A Threat To The Second Amendment?

FBI Director Christopher Wray had a bad day in Washington on Thursday. Congress kept on asking him questions he didn’t want to answer. There was one very interesting exchange reported by Breitbart on Friday.

The article reports:

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) called out FBI Director Christopher Wray during a hearing Thursday after Wray refused to explain why his agency is seeking information on Missouri concealed carry permit holders.

Hawley brought up the FBI’s pursuit of information on Missouri concealed carriers, saying, “Why are you asking for [this information] now, from the state of Missouri, from our sheriffs, when you didn’t ask for it in the past?”

Wray responded, “I’m going to have to get more information to be able to provide you a written response.”

Hawley followed up with another question. “What steps would the FBI take to be sure the information remains private, if you’re able to obtain it from these sheriffs all across Missouri?”

Wray said, “Again, the same answer, I really want to be careful not to speak when I don’t have all the facts.”

Hawley said, “Okay, so you’re not going to answer my questions.”

It’s interesting to me that the FBI was interested in concealed carry permit holders in Missouri. If you remember, in 2020 the McCloskeys, a Missouri couple, was indicted for brandishing weapons on their front porch to defend their home against some protesters who said they wanted to kill them. It seemed like a pretty obvious case of self-defense, but the Soros-backed Attorney went after them and used their actions in a fund-raising campaign. That attorney was eventually removed from the case. The McCloskeys were eventually pardoned.

Just a note: if you have seen the video of the McCloskeys, you understand that it is a mini-lesson in how not to handle firearms. Although I believe they were correct in wanting to defend their lives, the way they handled their firearms in the process was not correct.

This Could Get Very Interesting

In May, The Epoch Times reported that Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt and Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana on April 5 suing President Joe Biden, White House press secretary Jen Psaki, Dr. Anthony Fauci, and other top administration officials for allegedly pressuring and colluding with social media giants with the aim of censoring and suppressing free speech. In July, The Epoch Times reported that Eric Schmitt, Missouri’s Republican attorney general, announced on social media on July 13 that Terry Doughty, a judge in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, had ruled in favor of the request for the discovery process. The case is going forward.

On August 1, The Epoch Times reported:

The subpoenas and discovery requests sent out as part of a lawsuit against the federal government are going to bring back reams of information, Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry says.

Landry and Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, both Republicans, sued the Biden administration in May, arguing the government colluded with Big tech companies to violate the constitutional rights of Americans.

U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty, a Trump appointee, recently ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. Government officials like Dr. Anthony Fauci and companies including Facebook were served soon after.

“We’ve got a treasure trove of information that we think are going to come to us here shortly,” Landry said on EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders.”

“The subpoenas have gone out. They’re being served. I think Dr. Fauci got served, and he and other members of the president’s Cabinet, and they’re gonna have to send us communications between them and the platforms. And what we believe we’ll find is communications between them telling them what they should and shouldn’t put out or what they should suppress, and what they should amplify,” he added.

Government officials have said they have not acted improperly.

The article concludes:

Landry said that the government is violating citizens’ rights by pressuring companies to ban or take other punitive action against users. In a separate case, documents released this month showed U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention officials highlighting specific posts in messages to Twitter executives while complaining about alleged misinformation from those users. Whistleblower documents released by two U.S. senators in June, meanwhile, showed that U.S. officials had been in touch with Twitter over purported disinformation.

“I think what we found, and what the whistleblowers put out, was that the government was actually engaged, and the White House, in directly communicating with Big Tech on stories and information that they either wanted suppressed or put out,” Landry said.

It’s definitely time to get out the popcorn–this lawsuit is going to be very entertaining.

This Might Be A Very Interesting Case

On Tuesday, The Epoch Times reported that Terry Doughty, a judge in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, has ruled that Missouri and Louisiana officials can obtain documents to investigate the Biden administration’s alleged collusion with social media giants in an effort to censor and suppress free speech.

The article reports:

The ruling comes after the attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri filed a lawsuit in May alleging that the Biden administration “colluded with and/or coerced social media companies to suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content on social media platforms by labeling the content ‘disinformation,’ ‘misinformation,’ and ‘malinformation.’”

The attorneys general named social media giants such as Meta, Twitter, and YouTube in a press release announcing the lawsuit in May.

They also claimed that President Joe Biden himself, along with other top-ranking government officials, had worked with the platforms to censor and suppress free speech, including “truthful information” pertaining to the origins of COVID-19, the effectiveness of masks, election integrity, and the security of voting by mail, as well as the ongoing Hunter Biden laptop scandal.

Among the defendants named in the lawsuit are Biden, former press secretary Jen Psaki, chief medical adviser to the president and director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Dr. Anthony Fauci, former Disinformation Governance Board executive director Nina Jankowicz, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, and others.

As someone whose Right Wing Granny group is almost always ‘restricted’ on Facebook, I appreciate their efforts. I have been ‘shadow banned’ for years. It has become a way of life.

Do you honestly believe that if the truth about Hunter’s laptop, President Biden’s mental state, or the honest numbers on Covid-19 had been generally known by the public, the vote for President would have been even close? I don’t believe 2020 was an honest election, but that is another story. A Republic (which America is–not a Democracy) depends on a free, honest press to inform its citizens. We don’t have that right now. The only way you are going to find out what is actually happening is to go to the internet and find news sources you trust. You cannot currently find a lot of truth in any of the mainstream media.

Some Good News

On Saturday, The Epoch Times posted an article about the successful rescue of 47 human trafficking victims in twelve states.

The article reports:

A human trafficking operation joined by 12 states has rescued 47 victims and arrested 102 people, Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt announced on Aug. 27.

