Uncategorized

Watergate Redux

September 20, 2011 by

It was under questioning by Minority Counsel Fred Thompson at the Watergate hearings that presidential aide Alexander Butterfield revealed the existence of tape recording devices in both the Oval Office and the President’s office in the Executive Office Building. These tapes provided the nail in the coffin to Nixon’s presidency.

Now more tapes are leaking out of the conversations between ATF agents and the owner of Lone Wolf Trading Company Andre Howard. These tapes seem to indicate a strong effort to conceal the details of Operation Fast and Furious as well as a strong disdain for Senator Grassley. The one item that was mentioned that I find particularly interesting was the assertion by ATF Agent Hope McAllister that she had a file that would cover her if the operation went sour. I wonder if she is still in possession of that file and, if so, have copies been provided to Congressional investigators.

The more  I see and read of Project Gunwalker the more it reminds me of Watergate. Of course, no one died in Watergate nor was the press complicit for the most part in hushing up the scandal.

The excerpts of the tape and transcript are from CBS News.
 

EXCERPT 1

Dealer: Question: do your people have any confidence that you can forestall subpoena? Or is it still up in the air?

Agent: No, my understanding is person, the only people that can request a congressional hearing has to be a majority party. Grassley is a Republican.

Dealer: I know.

Agent: And as of right now…

Dealer: In the Senate right.

Agent: Yeh. And as of right now we don’t have any interest from anybody in the majority party to the extent that he’s shown interest. So even if you wanted to at this point unless he gets CUTS OUT somebody from the majority party to jump on board, he can’t…

Dealer: Not on his own no but you know Leahy and rest of ’em these people are snakes, they’ll do anything they can…

Agent: My understanding also is that the Attorney General’s office is supposed to come out little bit stronger…um…

Dealer: I understand that.

Agent: position…which may or may not, um, you know, help.

Dealer: I’ll tell you what I’ll give him that, he’s got f—ing b—s making that statement. I don’t wanna even go there.

EXCERPT 2

Dealer: Until something else happens they’re not stupid, Hope, they connect the dots.

Agent: No and you know and all that’s fine if Senator Grassley wants to come in and tell us show us how to work these cases more efficiently more effectively by all means.

Dealer: Don’t think Grassley, think Leahy.

Agent: Well, him too. I… I welcome him to come down and work…

Dealer: He’s an arrogant b—–d

Agent: So is Grassley though

Dealer: Chuck probably and I don’t know a thing about him other than from somebody else I’ve heard seems to be just somebody who’s hitching his wagon to any star to.. for his own aggrandizement.

Agent: Yeh

Dealer: You know that. He’s an arrogant

Agent: Yeh

Dealer: individual. Look he’s a United States senator there it is right there.

EXCERPT 3

Agent: That’s kind of what my suggestion but nobody thought that was funny like if I were a P.I. I’d put him on Grassley, I’m sure there’s a lot would go away. Actually my one suggestion was just tell him in a registered Republican. I’m sure if he knew that everything would be fine, they didn’t like that either.

Dealer: Well.

Agent: Alright.

Dealer: You gotta be, watch your back. I don’t trust these people around you one bit. You’ve been very lucky so far.

Agent: Again I’ll be more than happy to talk to somebody, they won’t let me, but more than happy to talk to anybody about the decisions we made.

Dealer: Hope, stay off the screen. You don’ t need this sh–. Neither does your husband.

Agent: Believe me I have…

Dealer: You gotta have a f—–g life man.

Agent: I have a file and…

Dealer: shhh

Agent: It’s all, it’s all public stuff I dont’ care.

Dealer: Well don’t even convey it in that. I’m sure you do. Hopefully this thing will subside…

Agent: You keep saying that but ?

Dealer: I know.

Dealer: You and I both know how bad it’s gonna get I won’t bull—t you you don’t bull—t me

Agent: Ha ha.

Dealer: my a– is up here and yours is here here but you’re covered I’m out in the open

Agent: Ha ha.

Dealer: God.

Uncategorized

Project Gunwalker – Let’s Go To The Tape

September 19, 2011 by 1 Comment

Andre Howard of Lone Wolf Trading Company in Glendale, AZ is not stupid. After being forced to cooperate with the ATF agents runnings Operation Fast and Furious, he took the smart step to record some of his conversations with one of the lead agents in the operation, ATF Agent Hope McAllister.

