America rejoiced when the White House announced it would re-open for tours after cuts to funding from sequestration. But in a blatant display of irony, visitors to President Barack Obama’s home must show a government-issued photo ID to enter, but not to vote.
Tours of the White House resumed after a seven month hiatus, with the first official tour given to tourists yesterday. But for visitors looking to head inside 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., they must show valid, government-issued photo ID.
“All guests 18 years of age or older will be required to present a valid, government-issued photo identification … . All foreign nationals must present their passport,” it states on the White House’s ‘Tours & Events’ page.
This criterion is particularly ironic given the fact that the man living inside the White House adamantly opposes voters showing photo ID before heading the the polls.
“This administration believes it should be easier for eligible citizens to vote, to register and vote,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said in July. “We should not be imposing unnecessary obstacles or barriers to voter participation.”
But not so much for those looking to tour the taxpayer-funded White House.
The Obama administration, though, has struck back against these two states, filing lawsuits on the grounds that voter ID laws “disproportionately impact Hispanic and African-American voters.”
But don’t forget that ID if you want to tour the White House, America.
Rivrdog ’hoists ‘them’ on their own petar’.
Misprision of Felony
…or, 18 USC 4
Here is the citation:
Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
This offense, however, requires active concealment of a known felony rather than merely failing to report it.“
This is from the Wiki on this subject.
Now, if the United States government, which has a clear chain of authority, knows of cases of felonious entry (Illegal entry is not a felony, but committing ANY crime while illegally in the country makes it so), and they not only fail to actively prosecute and at least, deport those individuals which it DOES know about, THEN the same Government engages in actions intended to cover up and/or relieve those felons of their criminal responsibility, is the Government and it’s agents/actors criminally liable for Misprision of Felony?
More at the Rivrdog link, above.
Inquiring minds want to know…
Weird And Pissed Off shares with us a story he had to get from the BBC.
(So much for OUR media! – sorry Biff)
On Wednesday, BBC News reported the indefensible discovery that the D.C. Capitol Police’s SWAT team was ready to neutralize the Navy Yard mass shooting.
But, the highly trained and heavily armed, elite tactical group was, instead, ordered to stand down and leave the scene. The Capitol Police promised a full investigation.
Today, BBC News reported more disturbing information. No one has talked to the SWAT team members. Not even for the protocol debriefing. But, not only have members of the SWAT team not been contacted,the department “has installed a new leader”. Without explanation.
Now, I’m not paranoid (or am I?) but this kind of thing smacks of pushing a political agenda through allowing violence to continue.
In an unarmed, target-rich environment for the bad guy!
And, it makes me sick. And more paranoid.
Free North Carolina (via avordvet) shares with us an ARIZONA story, of statists versus freemen.
To press the point, a free man, legally carrying a pistol openly, tried to photograph a Phoenix federal courthouse.
Not of the freeman photographer, but of the authorities, who promptly dispatched police helicopters and ground personnel to stop the
terrorist attack legally-armed photographer from photographing a public building.
(visit the link above for the video and post)
Seriously, don’t they have better things to do? Like catching real bad guys? I can see watching, and perhaps even tracking such an individual for security intel, but confronting, attempting to disarm?
This used to be a relatively free State, at least when compared to places like Massachusetts.
Mike Vanderboegh of The Sipsey Street Irregulars and the USA TODAY actually agree on something!! (copied in it’s entirety – it’s THAT important. – Guffaw)
The FBI gave its informants permission to break the law at least 5,658 times in a single year, according to newly disclosed documents that show just how often the nation’s top law enforcement agency enlists criminals to help it battle crime.
The U.S. Justice Department ordered the FBI to begin tracking crimes by its informants more than a decade ago, after the agency admitted that its agents had allowed Boston mobster James “Whitey” Bulger to operate a brutal crime ring in exchange for information about the Mafia. The FBI submits that tally to top Justice Department officials each year, but has never before made it public.
Agents authorized 15 crimes a day, on average, including everything from buying and selling illegal drugs to bribing government officials and plotting robberies. FBI officials have said in the past that permitting their informants — who are often criminals themselves — to break the law is an indispensable, if sometimes distasteful, part of investigating criminal organizations.
FIFTEEN CRIMES A DAY? And that doesn’t include the ATF and DEA, as reported earlier by USA Today: Crimes by ATF and DEA informants not tracked by feds.
Tell me again how federal “law enforcement” agencies actually enforce the law rather than carry out an agenda?
(The crummy part is I know folks, past and present, who did (do) their duty honorably, and obey(ed) the law. This kind of stuff makes them just as sick as it does me, even more so. Because it’s the bureaucrats that make the policy decisions. Think Fast & Furious. – Guffaw)
As one of the commenters said, distasteful?, how about illegal?
Funny how this was considered state-of-the-art in 1961, with the exception of those Leatherslap folks @ Big Bear (Jeff Cooper, Jack Weaver et al).
Regardless, fun and informative to watch!
h/t Jad, pistol-forum, Todd G.
A recent solicitation from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) reveals that the agency is seeking a “massive” online database capable of pulling up individuals’ personal information, connections and associates.On March 28, ATF posted the notice on FedBizOpps.gov, entitled “Investigative System.” The solicitation was updated on April 5 with a few minor changes.The document says that the system will be utilized by staff “to provide rapid searches on various entities for example; names, telephone numbers, utility data and reverse phone look-ups, as a means to assist with investigations, and background research on people, assets and businesses.”The system is described as a “massive online data repository system that contains a wide variety of data sources both historically and current that can be utilized in support of investigations and backgrounds.”An overview of the solicitation states, in part:The investigative system will allow ATF to “obtain exact matches from partial source data searches such as, incomplete social security numbers, address, VIN numbers, etc.”
