Article printed from WND: http://www.wnd.com
URL to original article: http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/obama-scheme-gives-democrats-power-for-all-time
A conservative congressman says the murder of a San Francisco woman by an illegal immigrant deported five times is a microcosm of the border security dereliction of the Obama administration and liberal city leaders choosing to reward criminal behavior. Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, also addressed the fierce debate within the Republican presidential field, taking care to avoid characterizing any candidate but leaving no doubt what he thinks the GOP’s policy position ought to be. The immigration debate took on a more personal dimension over Independence Day weekend, as 32-year-old Kate Steinle was randomly murdered by 45-year-old Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez. The killer, who has since confessed, has been convicted of seven felonies and deported five separate times. Gohmert said similar stories have played out far too often as the Obama administration effectively waves illegals across the border.
“It’s very easy to explain when you have a president who does not believe in the rule of law, who has pandered to people who are illegally in the country,” Gohmert said in an interview with WND and Radio America. “All we can figure is, he thinks that if they can just get people who are illegally the right to vote before they understand the responsibilities of trying to keep a democratic republic, then it will give the Democrats all power for all time.”
According to Gohmert, the Steinle murder is hardly an isolated incident. He said the House Judiciary Committee, of which he is a member, received very disturbing numbers from Immigration and Customs Enforcement on the extent of violent crimes committed by illegal immigrants in Fiscal Year 2014 alone. “These individuals have been convicted of 79,059 crimes, including 175 homicides, 373 sexual assaults, 186 kidnappings (and) 14,014 impaired driving offenses. It just goes on and on. This is making America less safe,” he said, noting both the federal government and city governments must stop rewarding criminals.
Listen to the WND/Radio America interview with Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas:
“If the president’s going to protect America, if our city leaders are going to protect America, the cities can’t be this haven for people who broke the law and would kill a beautiful young lady like we had in San Francisco,” Gohmert said. “And the federal government has got to stop encouraging illegal immigration.”
The congressman said the Steinle murder struck close to home for him, and he said the policy of San Francisco and other “sanctuary cities” needs to be revisited right away. “Having three daughters, I’m particularly sensitive to these things. But to have her shot so senselessly, randomly, right there in front of her parents, would never have happened if San Francisco were not a city that just welcomed people who violated our immigration laws. It is a sanctuary city,” said Gohmert, meaning San Francisco and other cities have laws refusing to hold people whose only known offense is coming to the U.S. illegally.
Lopez-Sanchez has seven felonies on his record. San Francisco and the federal government are now engaged in a blame game over which is responsible for the killer being loose in the first place. The federal government asserts Lopez-Sanchez was in custody and about to be deported for a sixth time when he was handed over to the city to face a drug charge and should never have been released when those charges were dropped. San Francisco officials say it was the federal government’s job to have a warrant ready to go when the drug case concluded.
Gohmert said illegal aliens create trouble for law-abiding citizens, even when there is no violent crime involved. He contends a recent account from a teenage constituent is a perfect example. “She and her single mom were trying to make ends meet. An illegal alien hit her car,” he said. “He had no driver’s license, no insurance. He was allowed to drive off in his car. Hers was totaled. It just made things crazy for these poor girls. It’s just outrageous that this president would not be more sympathetic to the plight of Americans dealing with crime in America.”
Just as maddening to Gohmert as what he sees as the Obama administration refusing to enforce immigration law is the president’s insistence that border security is operating at record efficiency. “It may just be because our president doesn’t know enough about our history,” he said. “I’m sure they didn’t teach it in Indonesia, but the fact is, when he says nobody has done more to secure the border than I have, or words to that effect, it’s simply not true.”
The congressman said the border was far more secure after President Woodrow Wilson (not a favorite of Gohmert’s) effectively sealed the border after Mexican revolutionary Pancho Villa conducted numerous murderous raids into the United States. On Wilson’s orders, thousands of forces clamped down on the southern border. “The border was secure,” Gohmert said. “Nobody came in unless we wanted them to.