These tapes have been turned over by Mr. Howard to the Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General and to Congressional investigators. In the tape below obtained by Sharyl Attkisson of CBS News, Howard and McAllister are discussing the third firearm that turned up at the scene of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry’s murder. The transcript of the tape can be found on the CBS News website above.

If you may recall, President Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder, and Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich have all said that that the DOJ Office of Inspector General should be the lead investigator into whether there was any wrongdoing in Operation Fast and Furious. Sharyl Attkisson reports today that the OIG is reported to have passed these tapes along to one of the subjects of the investigation – the U.S. Attorney’s Office for Arizona.

Law enforcement sources and others close to the Congressional investigation say the Justice Department’s Inspector General obtained the audio tapes several months ago as part of its investigation into Fast and Furious.

Then, the sources say for some reason the Inspector General passed the tapes along to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Arizona: a subject in the investigation. It’s unclear why the Inspector General, who is supposed to investigate independently, would turn over evidence to an entity that is itself under investigation. The Inspector General’s office had no immediate comment.

I am speculating here but one explanation as to why OIG turned over evidence to the U.S. Attorney’s Office would be so as to coach their testimony whether before OIG investigators or before Congressional investigators.

The role of OIG in this investigation is and has been tainted from the very start. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) recognized this early on which is why he called for an assignment to an outside Inspector General in a letter to the head of Integrity Committee of the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency back in March.

UPDATE: The DOJ OIG sent a response to CBS on why the tapes were given to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Arizona:

A spokesman from the Office of the Inspector General today said, “The OIG officially provided the United States Attorney’s Office with a copy of the recordings in question so that the USAO could consider them in connection with the government’s disclosure obligations in the pending criminal prosecutions of the gun traffickers. Prior to receiving the tapes, the OIG made clear that we would have to provide a copy of the recordings to the United States Attorney’s Office because they would need to review them to satisfy any legal disclosure obligations.”

Uncategorized

Do You Twitter?

September 19, 2011 by 1 Comment

Do you use Twitter to follow the news and blogs? If so, you may want to consider adding me to your Twitter follow list.

I leave Friday for the Gun Rights Policy Conference in Chicago. I intend to both blog and Tweet extensively from the conference. Given the lineup of speakers, signing up for Twitter would be a great way to follow the action if you can’t be in Chicago.

If you look in my sidebar, you will see a section near the top that says “Subscribe to this blog”. Among the methods for subscribing is Twitter. You click on the button that looks like the one below and it will take you to my Twitter page. My Twitter ID is @jpr9954.

Thanks and I hope to have lots to report from Chicago in the never-ending fight for gun rights.

Uncategorized

It Is Only Fitting

September 19, 2011 by

Copyright trolls Righthaven LLC and its owner Steve Gibson are in the crosshairs of Wayne Hoehn’s attorneys. Seems that Righthaven has an unpaid judgment against them and Hoehn’s attorneys are asking the U.S. Marshalls Service to seize their bank accounts for non-payment.

Attorneys representing Wayne Hoehn filed a motion Sunday asking the court to issue a writ of execution for Hoehn’s judgment against Righthaven after the group defied the court ordered payment due date last week. The motion states, “No stay prohibiting Hoehn’s execution of his judgment is in place, nor would any such future stay have retroactive effect.” It also states that the “Court is entitled to authorize the U.S. Marshalls to execute Hoehn’s judgment” through seizure of bank accounts.

That would be sweet justice because Righthaven’s campaign against bloggers was always about money and never about seeking justice.

H/T Sebastian

Uncategorized

Fixed It For Them

September 19, 2011 by 1 Comment

AB 144 which bans unloaded open carry in California is sitting on Gov. Jerry Brown’s desk awaiting either a signature or veto. The Brady Campaign opposes UOC because it scares rich white liberals buying overpriced coffee. That it may or may not deter a criminal is irrelevant to them.

Paraphrasing a quote by one of their spokespeople made to the L.A. Times:

Cop carry control advocates hope that California will now pave the way for the rest of the country to outlaw the practice.

“Openly carrying a cop on your back into Starbucks and other establishments creates a culture of fear and intimidation,” said Brian Malte, director for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Cop Carry. “It is irresponsible and dangerous.”

“People in other states look to see what California does,” he said. If Brown signs the bill, “other states will follow suit.”

My paraphrase of Brian Malte’s comment makes about as much sense as his statement does. The sad thing is that I realize it and he does not.

