CBS Press Release:
DRUG CARTELS ARE PAYING BORDER PANTROL OFFICERS TO GET ILLEGAL ALIENS INTO THE US, CBS NEWS INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT SHARYL ATTKISSON REVEALS ON “CBS SUNDAY MORNING WITH CHARLES OSGOOD”
FBI SPECIAL AGENT, TERRY REED, TELLS ATTKISSON: “I WILL TELL YOU THAT DRUG CARTELS ARE BECOMING INCREASINGLY AGGRESSIVE IN TARGETING AND RECRUITING OFFICERS TO WORK WITH THEM”
Caption: (L-R) FBI Special Agent, Terry Reed, Sharyl Attkisson
Mexican drug cartels are using money, drugs and sex to pay off corrupt U.S. Border Patrol agents in order to get illegal immigrants into the United States, CBS News Investigative Correspondent, Sharyl Attkisson reports this weekend on CBS SUNDAY MORNING WITH CHARLES OSGOOD.
“I will tell you that drug cartels are becoming increasingly aggressive in targeting and recruiting officers to work with them,” FBI Special Agent, Terry Reed, tells Attkisson. “They’re using cold war style tactics – money, sex, drugs – to convince officers to work with them and to help get their products and their people across the border.”
In the report, to be broadcast Jan. 13, 2013 on CBS SUNDAY MORNING (9:00 AM ET) on the CBS Television Network, Attkisson reveals that while the vast majority of the federal agents guarding the borders are honest, drug cartels are working harder than ever to infiltrate their ranks. A new Inspector General report lists 358 convictions of Customs and Border Protection agents and their associates since 2004. Corruption complaints are up by more than 75%, Attkisson reports.
Reed tells Attkisson that one agent arrested for corruption was making $2,000 per person crossing the border into the United States. He also says that the FBI is concerned that the cartels could collaborate with terrorist organizations to smuggle more than people across the border.
“It’s what keeps us up at night,” Reed says. “It’s what drives our behavior. Whether it’s a terrorist or the components to a dirty bomb being smuggled into the US, we know that these vehicles are not being inspected by corrupt officers – they’re being waved through the checkpoints.”
Attkisson’s report will be broadcast Jan. 13, 2013 on CBS SUNDAY MORNING (9:00 AM, ET) on the CBS Television Network. Rand Morrison is the executive producer.
Press Contact: Richard Huff
HuffR@cbsnews.com
Latest from Kurt Hofmann: What GOP and 'gun lobby' should be willing to yield: Absolutely nothing.
Give them nothing. Not an inch, not a millimeter. Fight them every step. Fight them as if our lives and liberties depend on it, because they do. Draw inspiration not from Neville Chamberlain, but from Winston Churchill (see sidebar video).
We may still lose, and restrictive new laws may still pass. Then we must defy them. And if that fails, the fight is still not over.
White House gun plan: An end run around the NRA
It’s an unusual strategy but one the Obama administration has used before: projecting strength on an issue by trying to create the perception that the White House is riding a wave of momentum from the American people. . .
Biden on Thursday told the NRA and five other gun-owner groups that they would be wise to join the White House effort to combat gun violence and avoid public wrath, said Feldman, a former lobbyist for gun manufacturers who now favors some middle ground, such as requiring background checks for weapons purchased at gun shows.
“He was really pushing us all to get with his program. He said that the public wants something done,” Feldman said. “His argument was all these other groups he’s met with, the Pentacostals and evangelicals and others, all of a sudden there is a different attitude. The implication is they are more amenable now with going along, and so should you.” . . .
The NRA issued a blistering statement condemning the meeting as evidence of the White House “agenda to attack the Second Amendment.” Feldman said he was the only gun group representative in the room to back universal background checks — and no one who participated supported new magazine or assault-weapons restrictions.
"You come in, you brandish your little book..."