“This president could do more. Of course, you remember (former Homeland Security Secretary) Janet Napolitano just announced one day, ‘Hey, the four billion dollars or so that was appropriated by Congress for virtual fence? I’m not going to do that. I’m going to spend the money elsewhere.’ This administration not only encourages people to violate our immigration law but it violates the laws regularly themselves.”
The killing of Kate Steinle poured rhetorical gasoline onto an already combustible debate within the 2016 Republican presidential field over the issue of illegal immigration.
Billionaire real-estate developer Donald Trump immediate stirred the pot in announcing his White House bid. “[Mexico is] sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists, and some I assume are good people,” said Trump on June 16.
Several other GOP hopefuls have denounced Trump both for his language and for his alleged inaccuracy. “He’s doing this to inflame and to incite and to draw attention, which seems to be his organizing principle of his campaign,” said former Gov. Jeb Bush, R-Fla. “He doesn’t represent the Republican Party or its values.”
Gohmert is not wading into the back-and-forth between candidates, but he said he trusts the assessment of the U.S. Border Patrol, and its assessment is sobering. “Many of them have told me there is not a single mile of the U.S.-Mexico border that is not under the auspices of some drug lord. And you don’t cross that border into the United States without permission from that drug lord. If you do, they’ll find you in the United States and kill you,” said Gohmert, who added that many illegals come across and claim they are refugees from deadly gang violence in their home countries.
After a brief interrogation, it is usually discovered that gangs are not the reason for their illegal migration but the means for shuttling them across the border.
The congressman said the proper approach for Republicans should be obvious. First, he said there should be nothing but admiration for Hispanic families who come here legally, since they value the intact family as high as this country did in the past. “It’s a generalization, but it’s a pretty good generalization that Hispanics love God, are devoted to God, love family, are devoted to family and they have a hard work ethic,” Gohmert said. “Those are the kind of things that made America great. We need more of that. We need more of what the Hispanic can bring before we co-opt it and teach them other ways.” However, he said, that admiration has to be tempered by a strict adherence to the law. “They have to come in legally,” he said. “To just disregard the rule of the law makes us like the countries in central America or Mexico that they’re fleeing.”
Opposition to legal status or even a pathway to citizenship for those illegally in the U.S. has long been described as unrealistic, and now Republicans and Democrats accuse people who hold that position of being hateful or even racist. Gohmert flatly rejects the label. “It’s ridiculous to say it’s racist if you want people who commit crimes to be punished for those crimes,” he said. “Having been a former felony judge, many times people accused me of being mean, but I followed the law. I was fair across the board, and that’s what we have to do. It’s part of the price of maintaining this democratic republic, as (Benjamin) Franklin said, if we want to keep it.”
“The politically-appointed class within the U.S. Border Patrol and in the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency are cooking the books to make it appear that illegal immigration is decreasing,” Moran claimed.
“This all started when Janet Napolitano said the border was safer than it’s ever been. People were told to get in line, and they’ve done a number of tricks to limit our effectiveness and our ability to accurately determine how many people are illegally entering the US, so that the numbers look ‘right,’” he said.
Vice President Moran did not stop there. He offered specific insights into how the bureaucrats from the Department of Homeland Security have trickled down into the various agencies under their control: “Our core duties have been restricted,” he said. “Most illegal aliens and smugglers do not have vehicles and have historically attempted to use public transportation to get from the border into the interior of the U.S., and our best results in Border Patrol have come from transportation checks, where we check buses and the like.”
“It was late 2011 or early 2012 when the leadership in U.S. Border Patrol put out a specific memo declaring that we could no longer check buses unless we had specific actionable intelligence indicating illegal aliens would be on certain avenues of transportation,” Moran explained. “Even though this was one of the most productive ways for us, they said Border Patrol was no longer allowed to do the checks.”
“The numbers are down because they are not allowing us to check the places where we know illegal aliens are,” he said.
Moran provided other examples, such as the leadership in Border Patrol actually altering the manner in which they record data. “Each station has an intel officer, they go out and they collect info on where people are crossing and how many. We look for footprints and such, the entire length of the border.”