“Using both buyer-centric and victim-centric ‘sting’ human trafficking operations, Missouri and participating states were able to rescue 47 victims and sex workers and provide needed medical services to 41, and arrested 102 across the country in connection with human trafficking,” the Missouri Attorney General’s Office said in a statement.

According to the information provided by the Missouri Attorney General’s Office, the operation rescued victims and made arrests in 12 states.

Missouri: four victims rescued, two arrests made.

Illinois: one victim rescued, three arrests made.

Iowa: 11 arrests made, a large amount of currency has been seized.

Kentucky: 21 adult victims rescued, two minor victims rescued, 46 arrests made.

Minnesota: eight victims rescued, three arrests made.

Nebraska: seven arrests made.

North Dakota: six victims rescued, three arrests made.

Oklahoma: one victim rescued, seven arrests made.

Tennessee: four arrests made.

Texas: four victims rescued, two arrests made.

Wisconsin: five arrests made.

South Dakota: nine arrests made.

The article concludes:

“Operation United Front was an unprecedented human trafficking operation that brought together law enforcement agencies from different jurisdictions—something that rarely happens. When we all come together, we can affect change and more effectively fight human trafficking, a crime that is often multi-jurisdictional in nature,” Schmitt said.

According to data collected by the FBI, there were 1,883 human trafficking offenses reported in 2019, with 875 of the offenses cleared or closed, including 18 offenses that involved minor victims under the age of 18.

The terms “cleared” or “closed” usually mean that law enforcement departments have made arrests, the suspects have been charged, cases have been turned over to the court for prosecution, or the offender has been identified.

This is a national problem that is being exacerbated by the border policies of the Biden administration. Many of the so-called family units coming in are cartel members bringing in young victims of sex trafficking. We need to close the southern border and increase our efforts to end this horrific crime.

Common Sense

Yesterday The Daily Wire reported that a federal judge has ordered the Biden administration to reinstate the Trump administration policy of having illegal immigrants wait in Mexico while their asylum requests are evaluated by the courts.

The article reports:

Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk ordered Biden to “enforce and implement [Migrant Protection Protocols, commonly referred to as ‘Remain in Mexico’] in good faith until such a time as it has been lawfully rescinded in compliance with the [Administrative Procedure Act] and until such a time as the federal government has sufficient detention capacity to detain all aliens subject to mandatory detention under Section 1255 without releasing any aliens because of a lack of detention resources.”

Considering the fact that our detention centers on the southern border of America are overcrowded, this is the compassionate thing to do.

The article notes:

Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, who filed the lawsuit with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, celebrated the win on social media, tweeting: “Big win for border security!”

“We just won our second immigration lawsuit against the Biden Admin! They unlawfully tried to shut down the legal and effective Remain-in-Mexico program, but Texas and Missouri wouldn’t have it,” Paxton’s office wrote in a tweet. “Together we sued, and just handed Biden yet another major loss!”

The judge’s order comes after Biden’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released new statistics yesterday showing that the Biden’s border catastrophe worsened for the sixth consecutive month as U.S. Customs and Border Protection apprehended 212,672 illegal aliens—the worst month ever recorded by DHS, which was created in 2002.

This is a win for American sovereignty.

This May Be A Necessary Move

Yesterday The Daily Wire posted an article titled, “Police Consider Charging Crowd Confronted By Armed St. Louis Couple With Trespassing, Intimidation.”

The article reports:

A group of protesters in Missouri who famously found themselves facing an armed husband and wife may soon be facing multiple charges.

As a group of demonstrators marched toward the home of St. Louis Mayor Lyda Krewson’s home on Sunday night to demand that she resign, they marched through an area that was closed off to the public, where a husband-wife team stood outside with a rifle and a gun to protect their property.

The demonstrators had to break through a closed gate to access the gated community. At that point, they could be charged with trespassing. Some of the demonstrators were armed and issued threats to the homeowners. The incident was caught on video via a cell phone, so there is recorded evidence of the event.

The article notes:

As noted by St. Louis Today, Anders Walker, a constitutional law professor at St. Louis University, said that Mark McCloskey and his wife Patricia did not break any laws because the street where they live, Portland Place, is a private street. He added that the couple is protected by Missouri’s Castle Doctrine, which allows people to use deadly force to defend private property.

FindLaw explains, “This legal doctrine assumes that if an invader disrupts the sanctity of your home, they intend to do you harm and therefore you should be able to protect yourself or others against an attack. Missouri’s law is more extensive than those of other states because it allows you to use deadly force to attack an intruder to protect any private property that you own, in addition to yourself or another individual. This means that if someone illegally enters your front porch or backyard, you can use deadly force against them without retreating first.”

“At any point that you enter the property, they can then, in Missouri, use deadly force to get you off the lawn,” said Walker, adding, “There’s no right to protest on those streets. The protesters thought they had a right to protest, but as a technical matter, they were not allowed to be there. … It’s essentially a private estate. If anyone was violating the law, it was the protesters. In fact, if (the McCloskeys) have photos of the protesters, they could go after them for trespassing.”

The article concludes:

An attorney for the McCloskeys, Albert S. Watkins, said of his clients, who are both attorneys, “Their entire practice tenure as counsel (has) been addressing the needs of the downtrodden, for whom the fight for civil rights is necessary. My clients, as melanin-deficient human beings, are completely respectful of the message Black Lives Matter needs to get out, especially to whites … (but) two individuals exhibited such force and violence destroying a century-plus old wrought iron gate, ripping and twisting the wrought iron that was connected to a rock foundation, and then proceeded to charge at and toward and speak threateningly to Mr. and Mrs. McCloskey.”

Laws vary from state to state, so homeowners need to be careful about the actions they take. In many states, using a gun to protect your property is not protected–you are only allowed to use a gun if you are at risk. However, I would think that if a mob with a history of burning things down approached you, you might feel that you were at risk.