"You have deliberately tried to frame this as a left-wing attack on the American Constitution and the Second Amendment," said Morgan, objecting to his guests perspective. "You come in, you brandish your little book..."
"My little book? That's the Constitution of the United States, our founding document," Shapiro exclaimed.
"I know what's in your Constitution," insisted the host.
"Do you really?" asked the conservative political commentator who turns 29 on Tuesday.
"Can I put my bullet in my gun, Andy?"
All out of ammo: US cops can’t stay stocked up as gun and bullet sales soar
A spike in gun and ammunition sales has caused a nationwide shortage that has delayed police training exercises and is putting a substantial amount of weaponry in civilian hands.
Police in Atlanta, Georgia have been forced to delay training exercises due to a shortage of ammunition. The police department has put orders for more bullets on back-order, while officers are being deprived of the training that makes them capable of handling weapons.
“When you can’t get ammunition, it is very concerning,” Sandy Springs Police Chief Terry Sult tells WSBTV. “It affects our ability to be prepared. It affects the potential safety of the officers, because they’re not as proficient as they should be.”
The Sandy Springs Police Department is facing a shortage of tens of thousands of bullets and is scrambling to restock. The neighboring counties are facing an equally dire situation, with both practice ammunition and duty ammunition in short supply. Douglas County Chief Deputy Stan Copeland predicts it could be 6-8 months before the back-orders come in.
“We’re going to get very concerned at the six-month level if that’s all we have in stock, because then we have to start planning and rationing,” Sult says.
While we are waiting for either (a) the other shoe to drop, or, (b) the panic to subside, there are a number of things you can be doing besides being frustrated that you can't immediately buy what you want as far as firearms and ammunition.
How are your long-term storage food stocks? There is no panic in that market -- yet. See to your logistics. If you are temporarily stymied on bullets, look to your beans.
How's your fitness? Take out your frustration by getting in shape.
See to your marksmanship skills. Go to the range, attend an Appleseed shoot, practice and then practice again.
A lot of us have projects sitting to one side that we haven't finished -- reloading sessions that we've been putting off, an unreliable weapon that needs some TLC gunsmithing, ammo in the box but not combat packed in bandoleers, stripper clips and ammo cans. Finish up what you can.
Don't leave all your eggs in one basket. Cache.
Train. Organize. Confront your county sheriff about whether or not he will be enforcing Fed diktat or interposing himself between the people and the tyranny.
Whatever you do, it's better than gnashing your teeth in frustration.
This just in from a reader:
Mike,
Here is an excellent source of accurate information for HUMINT. http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/norindsea.shtml
Try it out then couple it with: http://neighbors.whitepages.com/ to cross check.
All public information.
Just in case you want to check up on your ex-wife, or something. For informational purposes only.
(NOTE: This was originally posted a couple of days of ago, but some folks were having trouble with the link. Here it is again.)
Just received this from a reader:
Mike,
I just got off the phone with Feinstein's office. . . I'll give you a rundown of what I learned:
* Semi-auto, fancy hunting rifles are on the exemption list. Staffer said he'd used one last time he went hunting--so much for the idea that politicians and judges that hunt with semi-autos will oppose the ban.
* He specifically brought up the Kel-Tec KSG as an example of something that they wanted to ban even though it's not semi-auto, so even though the bullet points on Diane's website don't mention extended tubes on pump guns or any other features like pistol grips on them, that doesn't mean they're going to be safe if she gets her way.
* They don't know how they're going to set up the NFA regulation for everything--that will be done with the help of an ATF agent coming over from FTB next week. Therefore, no idea if they'll allow standard NFA transfer with $200 tax for those suckers who register their guns.
* The regulations will be a loose set of guidelines giving ATF authority to set it up how they want, so the picture on the 22nd will still just be a partial picture.
As for the lists of features and the specific exemptions and specific bans, they can't release them until the bill comes out, but the staffer said I could ask some specific questions and he'd tell me what he knew:
* KSG--as already mentioned, Banned.
