warrants there, thus leaving the law-abiding residents nakedly exposed to predation:
"About 50,000 criminal warrants have not been served, Prince George's County Sheriff Melvin High said, a major concern as the county reels from a spree of homicides at the beginning of the year. (emphasis ours)
Maryland, we remind everyone once again, is a "may-issue" state for firearm carry permits, with the State Police denying just about all legitimate applications for a lack of good cause (at least in their biased opinion).
That strategy is really working out quite well for them, isn't it?
"About 50,000 criminal warrants have not been served, Prince George's County Sheriff Melvin High said, a major concern as the county reels from a spree of homicides at the beginning of the year. (emphasis ours)
Maryland, we remind everyone once again, is a "may-issue" state for firearm carry permits, with the State Police denying just about all legitimate applications for a lack of good cause (at least in their biased opinion).
That strategy is really working out quite well for them, isn't it?
Monday, March 07, 2011
Another campaign promise gets tossed into the circular file
"Obama to resume military commission trials for Guantanamo detainees"
The very "habeas corpus-suspending" trials that Dear Leader railed so stridently against when President Bush was in charge of national security, mind you:
Apparently these complete embarrassments to our world reputation are once again quite lawful, at least now that it's convenient for the Constitutional Professor to deem them so.
"But on Monday, Obama directed Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to 'issue an order rescinding his prior suspension on the swearing and referring of new charges in the military commissions.'"
You almost have to feel sorry for the man. The job is obviously far too difficult for him so he simply defaults to the policies of his hated predecessor, even though he was elected on a specific platform of ending them as soon as possible.
Another promise broken. How many does that make now?
The very "habeas corpus-suspending" trials that Dear Leader railed so stridently against when President Bush was in charge of national security, mind you:
Apparently these complete embarrassments to our world reputation are once again quite lawful, at least now that it's convenient for the Constitutional Professor to deem them so.
"But on Monday, Obama directed Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to 'issue an order rescinding his prior suspension on the swearing and referring of new charges in the military commissions.'"
You almost have to feel sorry for the man. The job is obviously far too difficult for him so he simply defaults to the policies of his hated predecessor, even though he was elected on a specific platform of ending them as soon as possible.
Another promise broken. How many does that make now?
Saturday, March 05, 2011
The ongoing ATF scandal claims the life of yet another Federal officer
ICE agent Jaime Zapata, the unarmed officer ambushed and killed in Mexico while on duty in that country last month, was shot with a firearm purchased in Texas and allegedly smuggled across the border by three straw-purchasers whom the incompetent "Gunwalkers" at the BATFE apparently knew all about but curiously didn't bother to arrest until the murder weapon was directly connected to that agency's bungling:
"Robert Champion, special agent in charge of the local Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, acknowledged this week, though, that his agents did delay arresting three Lancaster men for three months after confiscating a load of guns the men intended to smuggle across the border to the Zeta cartel in November.
It was only after a gun used to kill Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agent Jaime Zapata in Mexico last month was traced back to North Texas that local ATF agents moved quickly to arrest the Lancaster trio."
Law-abiding citizens routinely get harassed and threatened with arrest and imprisonment by the ATF because their rifle inconveniently malfunctions or they put "Y" or "N" instead of "Yes" and "No" on the paperwork required to legally transfer a firearm, but gunrunners caught red-handed get to freely roam the streets until their actions get a Federal law-enforcement officer killed? Yep, that sure sounds like a "professional" way to run an agency under the auspices of the "Justice" Department.
Zapata sadly joins Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry as dedicated, professional officers who were murdered with firearms that ATF bosses allegedly permitted to cross the border without interdiction, apparently as part of some kind of insane PR attempt to artificially inflate the numbers of U.S.-sold weapons recovered in Mexico. These numbers would then presumably be used to bolster ATF's political argument for imposing greater gun control in America.
The brass at ATF who knew about and sanctioned "Project Gunwalker" should be sitting in a jail cell right now instead of being ensconced at their comfy desks in Washington, no doubt frantically wondering how to get themselves out of this mess that's falling around their heads as we speak.
For those interested in following this scandal, all of the latest breaking info on this inexcusable dereliction of duty (and outright lawbreaking) by the original "jack-booted thugs" can be found here and here.
"Robert Champion, special agent in charge of the local Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, acknowledged this week, though, that his agents did delay arresting three Lancaster men for three months after confiscating a load of guns the men intended to smuggle across the border to the Zeta cartel in November.
It was only after a gun used to kill Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agent Jaime Zapata in Mexico last month was traced back to North Texas that local ATF agents moved quickly to arrest the Lancaster trio."
Law-abiding citizens routinely get harassed and threatened with arrest and imprisonment by the ATF because their rifle inconveniently malfunctions or they put "Y" or "N" instead of "Yes" and "No" on the paperwork required to legally transfer a firearm, but gunrunners caught red-handed get to freely roam the streets until their actions get a Federal law-enforcement officer killed? Yep, that sure sounds like a "professional" way to run an agency under the auspices of the "Justice" Department.
Zapata sadly joins Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry as dedicated, professional officers who were murdered with firearms that ATF bosses allegedly permitted to cross the border without interdiction, apparently as part of some kind of insane PR attempt to artificially inflate the numbers of U.S.-sold weapons recovered in Mexico. These numbers would then presumably be used to bolster ATF's political argument for imposing greater gun control in America.
The brass at ATF who knew about and sanctioned "Project Gunwalker" should be sitting in a jail cell right now instead of being ensconced at their comfy desks in Washington, no doubt frantically wondering how to get themselves out of this mess that's falling around their heads as we speak.
For those interested in following this scandal, all of the latest breaking info on this inexcusable dereliction of duty (and outright lawbreaking) by the original "jack-booted thugs" can be found here and here.
Monday, February 21, 2011
Let them eat ribs
First Hypocrite Lady Michelle Antoinette Obama continues to set the pace for the healthy-eating initiative she continually shoves down the throats (pun intended) of the peasantry by chowing down on braised ancho-chile short ribs while on the latest of her many vacations, this time in Vail, Colorado.
Total nutritional damage, according to Food.com - 1576 calories and 142 grams of fat, more than twice the recommended daily percentage of the artery-clogging substance in that one dish alone.
The lady does love her meat, we'll give her that.
We personally don't care what Mrs. Obama decides to cram into her face or how often she does it. She presumes to lecture the rest of us about our own swinish eating habits, however, so that makes her diet fair game for criticism.
Need another napkin, ma'am?
Total nutritional damage, according to Food.com - 1576 calories and 142 grams of fat, more than twice the recommended daily percentage of the artery-clogging substance in that one dish alone.
The lady does love her meat, we'll give her that.
We personally don't care what Mrs. Obama decides to cram into her face or how often she does it. She presumes to lecture the rest of us about our own swinish eating habits, however, so that makes her diet fair game for criticism.
Need another napkin, ma'am?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