This case may be one way to push back against those who are abusing the right to protest. The right to protest is protected by the Constitution. The right to loot and riot is not protected.

False Statements That Create Division And Unrest

The mainstream media is not known for unbiased reporting, but every now and then even they have to correct something that is not only false but incendiary.

The Washington Free Beacon posted an article on Thursday about a recent lie by two political candidates that could easily be called incendiary.

The article reports:

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) doubled down on her tweet that claimed black teenager Michael Brown was “murdered by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri,” saying Wednesday what mattered was an “unarmed man” was shot in the street.

Campaigning in New Hampshire, Warren was asked about her inflammatory tweet, which received the harshest “Four-Pinocchio” rating from the Washington Post.

“What matters is that a man was shot, an unarmed man, in the middle of the street, by police officers and left to die,” Warren said. “And I think that’s where our focus should be.”

Warren and fellow presidential candidates Sen. Kamala Harris (D., Calif.) and Tom Steyer all used the term “murder” to describe Brown’s death in 2014 at the hands of Officer Darren Wilson. The incident set off a debate about police violence and racial injustice. Although the notion that Brown was killed with his hands up and begging Wilson not to shoot was apocryphal, “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” became a mantra for protesters.

To Senator Warren and Senator Harris the narrative was more important than the truth. Rather than tell the truth, they lied in order to advance the idea that the police involved were racist.

The article concludes:

The Washington Post‘s Glenn Kessler said for Warren and Harris—he didn’t include Steyer in his story—to dismiss the Justice Department’s findings was “galling.”

“Harris and Warren have ignored the findings of the Justice Department to accuse Wilson of murder, even though the Justice Department found no credible evidence to support that claim,” Kessler wrote. “Instead, the Justice Department found that the popular narrative was wrong, according to witnesses deemed to be credible, some of whom testified reluctantly because of fear of reprisal. The department produced a comprehensive report to determine what happened, making the senators’ dismissal of it even more galling.”

The Massachusetts Police Union ripped Warren as well, saying she had unfairly accused police of harming society.

So what is the impact of these statements? Those Americans who are unaware of the Justice Department findings or the grand jury’s decision are left with the impression that the police in Missouri murdered a man without cause. How does that impact the opinion of law enforcement held by the people who believe this lie? How does this lie impact the amount of respect for law enforcement needed to maintain a civil society? The statements of Senators Harris and Warren are totally irresponsible. Even if they thought they were telling the truth, they owe those people who work in law enforcement an apology.

The Contrast Is Obvious

There has been some media criticism of the fact that Pat Smith, whose son Sean was killed at Benghazi, spoke at the Republican National Convention. Democrats in particular criticized the fact that she was allowed to speak. Well, the Democrats have upped the ante.

The Washington Times is reporting today that relatives of victims of police shootings have been invited to speak at the Democrat Convention. Wow. Of course the Democrats at the convention expect all the benefits of police protection as they conduct their convention.

The article reports:

John McNesby, president of the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 5, said the union was “shocked and saddened” by the planned choice of speakers at the convention, which opens Monday in Philadelphia.

“The Fraternal Order of Police is insulted and will not soon forget that the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton are excluding the widows and other family members of police officers killed in the line of duty who were victims of explicit and not implied racism,” Mr. McNesby said in a statement.

He said it’s “sad that to win an election Mrs. Clinton must pander to the interests of people who do not know all the facts, while the men and women they seek to destroy are outside protecting the political institutions of this country. Mrs. Clinton, you should be ashamed of yourself, if that is possible.”

The Clinton campaign has scheduled former President Bill Clinton to speak Tuesday night with members of Mothers of the Movement, a group that includes relatives of black men killed by police such as Eric Garner of New York and Michael Brown of Ferguson, Missouri. Former Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey, who said the nation is a “powder keg” over the police-involved shootings and assassinations of officers, is also scheduled to speak.

I would like to remind anyone reading the above paragraphs about the details of the death of Michael Brown. Witness who said that he was surrendering have admitted to lying in their original statements.

The New York Daily News posted the following  information from the medical examiner’s report:

Ferguson Police Officer Darren WIlson’s account of the confrontation in which Michael Brown was fatally shot has reportedly been leaked, with an independent medical examiner’s report backing up his version of events.

Brown had marijuana in his system and was shot at close range in the hand, backing up claims by a police officer that that there was a violent struggle between the Ferguson, Mo. teen and the cop, an independent medical examiner told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

The report supports Wilson’s account, given after he shot and killed the 18-year-old on Aug. 9. Witnesses claimed the teen was surrendering when the cop fired. Police maintained Wilson only used his gun after Brown tried to take it – a life-and-death fight inside a police SUV.

The Democrats are continuing their war on police. It will be interesting to see if this wins them support.

Feelings Are Different Than Facts

 

Last week The National Review posted an article about 150 students who walked out of Missouri’s Hillsboro High School. The students were protesting Lila Perry’s request to use the girl’s locker room. Lila Perry is a male student stating that he feels like a girl. He still has all the basic male parts, and the controversy began because he was in the girl’s locker room with his male part exposed.

The article reports:

Perry told News 4 school officials have been accommodating, understanding, and compliant with Title IX. The school offered her a private gender-neutral restroom, which she turned down.

I would like to know on whose advice the gender-neutral restroom was turned down. I would also like to know when exposing male body parts in a girls’ locker room became a right rather than a punishable offense.

Thank God the students had the common sense to walk out.

 

I’m Obviously In The Wrong Business

There is an article posted on Allen West’s website today about more protests is Ferguson, Missouri.

The article reports:

According to the Washington Times, the “Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment (MORE) has been paying protesters $5,000 a month to demonstrate in Ferguson. Last week, hired protesters who haven’t been paid held a sit-in at MORE’s offices and posted a demand letter online. Hired protesters with the Black Lives Matter movement have started a #CutTheCheck hashtag and held a sit-in at the offices for the successor group to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) in Missouri after the group allegedly stopped paying them.”