“If we found footprints for 50 people, we would put that in the intel report and the numbers would be recorded,” he said. “Now if we put that number in, they reduce the number to thirty. They say things like ‘How do you know they didn’t get caught later?’ They try to cook the books to make it look like we are being more effective and less people are coming here.”
“Some of our advanced surveillance reveals that we are about 45% effective, meaning we are not even catching half of the illegal aliens or drug smugglers who enter our nation,” Moran claimed. “Now the politically-appointed leadership of U.S. Border Patrol and of U.S. Customs and Border Protection [BP’s parent agency] have effectively grounded that system of surveillance after the numbers did not match what their public numbers were.” He added that there have also been numerous sensors the bureaucrats have ordered turned off.
The shocking assertions from the National Border Patrol Council come just days after they released an explosive press release directed at their parent agency, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency. The release included assertions that Border Patrol agents’ lives were being placed in jeopardy in order to appease “fringe” groups; that the U.S. Border Patrol and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency were keeping information from the public about the criminal histories of illegal aliens who make accusations against U.S. Border Patrol agents; and that the federal government was refusing to prosecute violent illegal aliens who attack U.S. law enforcement officers.
Here’s Senator John McCain BEFORE his last election.
We’ve all heard about how “border security” is included in the latest amnesty bill that McCain and the Gang of Eight are pushing. Let’s be clear about security, a fence is critical to stopping the flow of illegal aliens and drugs. Yesterday, we looked at pictures of what passes for “fence” on the border between Mexico and Arizona. A real fence looks like this, it’s 15 feet high buried in six feet of concrete, is made of steel posts and has a cap on the top to deter climbers.
Actually, this type of fence occupies just a few paltry miles of the border and it works quite well in those few paltry miles. What actually passes for “fence” when the politicians talk about it looks more like this, minus the cute girl who is about five foot five.
As you might guess, this one might keep an SUV out of the country but it doesn’t even begin to slow down somebody on foot even if they’re carrying a backpack with eighty pounds of drugs.
Add to that outrage the fact that huge sections of the border don’t even have that. There’s at least one Indian tribe that has land on the border and because they’re a “sovereign nation” they don’t allow the US government to erect a barrier. Then there are some areas that are controlled by the US Department of the Interior and for environmental reasons no barriers are allowed. As a matter of fact the US Border Patrol is not even allowed to patrol those areas without permission from Interior 30 days in advance.
But never fear, Janet Napolitano, who will be the person the proposed legislation allows to declare the border is secure, has assured us border security has never been better…
“Now, I often hear the argument that before reform can move forward, we must first secure our borders. But too often, the border-security-first refrain simply serves as an excuse for failing to address the underlying problems,” Napolitano told the Senate Judiciary Committee today at a hearing on immigration.
“It also ignores the significant progress and efforts that we have undertaken over the past four years. Our borders have, in fact, never been stronger.”…
She said the results of 1986 amnesty wouldn’t happen again because “immigration enforcement now is light years away from what it was.”
“I think in 1986 there were a couple of miles of fence along the entire southern border and it was basically chain-link fence,”
I don’t think I need to comment much on the rank stupidity of those claims, the pictures above pretty well deconstruct them.
The Gang of Eight is also assuring us that they’ve built a clause into the legislation that requires that 90% of border crossers are apprehended before amnesty is doled out. Well, they got gamed because there is actually no link between amnesty and border security, the legislation treats them as mutually exclusive. And as to assurances that “…enforcement is light years away from what it was…” we’ve got some new data.
The U.S. Border Patrol has caught a fraction of the border crossers spotted by a sophisticated sensor mounted on unmanned spy aircraft and flown over remote stretches of desert, casting doubts on claims that the area is more secure than ever, according to documents obtained by the Center for Investigative Reporting.
The border crossers were spotted with a new, all-seeing radar system developed for use in the Afghanistan War and patrolling above the U.S.-Mexico border in parts of Arizona since March 2012. The system can reveal every man, woman and child under its gaze from a height of about 25,000 feet.
Between October and December, records show, the remotely operated aircraft detected 7,333 border crossers during its Arizona missions. Border Patrol agents, however, reported 410 apprehensions during that time, according to an internal agency report. The sensor was credited with providing surveillance that led to 52 arrests and 15,135 pounds of seized marijuana.