* M1 Garand is probably Safe.
(MBV Note: I'm not so sure since the Garand has a bayonet lug.)
* M1A/M14--Banned.
* Mini-14--Banned.
* M1 Carbine--Banned (hopefully this will upset some Fudds and older vets/collectors).
At first, he thought the M1-Carbine would be safe, but then he googled a picture of it. Basically, if he saw a magazine sticking below the body of the gun, and if it is a semi-auto, it's banned. He did a similar thing with the Garand and was apparently reading the Wikipedia page. His conclusion was that even though the gun was a military rifle, it "looked like you could hunt with it" and was limited in capacity. Apparently it's impossible to hunt with something that has a magazine sticking out the bottom--hey, since I've managed that before, maybe I can divide by zero too... This also showed that he has no conception of how quick it is to reload a Garand by pushing in a new En Bloc.
As for the new features test, flash suppressors and bayonet stubs are off the list, but he couldn't tell me the whole list, and just because a gun doesn't meet the features test doesn't mean it won't be placed on the specifically banned list. E.g., the M1A wouldn't necessarily fall under the ban if the feature's test only included the old features now that flash hider and bayonet stub are off the list, but it makes the specific ban list. I'd guess this will sweep up SKS's, Vz. 52 carbines, Saigas, Vepers, Hakims etc. (Or at least all of them that they actually Google and look at.) Since they have so little firearms knowledge, I would guess that they'll probably toss in a clause stating that ATF or the Attorney General can add items to the list in order to catch the ones they didn't Google (and to be able to expand the ban unilaterally later on.)
The phone call was a showcase of legislative ignorance, and of their disdain for us. The more I pretended not to know much about guns, the more they opened up to me about the law. I got the impression that they plan to go big or go home and to make quite a list of banned guns and features. From a few comments, I think that although bayonet stubs and flash hiders are gone, there may be more features being added to their list.
Regards,
Three areas where Biden and NRA can find common ground.
The NRA itself has changed since the conservative movement coalesced to take over the previously sportsman-focused organization. In the 1930s, the NRA supported the U.S. ban on machine guns, which still stands. Likewise, the NRA backed the 1968 Gun Control Law passed by President Johnson after the assassinations of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and Bobby Kennedy. "Today's NRA is not that of our grandfathers," said Gerney. "Unfortunately, the leadership of the NRA has turned the organization into an obstacle, rather than the partner of decades ago, in the effort to pass smart laws to keep guns away from dangerous people."
The NRA's hard turn to the right makes it highly unlikely that it will want to work with the White House on any measure. But in fact there is some common ground to be found, even between these political foes. Ironically, that common ground is likely to be found in increased federal enforcement of existing laws through executive order, the same remedy that the Drudge Report disgustingly demagogued on Wednesday by comparing executive orders by the president of the United States to tyrannical actions taken by the mass murderers Hitler and Stalin. It was a shocking reminder of just how unhinged and hateful our civic debates have become.
But beyond these efforts to fear-monger for political and personal profit, the fact that some common ground exists between the White House and the NRA on gun control should be a heartening.
David Codrea comments:
Somebody fed this guy the agenda, possibly this guy, because all of these points track closely with an embargoed copy of the press release his group doesn't want going out until after today's group grope.
All I can say is, if NRA doesn't lead, if they let NSSF and IFoA push compromise, or if there's some kind of stupid good cop/bad cop they're going to play to give them plausible deniability that they had to come up with something, remember this post and remember this one.
Gun Sanity Needs Bipartisanship
But there is a political truth that must be faced: Absolutely nothing positive will happen on this issue unless a substantial number of Republicans insist that we act. And before you give up hope, it's worth remembering that in 1994, 38 House Republicans supported the assault weapons ban on a roll call in May, and 46 supported the crime bill including the ban that eventually passed later in the year.