Evidently MORE is the current version of ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now). Since its heyday, ACORN has filed for bankruptcy.

The article further reports:

FrontPage reported. MORE and other groups supporting the Black Lives Matter movement have received millions of dollars from billionaire financier George Soros. The group Millennial Activists United posted a letter on their blog demanding MORE “cut the checks” to demonstrators.

I wonder how many people who supported the Black Lives Matter knew that it was funded by George Soros. I wonder if that would have made a difference.

Black lives do matter, but the fact that the movement is being funded by George Soros should give us all pause.

How Spontaneous Are These Demonstrations?

How spontaneous are the demonstrations in Baltimore, New York, Boston, and Washington, D.C? I don’t know, but having seen help wanted advertisements in the past advertising for paid protestors, I am wondering. I am sure many of the people protesting are protesting because they think injustice has been done. I am also sure many of the people are protesting because it is an excuse to behave badly.

Yesterday the U.K. Daily Mail posted an article about the protests in Baltimore, New York, and other cities. The article includes a lot of pictures of the protests. Please follow the link above to read the article. Often the British press does a better job of reporting on America than the American press does.

The article sums up events in Baltimore:

Enforced by 3,000 extra police and National Guardsmen, the streets that had been rocked by massive unrest were quiet following the ending of the curfew at 5am with no reports of disturbances in the early hours.

Indeed, going on the numbers alone, the curfew was a resounding success.

On Monday, 235 people – including 34 juveniles were arrested, 19 buildings set ablaze, 20 police injured and 144 vehicles torched.

On Tuesday, 10 people were arrested and one police officer was injured.

But life is unlikely to get completely back to normal anytime soon.

Attempting to keep expectations low, Governor Larry Hogan said that along with Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake they can’t promise that respect for the rule of law has returned to the city.

‘You can’t ensure that there’s not going to be any unrest. I’m not a magician,’ Hogan said to the Baltimore Sun . ‘What I can assure you is that we will put all the resources that we have at our disposal to make sure that disturbances don’t get out of hand.’

Let’s back up and look at this for a moment. It is unfortunate that a black man died while in police custody, but obviously that is not the whole story. When the facts eventually came out in Ferguson, it became obvious that the person killed was guilty of a number of things, including attempting to take the policeman’s gun and shoot him. Again, what happened was unfortunate, but the actions taken by the policeman involved were not totally unjustified. I wish there were more gentle ways to handle criminals who don’t listen to the police, but I also wish there were not criminals who don’t listen to the police. Both wishes are unlikely to come true.

This is one picture from the U.K. Mail article:

Protesters in Washington DC also marched on Wednesday from the Chinatown neighborhood to the White House in Washington DC

Note that the majority of the signs in the picture are professionally done. It is interesting to me that all of the protestors had the time (and the money) to get these signs printed up in such a short time.
I don’t like conspiracy theories, but I have noticed that sometimes people of all races die in encounters with police. It seems as if the victims who are not black just don’t get the publicity and reaction that we have recently seen. I  haven’t seen any “White Lives Matter” posters, and both white and black lives do matter. It seems odd to me that when America has its first black President, there is more racial tension in the country than there has been since the Civil Rights Movement. We need to examine the source of that tension carefully and look for the money behind it. The destruction and anarchy that is evident in these protests is being led behind the scenes. It would be to our advantage to know who is doing the leading.

They Are Already Here

The Center for Security Policy posted an article today about six Bosnian immigrants who have been accused of sending money and equipment to Islamic State and Al-Qaeda fighters overseas. The indictment of the six was released Friday.

The article reports:

All six individuals’ names have been released; Mediha Medy Salkicevic from Chicago, 34, Ramiz Zijad Hodzic, 40, Sedina Unkic Hodzic, 35, Armin Harcevic, 37, all three from St. Louis, Nihad Rosic, 26, of Utica, New York, and Jasminka Ramic, 42, of Rockford Illinois. The indictment states that all knew where the funding was going and that all are Bosnian natives who either legally immigrated to the United States or had refugee status. Five of the six have been already arrested; Ramic has fled the country but the Justice Department has not yet disclosed her location. According to the indictment, Rosic tried to go to Syria to join Islamic State last July.

The suspects used social media such as Facebook to communicate and sent their funding online via PayPal and Western Union. In order to conceal their intentions from any investigation, coded terms were used such as “the beach” for Iraq and Syria as well as “brothers” for Islamic militants. The US Postal Service was used to ship the equipment purchased.

The article concludes:

These most recent arrests show continues to show that the Islamic State continues to possess a powerfully draw on potential supporters, and while this is traditionally understood through the lens of foreign fighters, law enforcement must remain on watch to break up logistic and funding cells such as the one in St. Louis.

If we are to remain safe as Americans, we need to be aware of the threats against us. Susan Rice recently stated that ISIS is not an existential threat to the United States. ISIS specifically may or may not be, but the splinter groups and people inspired by ISIS represent a real threat to America because those groups and people are already here. We accomplish nothing by burying our heads in the sand and ignoring the fact that there are people in America who are currently supporting those who want to end freedom in America.

Do We Actually Have A Southern Border?

On Saturday, the Washington Times posted a story about the latest Congressional oversight report on the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). This was Senator Tom Coburn‘s final oversight report. CBN News also reported a similar story today.

The article in the Washington Times points out a few highlights in the report:

Less than 3 percent of illegal immigrants will ever be deported, and more than 700 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border remained unsecured as of 2014.

…The report also said corruption is a serious problem in the Border Patrol, but said agency officials actually told internal affairs investigators to cut down on the number of cases they were pursuing, according to the former division head.