Uncategorized

Webinar – Eliminate Hunting & Shooting Travel Hassles

September 19, 2011 by 2 Comments

The Professional Outdoor Media Association is sponsoring a free webinar on  Tuesday, September 20th about traveling by air with firearms.

You can register for this free webinar by registering here.

Webinar Registration

DON’T LET AIRLINE SECURITY OR
ODD LAWS RUIN YOUR TRIP

Sorry sir, you can’t take that trophy rack on board; and the fee to put it in cargo is $150. Ma’am, this gun case does not meet airline standards, we can’t check it. Nope, you cannot bring that firearm back into the U.S.

The U.S. Travel Security Administration (TSA) strictly enforces regulations. Violations can result in criminal prosecution and civil penalties of up to $10,000 per violation. Each airline/country also has its own rules and regs.

What should you do to circumvent big hassles? Act like a Boy Scout. Be prepared so you don’t find yourself in one of these positions or worse.

FREE TRAVEL WEBINAR

During a live webinar, Sept. 20, at 2 p.m. Eastern time, North American Hunting Club Executive Director and North American Hunter Television Show Host Bill Miller will teach you how to eliminate travel hassles.

Here’s a sample of what attendees will learn:

1) The most important thing to know about bringing guns back into the U.S.
2) Five measures to help ensure you and your guns/ammo, end up in the same place
3) The best travel gun cases
4) How to book hunting travel (airlines, hotels, etc.)
5) Tips for traveling with trophies and meat
6) Traveling with hunting dogs
7) Requirements for traveling with ammunition

The heaviest focus of the webinar will be on airline travel and crossing borders. However, many tips also apply to interstate travel in private vehicles.

Over 30 years, Miller’s traveled for business and pleasure, to hunt and shoot. He’s traveled to:

• More than 40 states
• Nine Canadian Provinces
• Mexico
• South America
• Africa and
• Europe

Miller’s on the road more than 100 nights a year and 99.9% of the time he’s traveling with firearms, ammunition, game meat, trophy racks and even his hunting dogs. Learn his travel secrets.

Uncategorized

Rule No. 4 Violation By SFPD

September 19, 2011 by 1 Comment

In a story reported by KCBS in San Francisco yesterday, two innocent bystanders were wounded when police shot at a fleeing suspect. The suspect, later identified as 20-year-old San Pablo resident Jesus Paredes Rodriguez, was not hit.

The woman, who was hit in the thigh, was treated at San Francisco General Hospital and has been released, (SFPD Lt. Troy) Dangerfield said. The man, who was struck in the lower leg, was still in the hospital as of this afternoon. Both their injuries were described as non-lifethreatening.

Rule No. 4 – Be sure of your target and of what is beyond it. There is a reason for that rule and the two innocent bystanders who had an unexpected visit to SF General were the victims of this rule violation.

If a concealed carry holder had done this, he or she would be in jail charged with a felony. The officers in question, however, are on paid administrative leave and, let’s be frank, they probably will not only not be charged with a felony but will keep their jobs.

The whole incident brings to mind the proposed regulations by SF Sheriff Michael Hennessey for getting a carry permit. Those regulations are predicated on the gun prohibitionists’ favorite notion that police are “the only ones” to be trusted with a firearm since they are “trained” and thus they need to make it very hard for a “civilian” to obtain a permit. But why is it that CCW holders almost never shoot innocent bystanders but the same can’t be said for law enforcement?

Uncategorized

Lautenberg Amendment Strikes Again

September 18, 2011 by 10 Comments

Delmar Polite was asleep at home when someone kicked in his door at 2:30am early Monday morning. Fortunately, he had a .357 revolver. While he had never fired it in the 9 years that he owned it, he still had it when it was needed.

Scott Sexton of the Winston-Salem Journal takes up the story from here:

Frightened or not, Polite did what a lot of us would do. He grabbed his pistol and went downstairs to defend himself and his home. He got off a couple of rounds — Polite didn’t hit a blessed thing — but managed to ward off the home invaders.

Polite called police and, when they showed up, they confiscated his gun — standard practice, nothing out of the ordinary — until they finished their investigation. Thanks to a 13-year-old misdemeanor conviction, Polite might not get his gun back at all.

Polite was not perfect in his younger days as he had three misdemeanor convictions. Unfortunately, one of them was for Misdemeanor Assault on a Female in 1998.