Yes, the GOP is very different now, more conservative and more dominated by Southern and rural voices. But key Republicans senators, including Mark Kirk, John McCain and Dan Coats, have been willing to back reasonable gun laws in the past. The GOP's House majority includes 12 members from New York and New Jersey, 13 from Pennsylvania, 44 from the Midwestern states of Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin, and 20 from the West Coast.
So, in a few hours the NRA will walk into a meeting with Joe Biden's "gun violence commission": NRA Accepts Biden's Invitation To Meet
And, as Chris Cillizza writes: Why Joe Biden needs the NRA.
But, the meeting is smart politics by Biden — and the White House more broadly. It’s a recognition that, to pass something on guns through Congress, they need the NRA either on board or not totally in opposition to the proposal. . .
And, in a political jump ball, having the NRA signed on to some proposal is almost certainly the difference between a bill becoming a law and it, well, not.
Now, inviting the NRA to a meeting is very different than getting (or wanting to get) the NRA to sign on to the final product that the Biden task force produces. (It seems unlikely that if Biden pushes for an assault weapons ban, for instance, that the NRA would be even close to on board.)
But Biden is smart to meet with the NRA both to a) see if there is a place of mutual interest where the organization could actually be supportive of the proposal from the task force, but also b) to try to tamp down the white-hot rhetoric on both sides at the moment.
While “A” might be the goal, “B” has its merits as a political strategy as well. It’s at least in theory more difficult for the NRA to aggressively hate a bill that they were consulted on — even if it’s not a piece of legislation they can support.
Remember in politics it’s always a good idea to keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
The NRA, despite its vaunted reputation, sold out American firearm rights at critical moments in enactment of the 1934 National Firearms Act, the 1968 Gun Control Act, and the 1994 Brady and AWB bills. (The latter because Bob Dole begged them to because he thought it was good politics in his upcoming presidential run -- we all know how well that turned out.)
"Peace in our time." Neville Chamberlain on his way to meet Hitler, 1938.
So the prospect of the NRA meeting with Joe Biden in an atmosphere of panic and hysteria does not fill me with warm and fuzzy thoughts. In fact, the only question I have is if it will be Neville Chamberlain or Vidkun Quisling who steps out of the NRA weeniewagon when it pulls up to the White House entrance.
Vidkun Quisling, whose name became synonymous with traitor, on trial in Norway after the war.
And here is where he was executed by firing squad:
Day by Day.
In my email in-box is this story about MagPul, "One Million AR-15 Magazines On Backorder." And those, my friends, are just MagPuls. How many 30 round AR mags of all types are floating about in private hands is anyone's guess -- tens of millions certainly. How, then, will these soon-to-be-forbidden items be recovered by government forces if DiFi's law passes? It will be impossible without violence, of course. As I've observed in the past, it is more than passingly ironic that people who claim to be worried about "gun violence" intend to stack up millions of bodies in pursuance of that chimera.
While on the road in the sticks of western Alabama today, I heard the audio of Joe Biden's promise that "Obama Considering 'Executive Orders' to Deal With Guns."
"The president is going to act," said Biden, giving some comments to the press before a meeting with victims of gun violence. "There are executive orders, there's executive action that can be taken. We haven't decided what that is yet. But we're compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action that we believe is required."
Biden said that this is a moral issue and that "it's critically important that we act."
Biden talked also about taking responsible action. "As the president said, if your actions result in only saving one life, they're worth taking. But I'm convinced we can affect the well-being of millions of Americans and take thousands of people out of harm's way if we act responsibly."
Biden, as he himself noted, helped write the Brady bill.
Eric Holder was scheduled to be at the meeting that's currently taking place at the White House.
Not surprisingly, when I returned home, I had a lot of outraged email, all reflecting in different words and phrases this sentiment from another freedom activist: "What Biden proposed today is rank, wicked lawlessness. I will not stand for any such thing, under any circumstances."