In another finding Mr. Coburn’s staff on the Senate Homeland Security Committee found mission creep to be a problem: agents at one immigration agency spent time cracking down on women’s lingerie that they believed infringed on Major League Baseball’s officially licensed logos. The agents raided a lingerie store in Kansas City, Mo., flashed their badges and confiscated 18 pairs of underwear marked with an unauthorized Kansas City Royals logo, Mr. Coburn’s investigators found.

The article at CBN News reported:

“Ten years of oversight of the Department of Homeland Security finds that the Department still has a lot of work to do to strengthen our nation’s security,” Coburn explained. 

“Congress needs to review the Department’s mission and programs and refocus DHS on national priorities where DHS has a lead responsibility,” he added.

Coburn also says 700 miles of the southern border is still unsecured.

The agency also has problems protecting itself from online attacks, even though it’s supposed to protect the country from them.

Needless to say, the DHS had a different take on the oversight report (as reported in the Washington Times):

Homeland Security Department spokeswoman Marsha Catron thanked Mr. Coburn for his report, but said it didn’t capture the extent of the work her department does.

Dr. Coburn’s report on DHS overlooks much of the concrete and recent progress we have made over the past year to improve homeland security and the manner in which DHS conducts business,” she said.

You will have to excuse my skepticism. I think it’s time to reevaluate the mission and success of the DHS and consider more effective ways to guard America’s security.

The Creeping Bureaucracy Of Washington

Andrew McCarthy posted an article today at National Review Online about the recent events involving police that have gotten so much publicity. Mr. McCarthy’s theory is that Eric Holder has inserted himself into these events not because they are civil rights issues, but because he can use these events to exert federal power over local law enforcement.

The article reports:

Civil-rights investigations in Ferguson and Staten Island? No, what denizens of St. Louis and New York City ought to be worried about right now is . . . the crime wave overtaking Seattle.

If you don’t understand why, then you probably thought Obamacare was about covering the uninsured. Like its health-care “reform” campaign, the Obama Left’s civil-rights crusade is about control — central control of state law enforcement by Washington.

The deaths of Michael Brown in Missouri and Eric Garner in New York are each tragic in their own way. But in neither is there a federal civil-rights case to be had. To think otherwise, you have to be getting your advice from Al Sharpton — the huckster confidant of President Obama and Attorney General Holder.

So what has happened in Seattle that should have us all concerned?

The article reports:

Seattle is another of the big cities that has been targeted by the DOJ. It has been under a consent decree since the Justice Department targeted it in 2012 for a “pattern or practice” of violations, allegedly including “subjecting individuals to excessive force” — in particular, “using excessive force against persons of color,” and “escalating situations and using excessive force when arresting individuals for minor offenses.”

…Meanwhile, Seattle has been making announcements, too. It seems crime in the Emerald City has been skyrocketing since the Justice Department came in to, er, help. Homicides up 21 percent, car theft up 44 percent, aggravated assaults up 14 percent, and so on.

Welcome to Change: produced and directed by the Obama Justice Department and coming soon to a town near you.

Although I agree with Andrew McCarthy that what is happening in Ferguson and Staten Island is about control, I also think there is another purpose. One of the characteristics of the Obama Administration has been to create division between different groups of people. The ‘war on women’ was an attempt to create division among the sexes, the so-called ‘problem of income inequality’ was to create class warfare, and the focus on the two unfortunate deaths in law-enforcement situations undermines the authority of the police and can also be used to create racial division and tension. Unless Americans wake up and realize that they are being manipulated by a Chicago thug, we are in for a really ugly next two years.

Some Clarity On The Ferguson Grand Jury

Yesterday Andrew McCarthy posted an article in the National Review Online about the Grand Jury decision not to indict Darren Wilson.

Mr. McCarthy sums up the story as follows:

All very reasonable, but let’s not pretend reason has anything to do with what happened in Ferguson this week. In Liberal Fascism’s focus on myth, Jonah recalls Mussolini’s assertion, “It is faith that moves mountains, not reason. Reason is a tool, but it can never be the motive force of the crowd.” The crowd in Ferguson was moved to riot on the article of a false faith that condemns America and its police forces as incorrigibly racist. It is from this condemnation that all purported “reasoning” proceeds.

Such reasoning dictates that our constitutional right not to be indicted in the absence of just cause should be subordinated to the mob’s demand for a public trial. Succeeding in that legerdemain, it next dictates that our constitutional right not to be convicted in the absence of proof beyond a reasonable doubt be subordinated to the mob’s demand for a guilty verdict.

Such a verdict that would have had only the most tangential connection to the tragedy of an 18-year-old’s death or a police officer’s well-founded fear for his life. But it would have fed the myth.

The article reminds us that the American Left has fostered the myth that white policemen kill black teenagers. There is no reference to the amount of crime committed by black teenagers, we are simply supposed to buy the myth at face value–it is useful for manipulating crowds.

The article points out that the discussion of Grand Jury rules and procedures was irrelevant:

As it turns out, there was no need to thumb the legal treatises of Blackstone or Joseph Story. If you were going to hit the books, Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism would have served you better. Brilliantly illustrating modern liberalism’s roots in 20th-century progressivism — a movement as comfortable marching lockstep with Stalin as it was borrowing copiously from Mussolini — Jonah homes in on the centrality of myth. It is irrelevant whether an idea around which the Left’s avant-garde rouse the rabble is true; the point is the idea’s power to mold consciousness and rally the troops.

It is unfortunate that a young man is dead. It is also unfortunate that the young man chose to rob a store and attack a policeman. (The forensic evidence confirms the fact that Michael Brown did attack Darren Wilson.) However, it is also unfortunate that a good policeman has resigned the force and had his life negatively impacted by simply defending his own life.