According to the story, Polite had gotten into an argument with his then girlfriend which escalated into pushing and shoving. The police were called and he was arrested. When he went to court, he represented himself and was told that he’d get no jail time if he’d just plead guilty to the misdemeanor which he did. Nothing was ever mentioned about Federal gun laws and misdemeanor domestic violence convictions.

While much of the story deals with the question of whether or not Delmar Polite gets his gun back, I think the untold story is whether he will face Federal charges for even having the firearm in the first place. From a Fact Sheet on Federal domestic violence laws:

Possession of Firearm After Conviction of Misdemeanor Crime of Domestic Violence, 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(9)

As of September 30, 1996, it is illegal to possess a firearm after conviction of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. This prohibition applies to persons convicted of such misdemeanors at any time, even if the conviction occurred prior to the new law’s effective date. A qualifying misdemeanor domestic violence crime must have as an element the use or attempted use of physical force or the threatened use of a deadly weapon. For example, a conviction for a misdemeanor violation of a protection order will not qualify, even if the violation was committed by a violent act, if the statute does not require the use or attempted use of physical force or the threatened use of a deadly weapon. The U. S. Attorney’s Office can determine which misdemeanor convictions qualify.

In addition, the statute contains due process requirements regarding counsel and jury trials. Absent compliance with these due process requirements, the misdemeanor conviction will not qualify as a domestic violence conviction for purposes of Section 922(g)(9). Moreover, a person may be able to possess a firearm if the conviction has been expunged or set aside.

The maximum penalty for violation of Sect 922(g)(9) is 10 years.

As columnist Scott Sexton notes, it is never OK to get into a physical altercation with your spouse or girlfriend. That said, when is your debt to society considered paid?

“That follows you for the rest of your life,” Polite said….

Whether Polite should get his gun back isn’t an easy question. At a minimum, he shouldn’t be charged with having it. Perhaps the best prism to look through belongs to Delmar Polite and the terror he suffered Monday.

“I don’t know what would have happened if I didn’t have that gun,” he said.

And you know, I think Delmar Polite is right – what would happened if he didn’t have a firearm with which to protect himself from a home invasion. The supporters of the Lautenberg Amendment would say that he gave up that right when he pushed his girlfriend in 1998 but should such a conviction for domestic violence then become a death sentence 13 years later?

Uncategorized

Black Belt Nun

September 18, 2011 by

As anyone who attended a Catholic grammar school in the years gone by can attest, nuns were considered deadly with rulers. Now comes a story about a nun in North Carolina who is a black belt in karate.

Sister Joan Pearson works at Our Lady of Mercy Church in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. In one of those odd coincidences of fate, Joan was a couple of years ahead of me in high school. Her sister Mary was a friend of mine who graduated in my class. I vaguely remember Joan – now Sister Joan – as one of those all around nice girls who everyone liked.

Sister Joan says she got into karate for the “focus and awareness” she got from training. She was just awarded her first-degree black belt in August. As to what her fellow nuns think of her karate training, she says:

At times during her years of practice, Pearson has gotten some “giggles and eye rolls” from her fellow sisters when seen shadowboxing inside the church.

But that never bothered her.

“You may find that many nuns like to sew, knit or crotchet — I myself could never crochet,” she said, bristling at the thought. “But golly, you know what? I can do a great roundhouse kick!”

Uncategorized

And They Wonder Why Gun Owners Are Wary Of The Media

September 16, 2011 by 6 Comments

Today’s San Francisco Chronicle had a story about new lawsuits filed against the City of San Francisco. These lawsuits challenge a city requirement that handguns must be kept either in a locked container or have trigger lock and a city ban on the sale of hollow-point ammunition. With regard to the latter, reporter Rachel Gordon wrote:

The other, which has been on the books in various forms since 1994, prohibits the sale of hollow-point bullets and similar ammunition that fragments or explodes upon impact.

Hollow-point ammunition does not explode nor fragment upon impact. It opens up, becomes wider, and is designed to stop the bad guy without passing through and hurting an innocent bystander. That is why most police officers are issued such ammunition. The only ammunition that fragments upon impact is frangible ammunition which is designed that way to prevent pass throughs or ricochets at a shooting range. Even then, it only comes apart when it hits a hard object like a target backstop.

The only “exploding” ammo I’ve ever read about was in Frederick Forsyth’s Day of the Jackel where the assassin had special ammo made with a drop of mercury in a sealed bullet.

Jeez!