And, although he specified, along with his anger, his willingness to await events and not become proactive, I replied in agreement:
Keep your patience and your powder dry. Most importantly do not become the evil we purport to fight. Events will dictate our legitimate response and it is not weakness to await the first blows from the dark side, but is in fact the Founders' wisdom who also found themselves sorely provoked by atrocities of the King's men.
Since I have done my level best to offer myself as one of those first targets, I do not believe, as one person chided me, that I was "willing to patient until half of our people are dead before responding." I am willing to be the tripwire myself. That is a trade I reconciled myself to back in the 90s.
So, my accuser is wrong, that is not the case. Nor is it the case that it is okay to commence hostilities now based upon previous outrages such as Ruby Ridge and Waco, or upon mere announced tyrannical intentions. As I pointed out, the Founders also had to suffer a "train of abuses" before responding with defensive violence. That of course happened during a British gun raid on Lexington and Concord, though the memory of that reality, and the irony, is apparently lost upon the Joe Biden's of the world.
We must now be more patient than ever, more watchful, more diligent in our training and preparations. This is not weakness, but wisdom, just as the Founders were wise. We must be like the Founders -- Await the first blows and then respond, and win.
There will be plenty of time for lampposts later.
This morning began with an MRI at the hospital (delayed because they couldn't start an IV without calling in an expert with an ultrasound from the main hospital -- this after repeated failed attempts by lesser mortals that resembled nothing so much as a Japanese bayonet attack). Then, because we are now down to one car, we had to carry my youngest daughter back to college which took 5 hours to get there (thanks to rain-assisted wrecks) and four hours to get back. I stumbled in the door and crapped out for a nap without making it to the computer, so I just now enabled the comments and have begun to review my email. In the intervening time, I've had phone messages and emails concerned about my absence. Everything is fine with me, however . . .
You may recall my previous call for prayer for Julian and his wife Lynn, who has been desperately ill for a while. One of the first emails I opened was from Julian telling us that "Lynn is with God. She passed away at about 6:15 tonight. It was peaceful with no suffering or struggle." Please keep Julian and Lynn in your prayers.
The conclusion:
So now we’re back to you, Mr. Security Agent, and your unique role in this high drama. Let me state this very clearly, both for you and for the liberal agenda-setting elites who might accidentally stumble upon this essay. Let there be no doubt about this. Let no one later say, “But we were just trying to improve public safety. We had no idea that all these disastrous unintended consequences would happen.”
I am telling you now that disastrous unintended consequences will happen if Congress passes new laws banning presently legal firearms. To make it very easy to remember, and in the spirit of our beloved Department of Homeland Security’s old color-coded security threat levels, let me spell out three lines of demarcation.
The Yellow Line:
The yellow warning line will be crossed with national gun registration laws, including laws forbidding private gun sales without government permission. When that law passes, millions of Americans will feel that they have been pushed directly to the edge of the abyss above the mass graves of history. Defenders of the Second Amendment know what happened in Turkey, the USSR, Germany, China, and other nations that fell under totalitarian rule: in every case a necessary preliminary step on the road to genocide was national gun registration, followed by confiscation. The Jewish survivors of the Nazi Holocaust say, “Never again!” And so do we.
The Red Line:
The red line will be crossed with the passage of laws mandating that currently owned weapons, ammunition magazines, and ammunition quantities above a certain number must be turned in to authorities or destroyed, and thereafter their simple possession will be a felony. At that point, the nation will be on a hair trigger, with a thousand flaring matches nearing a thousand primed cannon fuses aimed directly at the next Fort Sumter.
The Dead Line:
The next line requires a bit of history to explain. In some primitive Civil War POW camps, where lack of funding or logistical constraints did not allow the construction of proper fences, a knee-high continuous railing of wooden slats encircled the prison grounds. Guards with rifles were positioned at the corners and in crude towers. If a prisoner so much as stepped over the narrow plank, he was shot dead without warning, obviating the need for a real fence to contain him. Hence the term “dead line.” Cross the line and people die, right now.