The mob mentality here is right in line with Saul Alinsky‘s Rules for Radicals. The article explains:

Darren Wilson was a white cop and Michael Brown was a black teenager killed in a violent confrontation with Wilson. Therefore, Brown was the victim of a cold-blooded, racially motivated murder, Q.E.D. That is the myth, and it will be served — don’t bother us with the facts.

Once you’ve got that, none of the rest matters. In fact, at the hands of the left-leaning punditocracy, the rest was pure Alinsky: a coopting of language — in this instance, the argot of grand-jury procedure — to reason back to the ordained conclusion that “justice” demanded Wilson’s indictment for murder. And, of course, his ultimate conviction.

What the ‘protestors’ (thugs and criminals) gained from destroying their own city I don’t know. I wonder if the Nike sneakers were worth the fact that there will no longer be a place to buy sneakers in the town. Very few of the violent protestors were actually from the town, which tells us that this whole scenario was a planned show to manipulate the low-information voter by using the low-information media. The really sad part of this story was that innocent people had their businesses destroyed and their lives ruined by the actions of people driven by rage caused by misinformation they were given. They were played.

The Proof Is In The Pudding

On November 24, The New York Post posted a story about some comments made by former Mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani.

The article reports:

Giuliani was over on “Meet the Press” — opening up on Michael Dyson, a Georgetown University professor and frequent critic of policing practices in Ferguson, Mo., and elsewhere in America:

“Ninety-three percent of blacks are killed by other blacks,” Rudy barked. “I would like to see the [same] attention paid to that, that you are paying to [Ferguson].”

“What about the poor black child who was killed by another black child?” Giuliani asked. “Why aren’t you protesting that? White police officers wouldn’t be there if you weren’t killing each other.”

Even if you don’t like what he said, Mayor Giuliana has a history of successful crime prevention.

The article reports:

The city’s murder rate began its dramatic decline during Giuliani’s early months in office, accelerated during the remainder of his mayoralty — and continued to fall during the ensuing 12 years as Mike Bloomberg more or less unapologetically continued Giuliani-era policing strategies.

…In Ferguson, the police force is overwhelmingly white. In New York, the department has been majority-minority for some time now, yet that fact generally is lost in the debate — which almost always revolves around race as it relates to enforcement, and only rarely as it involves victims and victimizers.
The fact is that crime attracts cops — that’s the point of a police force, after all.

Hard-charging cops can be abrasive, and that’s something officers everywhere need to work on — but in the end the issue must not be cops, but rather crime.

Rudy Giuliani’s point, not to put words in his mouth, seems to be this: If a fraction of the energy that now goes to demonizing cops was devoted to condemning crime and criminals, some real progress might be made.

How ironic that Barack Obama seems to agree.

Mayor Giuliani was successful in reducing crime in New York City. He created an atmosphere where criminals were prosecuted and punished for their crimes. Unfortunately, the Obama Administration has seen criminal activity in racial terms–an early example of this was the refusal to prosecute the Black Panthers for voter intimidation despite the video evidence that was posted on YouTube. Injustice triggers anger, regardless of which race is being treated unjustly. I think the President needs to remember that.

Have We Forgotten That Actions Have Consquences?

It is a shame that Michael Brown is dead. It is also a shame that a policeman was injured when Michael Brown attacked him and that because of racism on the part of some Americans, that policeman will never be seen as justified in defending himself against Michael Brown.

Michael Brown did three things that were consequential. First, he committed a minor robbery from a store. Second, he chose to walk down the middle of the street, drawing attention to himself. Third, he attacked a policeman. (The press conference last night stated that the Grand Jury had evidence that Michael Brown attacked Darren Wilson.) All three of these actions had consequences.

The Daily Caller reported late last night that Eric Holder has stated that the Justice Department‘s investigation of the incident is not over yet. Why? What are they looking for? Does Attorney General Holder believe that it is acceptable to attack a police officer? Or rob a store? Does Attorney General Holder believe that policemen have the right to defend themselves? Would Attorney General Holder be as concerned if Michael Brown had shot Darren Wilson with Darren Wilson’s gun?

The article quotes Attorney General Holder:

“Though there will be disagreement with the grand jury’s decision not to indict, this feeling should not lead to violence,” Holder said. “It does not honor [Michael Brown’s] memory to engage in violence or looting.”

Michael Brown’s memory? One of the last acts of Michael Brown was to rob a store. He only robbed something small, but he robbed a store. I am sure Michael Brown had many positive traits, but he made some very foolish mistakes and paid a very high price for them. He should be held up as an example of what not to do–not as a helpless victim.

 

Some Common Sense From Someone With Experience

A website called lawofficer.com posted the following article today. I know this is long, but please read all of it:

An Open Letter to Captain Ronald S. Johnson

From a former St. Louis Metro Area police chief

I have to call you out.

I don’t care what the media says. I expect them to get it wrong and they often do. But I expect you as a veteran law enforcement commander—talking about law enforcement—to get it right.

Unfortunately, you blew it. After days of rioting and looting, last Thursday you were given command of all law enforcement operations in Ferguson by Governor Jay Nixon. St. Louis County PD was out, you were in. You played to the cameras, walked with the protestors and promised a kinder, gentler response. You were a media darling. And Thursday night things were better, much better.

But Friday, under significant pressure to do so, the Ferguson Police released the name of the officer involved in the shooting of Michael Brown. At the same time the Ferguson Police Chief released a video showing Brown committing a strong-arm robbery just 10 minutes before he was confronted by Officer Darren Wilson.

Many don’t like the timing of the release of the video. I don’t like that timing either. It should have been released sooner. It should have been released the moment FPD realized that Brown was the suspect.