I have an engineering degree from a top university. I learned how to do math but this problem really only requires 2nd grade arithmetic. Or in today’s schools, maybe high school arithmetic.
If I divide 410 by 7,333 (that would be number caught by number of crossers) I get 5.59%. I’m guessing that in whatever arithmetic is in use today that 5.59% is still a whole lot less than 90%. So, we’re a tad short of our goal. But we’re going ahead with amnesty anyway.
I’ve got $100 I’m willing to wager on whether the government even attempts to do better than six percent.
Bottom line, we don’t have a fence on the vast majority of the border and there is no plan to build one.
Napolitano, a former Arizona governor, noted a U.S. Border Patrol study determined a fence makes sense on 653 miles of the 2,000-mile southern border and so far some sort of fencing is up on 652 of those miles.
Get the idea? It’s way past time to contact your Senators and your Representative. Click the button and you can get their telephone numbers and you can send them faxes. Let them know that it’s way past time to put security first and this bill doesn’t even address security in any meaningful way.
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has repeatedly claimed that the border is more secure than ever, but when DHS officials were pressed at a recent Homeland Security Committee hearing to demonstrate how this progress has been measured, they had no verifiable metrics to support their claims.
In fact, Napolitano has stopped using the widely accepted term of “operational control.” This was not because they had achieved it — it was precisely the opposite.
In fact, the southern border makes Chicago and Detroit look like an old folks home.
Part of the problem is that very few people actually know what the border looks like. We hear lots of talk about “the fence” and politicians like John McCain love to be seen standing in front of the fence to give you the idea that the border is fenced and secure. It’s not.
This is a fifteen foot post fence with a steel box on the top. This is a secure fence that John McCain would like to stand in front of.
That type of fence is on less than 10% of the border. What actually passes for fencing is actually a vehicle barrier.
The cute girl is five feet five and the greenery is Mexico. Welcome to what border security looks like. It’s difficult to see the footprints in the dirt on the other side of the barrier, but there are paths coming over the side of the ditch that have obviously been used thousands of times and the footprints are all headed north.
The land on the south side of the vehicle barrier, which was once a ranch owned by John Wayne, is all owned by the Mexican drug cartels for as far as you can see. This is a highway from Mexico into Arizona that illegal aliens and drugs flow over daily just like commuters into LA on Interstate 5.
You don’t hear anything about the increase in traffic that occurred once President Obama announced his plans for amnesty last year. He made the announcement on August 15 and south of Tucson, which is one of three “major” border crossing areas, Border Patrol was apprehending about 10 people per day. By October 31 that was up to 90 per day as shown on this chart from American Border Patrol.
OK Mike, the border isn’t secure, so what? Well, here’s the desert about 30 miles outside of Phoenix. These pictures were taken about a mile from both Interstate 8 and 10, the major highways in Arizona.
What you see here is trash from traffickers. The burlap and the backpacks are filled with drugs on the Mexican side of the border and loaded onto the backs of “undocumented workers” who make the trek north in search of a better life for their family. Or something. This is not an isolated site, there are literally hundreds of them along the dirt road that is within sight of Interstate 8.
Here’s what happens when the “undocumented workers” get to the drop site. See video @http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=verK_92IKjU&feature=player_embedded
Remember, Janet Napolitano thinks the border is secure. And John McCain and his Gang of Eight buddies are insisting that there won’t be any “amnesty” until Homeland Security (an oxymoron if there ever was one) certifies that the border is “secure.” My guess is that will take about a month.
Just in case you still want to think that the federal government is actually doing anything to secure the border, given the billions of dollars they’ve spent in the last few years, here is a “fence” at Naco, Arizona, sorry for the glare…
This fence is about eight feet high and is nothing but corrugated metal bolted to steel fence posts. There are any number of places where the metal has been cut with a saw or where someone has dug under it. The typical repair is a patch over the cut and large rocks in the tunnels under the fence.
Not 50 feet away from that mess sits steel posts for a 15 foot fence that would actually secure the areas. These fences are buried in six feet of concrete and have barriers on the top. These posts have been laying there for as long as anybody can remember and there is no plan to actually do anything but store them.