And this is what liberal utopians must understand: after passing the yellow line with national gun registration and transfer requirements, and the red line by making possession of currently legal firearms felonious, the dead line will be breached with the first SWAT raids upon citizens suspected of owning legal firearms made illegal by the new gun control laws. People will die resisting confiscation, in large numbers.
Confiscation crosses the dead line, make no mistake about it.
So this essay is really for you, Mr. Security Agent, because it won’t be elite Manhattan or Malibu liberals or Ivy League professors or politicians or columnists who will be ordered to strap on the sweat-stained body armor and enforce the new gun control laws at gunpoint. No, that grim task will fall to you.
But as long as you are an honorable agent of the people while an employee of the government, and as long as you honor your oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, then you will encounter no problems at all with gun owners. Why? Because you will refuse to take part in gun confiscation raids. Period. End of sentence, end of paragraph.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation is the leading American law enforcement agency, at least in terms of its long history and high prestige. Dear Mr. Security Agent, please consider that F.B.I. also stands for Fidelity, Bravery, and Integrity. Soon, your fidelity to your solemnly sworn oath may be severely tested. It will take a lot of bravery to make your personal integrity a higher calling than following illegitimate orders, simply to maintain your steady paycheck and benefits.
On the other hand, if you no longer resemble the upstanding and honorable federal agents I have known in the past, if that whole oath-to-the-Constitution shtick was a big fat joke to you and you would accept a transfer to the old Soviet KGB or East German Stasi for a ten percent pay raise…then we are definitely going to have a problem. So that oath you swore really matters, one way or the other, and so does your personal sense of honor.
Dear Mr. Security Agent, let me spell it out. If you find yourself in the sub-basement of an annex to a secret intelligence center on the far end of town, waterboarding citizens into revealing the locations of suspected “illegal caches” of firearms, ammunition or ammunition magazines that were legally owned in 2012, then know this one simple fact: tens of millions of Americans will most surely consider you a betrayer of your sworn oath and a traitor to your country.
And so, if you find yourself silently dismounting a covert SWAT vehicle at zero-dark-thirty, dressed all in body armor, counting down to the time-coordinated explosion of battering rams and flash-bang grenades, on a raid against a sleeping household intended to result in the confiscation of firearms, ammunition or ammunition magazines that were legal to own in 2012, millions of Americans who also swore an oath to defend the Constitution will consider you their domestic enemy, and they will resist you with force of arms. Just as the soldiers of King George were resisted on another notable gun confiscation raid on April 19, 1775. It used to be called “The Shot Heard ’Round the World.”
You may consider the sentiments expressed above to be absurd, hyperbolic, dangerous, ridiculous, or simply wrong-headed. But please understand that tens of millions of Americans feel this way to their cores, and they will not be disarmed without a fight. Well-meaning but naive liberals should understand the certain-to-follow consequences of new gun control laws intended to disarm their fellow citizens in the name of “public safety.” LEOs and FLEAs should understand the dire consequences of participating in gun confiscation raids, in direct violation of their sworn oaths to uphold the Constitution, including the Second Amendment.
The unintended consequences of this misguided utopian fool’s crusade to ban guns would include a second civil war as agonizingly painful as the first one, if not more so, since there would be no front lines and no safe areas for anybody, anywhere. Every sane American wants to prevent such a calamitous outcome as a “dirty civil war” on United States soil.
But know this: those tens of millions will never be quietly disarmed and then later forced at government gunpoint onto history’s next boxcars. If boxcars and detention camps are to be in America’s future, then you, Mr. Security Agent, will have to disarm them the hard way first. Not Piers Morgan, not Michael Moore, not Rosie O’Donnell, not Dianne Feinstein, not Chuck Schumer.