Captain Johnson, your words during the day on Friday helped to fuel the anger that was still churning just below the surface. St. Louis County Police were told to remain uninvolved and that night the rioting and looting began again. For much too long it went on mostly unchecked. Retired St. Louis County Police Chief Tim Fitch tweeted that your “hug-a-looter” policy had failed.

Boy did it.

And your words contributed to what happened Friday night and on into the wee hours of Saturday. According to the St. Louis Post Dispatch, you said the following regarding the release of the video: “There was no need to release it,” Johnson said calling the reported theft and the killing entirely different events.

Well Captain, this veteran police officer feels the need to respond. What you said is, in common police vernacular—bullshit. The fact that Brown knew he had just committed a robbery before he was stopped by Officer Wilson speaks to Brown’s mindset. And Captain, the mindset of a person being stopped by a police officer means everything, and you know it.

Let’s consider a few examples:
On February 15, 1978 Pensacola Police Officer David Lee conducted a vehicle check. He didn’t know what the sole occupant of the vehicle had recently done, but the occupant did. Who was he? Serial killer Ted Bundy. Bundy attempted to disarm Lee. Lee was able to retain his firearm and eventually took Bundy into custody.

On April 19, 1995 Oklahoma State Trooper Charlie Hangar stopped a vehicle for minor traffic violations. He didn’t know that 90 minutes earlier the traffic violator, Timothy McVeigh, killed 168 people with a truck bomb at the Murrah Federal Building. But McVeigh sure knew it, didn’t he? Fortunately, given his training and experience Hangar was able to take McVeigh into custody for carrying a concealed firearm. It was days later before it was determined that McVeigh was responsible for the bombing.

On May 31, 2003 then-rookie North Carolina police officer, Jeff Postell, arrested a man digging in a trash bin on a grocery store parking lot—an infraction that would rise to about the level of jaywalking. Postell didn’t know that he had just captured Eric Rudolph, the man whom years earlier had killed and injured numerous people with bombs and was on the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted list.

So now, let’s consider Ferguson Officer Darren Wilson’s stop of Michael Brown. Apparently Wilson didn’t know that Brown had just committed a strong-arm robbery. But Brown did! And that Captain, is huge.

Allegedly, Brown pushed Wilson and attempted to take Wilson’s gun. We’re also being told that Officer Wilson has facial injuries suffered during the attempt by Brown to disarm him. Let’s assume for a moment those alleged acts by Brown actually occurred. Would Brown have responded violently to an officer confronting him about jaywalking? Maybe, but probably not.

Is it more likely that he would attack an officer believing that he was about to be taken into custody for a felony strong-arm robbery? Absolutely.

Officer Wilson survived the encounter with Brown as did Lee, Hangar, and Postell. Michael Brown didn’t survive and it’s too soon to say if Officer Wilson’s use of deadly force was justified and legal. You and I both know that not all officers survive such confrontations. Officers die in incidents like this Captain Johnson, including a couple that I remember from your own organization:

On April 15, 1985 Missouri Trooper Jimmie Linegar was shot and killed by a white supremacist he and his partner stopped at a checkpoint; neither Trooper Linegar nor his partner were aware that the man they had stopped had just been indicted by a federal grand jury for involvement in a neo-Nazi group accused of murder. The suspect immediately exited the vehicle and opened fire on him with an automatic weapon.

Just a month before, Missouri Trooper James M. Froemsdorf was shot and killed—with his own gun—after making a traffic stop. When the Trooper made that stop he didn’t know that the driver was wanted on four warrants out of Texas—But again the suspect knew it.

So Captain Johnson, I guess the mindset and recently committed crimes of the suspects that murdered those Missouri Troopers didn’t mean anything. The stops by the Troopers, as you have said, are entirely different events right?

Bullshit.

Some information contained in this article came from the Officer Down Memorial Page (ODMP).

Mobile Category:
News

 

Another State Wakes Up And Smells The Coffee

Last Saturday, Townhall.com reported that the Missouri legislature has voted to end the Common Core educational standards in the state of Missouri. Common Core is a set of educational standards (not necessarily a bad idea) that has become controversial as people have realized some of the underlying aspects of it. Some of the problems with Common Core are invasive data collection with no privacy guarantees, a very politically slanted companion curriculum, and lessons for younger children that are not age-appropriate. As more and more people become aware of the contents of this program, more parents are contacting their legislators and asking that it be removed from their children’s schools.

The article at Townhall.com explains the current status of Common Core in Missouri:

House Bill 1490 (HB1490) passed through the state senate on May 1 by a 24-8 margin. It had previously passed the house by a 132-19 vote. Since the Senate version differed from the House version, the House had an opportunity to accept the amendments offered by the Senate, but refused. That sends the bill to a joint conference committee, with members of both chambers, to work out the differences in the bill and finalized the version going to the governor.

A spokesman for Rep. Bahr, the bill’s chief sponsor, said, “The conference was requested by the floor leader since the house passed a four page bill and the senate sent back a 44 page version. He did not feel like there would be enough time for all 150 house reps to pour over all of the new information in the bill to pass it speedily and also doing their duty.”

The amendments do not stop the bill from taking important steps to re-establish local control of education and end involvement with Common Core in the state. HB1490 states that “[each] local school board shall be responsible for the approval and adoption of curriculum used by the school district.” It also would sanction “work groups composed of education professionals to develop and recommend academic performance standards” which would ultimately be used to replace Common Core by the 2016-2017 school year.

It is time for all states to return control of their schools to the local school boards and educators. They are the people who know and understand the needs of the community. If you are a parent of a school-age parent and your state legislature is in session, please learn about Common Core and call your state legislators to ask that it be removed from your state. Your children are depending on you.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Government Bullying Takes A New Turn

Yesterday the Las Vegas Sun posted an article about some recent events in the Nevada desert. Cliven Bundy, a 68-year-old Nevada native, has been in a battle with the Bureau of Land Managment (BLM) over land that his cattle has been grazing on for decades.