And while we’re talking about your tax money at work, the folks from Arizona Project who put this tour together took us by three Border Patrol offices and one highway checkpoint. There are literally hundreds of Border Patrol vehicles – all GM SUVs – parked at each location. There are more vehicles than officers to drive them. Remember that the next time you year GM is selling lots of cars.
We need to secure our border, it’s a basic function of the federal government. The immigration bill that the Gang of Eight put together in secret and is trying to ram through the US Senate will not do the job. It will leave the border open and grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens.
Let your Congressman and your Senators know you want the border secured before we even talk about immigration policy.
As Homeland Security is focusing on Christians, as Doug Giles expounds on in his article displayed below, Two bombs go off in Boston killing and wounding American Citizens. Feeling safe? – Jerry Broussard
By Doug Giles /http://clashdaily.com/2013/04/i-went-to-bed-a-christian-and-woke-up-a-terrorist/
According to the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security, evangelical Christians are now a national security threat. I’m talkin’ at the top of the list folks. As Gomer Pyle used to say, “Surprise, Surprise, Surprise” eh, Christians?
Under the New Rules enacted by these agencies under this administration’s tutelage the following acts are now to cause red flags of “terrorism” to fly, alerting cops and military personnel to a new group[s] which could start blowing crap up like the other group that we can no longer speak the truth about.
So, herewith, I guess, are some of the characteristics of the “newfangled” terrorists in the United States of Statism.
· If you enjoy singing How Great Thou Art and Amazing Grace – you might be a terrorist. · If you say “bless their heart” after you hear that someone did something really, really stupid – you might be a terrorist.
· If you believe Jeremiah was a prophet and not a bullfrog – you might be a terrorist.
· If you feel obligated to say you’ll pray for someone after you’ve gossiped about them – you might be a terrorist.
· If you watched The Bible on the History Channel and thought it was badass – you might be a terrorist.
· If you believe it’s wrong and ungodly to hijack airplanes and jam them into skyscrapers full of innocent people – then you might be a terrorist.
· If you think Billy Graham has been a great gift to our nation – you might be a terrorist.
· If you celebrate Thanksgiving, Christmas and Easter – you might be a terrorist.
· If you made the day you got saved your birthday on your Facebook page verses the day you actually popped out of your mama’s bottom – you might be a terrorist.
· If you give money towards the preaching of the gospel and to works of charity – you might be a terrorist.
· If you love your neighbor as yourself – you might be a terrorist.
· If you recognize, appreciate and wish to pass on to the next generation America’s godly heritage – you might be a terrorist.
· If you like the Declaration of Independence, our Constitution and the Bill of Rights – you might be terrorist.
· If you have Jesus Take the Wheel on your iPod – you might be a terrorist.
· If as a single man, you have told a homely single lady that, “all you’re looking for is a godly woman and that you don’t care that she’s not attractive.” – you might be a terrorist.
· If you believe Jesus is Lord and not the state – you might be a terrorist.
· If you raise your kids to be productive, independent and righteous kids who love God and our country and not be narcissistic entitlement hookers – you might be a terrorist.
· If you believe love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs and does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth – you might be a terrorist.
· If you believe the Golden Rule is a pretty legit tenet to live by – you might be a terrorist.
· If you have a fish sticker on your mini van – you might be a terrorist.
· If you take umbrage that you would get pitched as a terrorist because all of the aforementioned Christian stuff – well … you might be a terrorist.
Yes my brethren, your love for God and country has caused thou to be deemed a menace to our national progress at least as the Leftists’ deem progress. Congratulations.
On April 4th 2013 we found out that an Army Reserve Training Brief put Evangelicals on the top of the danger list as religious extremists. They put us sola fide boys and girls above Al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. To these wizards, Billy and his son Franklin Graham are way scarier than Khalid Sheik Mohammed and his ubiquitous murderous ilk.
Oh, I almost forgot. This brief also crapped on Catholics and Jews. Yes, you too are terror threats to our country according to someone somewhere inside the beltway. I wonder who would be churning out such nonsense like this? Hmmm.