You.
MBV Note: Not that such a war wouldn't have consequences for the war planners, enablers and leaders. They would end up just as dead under Bill Clinton's 1999 Serbian rules of engagement, either before or after the war crimes trials.
Julius Streicher, Hitler's favorite "journalist," after being hung at Nuremberg.
White House recruits foundations on gun effort
The White House on Tuesday afternoon reached out to major philanthropic foundations not typically associated with gun control to gauge how much they are willing to get involved in President Obama’s future gun violence prevention efforts, according to a person on the call.
The call, which featured Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, Jonathan Greenblatt, the director of the White House Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation, and members of Vice President Biden’s staff, was largely a “listening session,” according to the person on the call, who represents a foundation invited to participate.
The person said the call included the Open Society Institute, the McCormick Foundation, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the California Endowment. Those groups, which traditionally work in public health fields, have not previously been identified with major gun control efforts.
White House officials declined to comment about the call.
“There’s only one reason why you get a bunch of deep-pocketed funders on the phone,” the participant said. “It’s not because they’re great dancers. It’s because at the end of the day you need to tap into them for something.”
Lessons learned, Obama takes fights to Congress
But Obama’s most intriguing fight — or non-fight — looms on gun control in the wake of a December school massacre that repeatedly brought him to tears.
Some members of the president’s own staff were chagrined when he decided to create a task force, led by Biden, to study gun control measures instead of pushing ahead in the lame-duck session with bills limiting high-capacity gun magazines and expanding the firearms database.
To some Obama veterans, that move echoed the earliest months of Obama’s first-term, when then-chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, an arch pragmatist, clamped down on any proposal that didn’t have a realistic chance of surviving in Congress. There would be no crusades in the Obama White House, he told his troops.
(MBV Note: Which, you may recall, led to the Gunwalker Scandal.)
This time might be different, White House officials say. The massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School touched the president deeply, and he had privately expressed a desire to force members of Congress to vote, up or down, on gun legislation, whatever the outcome.
Moreover, they believe that a victory on the Hagel confirmation — which they expect, despite some opposition among Democrats — will give them more leverage in the gun control and debt ceiling fights.
Meanwhile, Immigration's new rival: gun control
President Barack Obama promised immigration reform leaders that their cause would top his second-term agenda, making January their month.
But immigration advocates are beginning to worry that their fight could slip behind a cause that wasn’t even an issue during the election: gun control.
This month the White House was supposed to begin its push in earnest for immigration reform. Instead, after a gunman killed 20 school children in Newtown, Conn., Obama tapped Vice President Joe Biden to lead a group that will release a reform proposal in mid-January — just when immigration activists had hoped all eyes would be on their issue.
Immigration advocates believed that their best shot at comprehensive reform was to push it early in Obama’s second term — when the election results were still fresh in Republicans’ minds and when the president could use the bully pulpit of his Inauguration and the State of the Union Address to rally the public.
If those speeches become about gun control, it’ll make it that much harder for advocates to pick up the momentum needed to get a big, controversial bill through Congress. . .
But here's the money quote:
Speaker John Boehner’s (R-Ohio) recent move to bring the fiscal cliff deal to the floor without a majority of Republican votes to pass the legislation has also cheered immigration proponents.
From a reader:
It had to come. It has been introduced in Illinois, the most anti-gun state in the USA. Creates the Precious Metal Purchasing Act. Provides that a person who is in the business of purchasing precious metal shall obtain a proof of ownership, create a record of the sale, and verify the identity of the seller.
(AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster) "Vice President Joe Biden, right, with President of the National Association of Police Organizations and Boston police officer, Thomas Nee, center and Attorney General Eric Holder, far left, speaks to media during a meeting at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in the White House complex, Thursday, Dec. 20, 2012, in Washington. Biden is leading a task force that will look at ways of reducing gun violence."