Wirecutter gets rather earthy in his response to this development. I shan’t quote him here. Not that I don’t have exactly the same feelings.
The ATF was formerly part of the United States Department of the Treasury, having been formed in 1886 as the “Revenue Laboratory” within the Treasury Department’s Bureau of Internal Revenue. The history of ATF can be subsequently traced to the time of the revenuers or “revenoors” and the Bureau of Prohibition, which was formed as a unit of the Bureau of Internal Revenue in 1920, was made an independent agency within the Treasury Department in 1927, was transferred to the Justice Department in 1930, and became, briefly, a division of the FBI in 1933.
In short, it was established for tax collection. After all, violating federal laws regarding cigarettes, booze and guns is bound to generate heavy fines and taxes.
It appears now they are trying to enlarge their purview, as all government agencies do, when it’s ‘gotta verify what your agency is doing is worth while’ time. Especially after Gunwalker/Fast & Furious.
And, of course, we’re looking at U.N. Arms Treaties, and another Assault Weapons Ban, and Lord knows what else.
As I mentioned in a previous post, they keep testing the fences…
How apropos, I was led here by wirecutter!
I LOVE History. Especially American. Especially Twentieth Century – post War era. Film(s) noir, depicting such a period. And stuff based on real events.
The Hat Squad was a loose team of L.A.P.D. detectives, roughly from the late 40s to the early 60s. Popular culture has used them in such films as The Hat Squad, Mullholland Falls, and L.A. Confidential. And Stephen J. Cannell (of The Rockford Files and about 20 other shows) even pegged a short-lived television show on them.
But the real Hat Squad was something much more than lauded in West Coast crime fiction. They were real men who lived by a code – not the code of Mulholland Falls, but not the police department service manual, either.
LOS ANGELES – In this city where everything and everyone can be reinvented, true crime has long become true drama.
The Los Angeles Police Department stars in both.
The LAPD Hat Squad of the 1940s and ’50s starred four detectives in crisp fedoras and matching suits costing two weeks’ pay.
Publicly revered, the squad became known for its more secretive duties, including getting rid of Eastern mobsters seeking to expand business. According to legend, the Hat Squad discouraged visiting gangsters by meeting them at the airport and beating the wanderlust out of them.
Two of the detectives later became judges. None was ever disciplined.
“They were so feared and respected that when we’d announce such-and-such a case had been turned over to the Hat Squad, many of the suspects in those cases would voluntarily give themselves up,” department veteran Dan Cooke, now dead, told a local newspaper in 1987.
Inevitably, a movie depicted the well-dressed quartet. In 1996′s “Mulholland Falls,” Nick Nolte played its leader. In an early scene, a bloodied don is about to be tossed from a canyon ledge.
“You can’t do that, this is America,” the gangster squeaks.
“This isn’t America, Jack,” says Nolte. “This is L.A.”
And here, fact and fiction continuously blend.
I don’t think anyone had done a definitive work on them. Perhaps they are afraid. Just like no one will touch the FBI’s Cointelpro program with any depth. Funny, they’ll do the NSA’s MK Ultra…?
We need to look at the triumph and tribulations of our police past to make certain history doesn’t repeat itself on a
national federal scale.
Perhaps it already has.
Alphecca tells us, that yet again, pesky NannyStater Fascist NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg is back at it!
The leftist press — NBC, ABC, CBS, NPR, NY Times, et al — love to complain if the Koch brothers donate to or fund money to conservative causes. They conveniently ignore the millions that George Soros spends on liberal ones.
And, when the NRA flexes its money lobbying for what its members wants it to, gun rights, the same liberal press expresses outrage. Will they do the same when NYC Mayor Michael Blowhard outspends them (this, after just spending other millions in support of anti-gun candidates around the country in recent state elections) on anti-gun, gun control advertising? That was a rhetorical question:
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has announced a new $12 million television ad campaign that will push senators in key states to back gun control efforts, including comprehensive background checks.
The Right To Be Left Alone used to be one of the many rights affirmed (not granted) by the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Apparently, Mayor Bloomberg is not aware of this legal precedent. Of course, neither is the current federal government. (see Obamacare)
…or ‘just a little off’?
The Liberty Sphere discusses the move by the administration (and it’s sycophants) to more loosely define ‘mental illness’. Not to get more folks in need dependent on the government.
But to get them declared a ‘prohibited possessor’ under federal law, with regard to firearms possession and ownership.
When Fidel Castro bullied his way into power in Cuba five decades ago, the west began to see, up close and personal, the manner in which totalitarian governments played fast and loose with the term “mentally ill.” Political dissidents were routinely rounded up, and if they were not murdered in cold blood, they were deemed insane, taken to state-run mental facilities, and given a series of electric shock treatments that rendered them imbeciles for all intents and purposes.
In like manner, the American government under Barack Obama and Democrats who run the U.S. Senate, and their allies in ultra-liberal state governments such California, are using the term “mentally ill” in a haphazard fashion, allowing them to confiscate guns.
And you don’t even have to be a patient. Merely being a family member of such a person is enough for the American Gestapo squads to seize your firearms. This news report from Bloomberg provides the details.
h/t Nat’l Conservative Examiner