The article reports:

A renegade when it comes to any sort of government control, Bundy — the father of 14 children — has refused to pay BLM a dime of required grazing fees for his 900 cattle, a tab that has since reached $300,000. Bundy has fought the fee, he says, because his Mormon ancestors set up shop on the land long before the BLM formed.

The problem? The land where Bundy’s cattle graze is federally owned, and the BLM now says the livestock aren’t supposed to be there. Federal agents this week cordoned off sections of land and sparked a monthlong operation to seize the cattle.

Tensions boiled over this week when a scuffle between the BLM and Bundy’s supporters ended in violence: Agents reportedly used a stun gun to subdue Bundy’s son and knocked his daughter to the ground. Though called “brutal” by some, the brawl did not land anyone in a hospital or jail.

But the incident did prompt Operation Mutual Aid — a national militia with members from California to Missouri — to visit Bundy’s ranch and set up a camp just in case things got out of hand again. Before their arrival Thursday, dozens of Bundy’s friends and relatives gathered at a protest camp in solidarity for the recent woes that have colored his rustic ranch.

The Blaze has also reported on this story:

But the presence of what appear to be heavily armed agents isn’t the only thing that has the Bundys on edge: Their son, Dave, was arrested and allegedly roughed up Sunday for filming federal agents while outside an area designated for First Amendment activity on the restricted property. He was held overnight.

The 37-year-old Bundy was arrested “following failure to comply with multiple requests by BLM law enforcement to leave the temporary closure area on public lands,” Cannon said. She declined to comment on the claim that he was brutally treated.

Dave Bundy was released from custody Monday and cited for refusing to disperse and resisting issuance of a citation or arrest, she added. Cannon could not explain why Dave was held overnight.

There are a few questions I have here. At what point did the government take over the land? Did the government pay for the land? Why was David Bundy arrested for taking filming federal agents? This does not sound like America–it sounds like a government of bullies with nothing better to do than harass American citizens. Among other things, the government is stealing this man’s cattle!

Enhanced by Zemanta

This Really Is More Information Than I Needed

ESPN and other news outlets are buzzing today about Michael Sam, an All-American defensive lineman from Missouri and the Associated Press‘ SEC Defensive Player of the Year. Michael Sam has announced that he is gay. Mr. Sam, no offense, but I really don’t care. My question is, “Would the press make this much fuss if a football player announced that he was celibate because he was a Christian?” Either way, it’s more information that I need. I wish Mr. Sam the best in his career, and I hope that he is treated fairly. Other than that, this really is more information than I need, and it is none on my business.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Double Standard At Work

Yesterday Breitbart.com posted a story about the recent controversy regarding a rodeo clown at the Missouri State Fair. The clown wore a President Obama mask.

Breitbart.com reports:

On Tuesday, the Missouri State National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) issued a statement asking for federal involvement in the case of a rodeo clown who wore an Obama mask and then asked the crowd if they’d like to see Obama run down by a bull. “The activities at the Missouri State Fair targeting and inciting violence against our President are serious and warrant a full review by both the Secret Service and the Justice Department,” said State President Mary Ratliff. “Incidents involving individuals acting out with extreme violent behavior in movie theaters, schools, churches, political appearances, and outdoor events in general speaks volume to the irresponsible behavior of all the parties involved with the incendiary events at the Missouri State Fair.”

To be honest, I think the rodeo clown with the Obama mask is tacky. I think it was tacky when rodeo clowns wore George Bush masks. However, free speech is a part of American life. Where were all these people demanding investigations when this was done to George Bush? Why is this any different because President Obama is black (actually half black if you want to be technical)? If we had true equality of races, there would be no distinction between making fun of President Obama and making fun of President Bush. However, this is not really about race–it’s about politics–the political left always cries fowl when they are treated the way they routinely treat the political right.

There is nothing racial in this–the same thing was done to President Bush. I think it is tacky whatever race is involved. It may be considered satire in some circles, but it is definitely tacky.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Disarming America–One State At A Time

Yesterday I posted a story about state police in New York mistakenly taking away a law abiding citizen’s guns. Today I have another story. Breitbart.com reported yesterday that during an investigation of the states new driver’s licensing system, it was discovered that the Missouri State Highway Patrol twice gave a database of concealed carry permit holders to federal authorities.

The article reports:

The investigation into leaked personal information began after suspicions arose over new drivers license rules requiring citizens to bring in numerous personal documents–including concealed carry permit information–to be “scanned and retained.” 

Replogle said the names were turned over to “cross-check… names on the concealed carry list with [the federal] agency’s list of those with disabilities attributed to mental illness to find possible evidence of fraud in the system.”

Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon (D) has been denying that “concealed weapons permits were turned over to a ‘magical database’ for federal agents to ‘mess with.'”

The article states that the information was given to the Social Security Administration Office of the Inspector General in Nov. 2011 and again in Jan. 2012. Replogle claims the information was encrypted and the discs holding the information were destroyed.

Excuse me if I am a little skeptical of the fact that the information was destroyed and that there are no copies floating around anywhere.

Enhanced by Zemanta

He Might Just Fit Right In

Talk radio is abuzz today with the story of Representative Todd Akin and his totally stupid remarks about rape. Representative Akin is running for the Senate seat currently held by Claire McCaskill.

The Washington Examiner reported today that despite pressure to drop out of the race, Representative Akin will continue his run for the Senate. I personally think he should drop out, but on the other hand, he hasn’t said anything dumber than has been said in Congress before.

Do you remember this YouTube video of Representative Hank Johnson questioning the military on their plans to increase troop strength in Guam?

Double standard, anyone?

Enhanced by Zemanta