Sipsey Street has learned that a key member of the President's committee to find "the solution" to school shootings, has a son who was convicted of plotting a Columbine-style school massacre -- possibly with a service pistol obtained from his father. Nee is the former head of the Boston Police Patrolman's Association and is currently the head of the National Association of Police Organizations. In short, says one source familiar with the notoriously anti-firearm Nee, "he is a political hack/thug/activist who happens to carry a badge."
Sources point out that not mentioned in state-run media accounts of the Biden comission is that Thomas Nee's son was arrested and convicted for plotting a Columbine-style attack on Marshfield High School in Massachusetts. Additionally, says one source, "Joseph Nee might have armed himself at one point with his father's service pistol though that story went off the radar."
This source continued, "As usual, the 'solution' will be the attempted theft of freedoms from the innocent while the root causes of these evil shootings, especially dysfunctional parents will be ignored."
There are a ton of links out there re this story, here are a few.
Boston police eye alleged Marshfield plot suspect: Will investigate report that youth had service gun
Boston Police plan to contact authorities investigating the alleged Columbine-style attack plot at Marshfield High School to determine if a gun that one suspect allegedly showed to another student was a .40-caliber handgun issued by Boston Police.
A female student told Marshfield Police that Joseph T. Nee, one of the two suspects in the case, pulled what she thought was a black, .40-caliber handgun from his waistband as she was getting off a school bus this past spring and told her "how the school was going to be shot up," John P. McLaughlin, an assistant Plymouth district attorney, said at Nee's arraignment Monday.
Nee is the son of Thomas J. Nee, president of the Boston Police Patrolmen's Association, the city's largest police union. Boston police officers carry .40-caliber Glock handguns, according to a department spokeswoman.
Joseph Nee, seen in 2004, convicted of masterminding a Columbine-style mass murder plot.
Joseph Nee convicted; is dad part of the story?
The Associated Press thinks so. The Boston Globe doesn't.
A bit of background: Joseph Nee was just convicted of conspiracy to commit murder for plotting a Columbine-style attack at Marshfield High School. Tom Nee, Joseph Nee's father, is the head of the Boston Police Patrolmen's Association.
You could make a reasonable case for either position. Tom Nee is a public figure, but the crime is his son's, not his.
That said, the Globe's current approach is especially interesting in light of this October 2004 article, which posited a strong link between Joseph Nee's legal troubles and his relationship with his father.
From COMMONWEALTH vs. JOSEPH NEE.
"In this case, the Commonwealth presented sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant entered an agreement with Kerns with the intention to commit mass murder. See Commonwealth v. Frazier, supra. Multiple witnesses testified that the defendant either initiated or assisted in the development of an elaborate plan to "shoot up" the school. There was substantial evidence that the defendant prepared to carry out the attack by learning about and experimenting with explosive devices, and attempting to acquire firearms. Moreover, the defendant attempted to recruit Courchene and others to participate in the attack and threatened to cut out the tongue of anyone who spoke about the plan to the police. From this and other evidence, the judge could properly find that the defendant in fact reached an agreement with his friends to kill people at the school. See Commonwealth v. Benson, supra."
See also
The Lost Boys.
Well, I guess they were looking for "experts" in mass murder plots and found one close to home, although the Obama administration seems loathe to point that out.
A Divide Widened by Misunderstanding
The big divide in America is over German sociologist Max Weber’s 1919 lecture “Politics as Vocation,” in which he announced that the very definition of a state is “the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force.” Few Americans have read Weber, but his principle has been the core premise of the gun control movement, and anathema to the gun rights movement.
Many American Weberians are also “pacifist-aggressives”; that is they believe that it is wrong for anyone (or anyone other than a government employee) to use deadly force. Their demand to impose their personal morality on everyone else are fiercely resisted by people who (like Enlightenment philosophers such as Grotius, Puffendorf, and Locke) see self-defense as the most fundamental of all inherent, natural rights.