Indeed, according to “them” we must forget the fact that it’s been nutty Muslims that have terrorized us for the last couple of decades and that it’s been radical leftists that have aggressively eroded our constitutional liberties. Parts of our armed forces and police departments have been told to just white all that stuff out and believe that it’s guys like Chuck Norris who are the real hazard that our cops and our military need to be concerned about.
Welcome to the jungle.
These are trying times. Never in the history of this country have we been so weakened and polarized by what many view as deliberate government policy. Now anti-gunners in the U.S. Congress, the Obama administration, and legislatures across the country are seeking to exploit the Newtown tragedy to promote their “gun control” agenda that envisions federal, universal background checks on gun purchases, and that could lead to gun registration and confiscation.
At the same time, the increasing militarization of law enforcement, most visibly demonstrated by the growing use of massive, SWAT-type raids on businesses and individuals, sometimes with federal involvement or authorization, is heightening concerns that this country is moving toward a police state.
Mountain Pure SWAT Raid: The Movie
Mountain Pure Water, LLC is headquartered on Interstate 30 just outside the town of Little Rock, Arkansas. The company manufactures and distributes beverage containers, spring water, fruit drinks, and teas. In January 2012, about 50 federal agents, led by Small Business Administration (SBA) Office of Inspector General (OIG) Special Agent Cynthia Roberts and IRS Special Agent Bobbi Spradlin, swooped in, guns drawn. Without explanation they shut down plant operations, herded employees into the cafeteria, and confined them to the room for hours. They could not so much as use the bathroom without police escort. Cell phones were confiscated and all Internet and company phones were disabled.
Plant Manager Court Stacks was at his desk when police burst through his office door, guns drawn and pointed at him—a thoroughly unprofessional violation of basic firearms discipline in this circumstance, and the cause of numerous accidental SWAT killings.
According to Mountain Pure CEO John Stacks, the search warrant was related to questions about an SBA loan he secured through the Federal Emergency Management Agency to recover tornado losses to his home, warehouse, and associated equipment. Mr. Stacks says the SBA apparently doesn’t believe that assets listed as damaged in the storm were actually damaged.
The search warrant was extremely vague and some agents’ actions may have been illegal, according to company attorney, Timothy Dudley. Comptroller Jerry Miller was taken to a private room and interrogated for over three hours by SBA Special Agent Cynthia Roberts, the raid leader. He requested an attorney and was told “That ain’t gonna happen.” According to Miller, the SBA unilaterally changed the terms of Stacks’ loan. He says he asked Roberts what gave the SBA authority to do that, and she responded, “We’re the federal government, we can do what we want, when we want, and there is nothing you can do about it.” Miller said during the raid Roberts “strutted around the place like she was Napoleon.”
Stacks said the company has had three IRS audits in the past three years, including one following the raid, with no problems. The SBA has still not filed any charges, continues to stonewall about the raid’s purpose, and refuses to release most of the property seized during the raid.
Quality Assurance Director Katy Depriest, who doubles as the company crisis manager, described agents’ “Gestapo tactics.” She added that they confiscated CDs of college course work and educational materials for a class she had been taking that resulted in her flunking the course. Those materials have not yet been returned.
Attempts were made to contact Ms. Roberts for this article, but she is no longer employed by the SBA. Questions were directed to the Little Rock, Arkansas U.S. Attorney’s office. The USA’s public affairs officer had no comment; however they have convened a grand jury to evaluate the case.
Because law enforcement refused repeated requests to respond for this article, we have only Mountain Pure’s side of the story, but they make a compelling case:
The video includes testimony from Henry Juszkiewicz, CEO of famed Gibson Guitar Corp., which suffered two such raids, and another raid target, Duncan Outdoors Inc. The video does not attempt to establish anyone’s guilt or innocence, but rather highlights law enforcement’s heavy-handed tactics in executing SWAT-style search warrants against legitimate businesses. Gibson has settled with the Justice Department in a case fraught with legal ambiguities, while Duncan has been indicted for violations of currency transaction reporting requirements.
Mr. Stacks claims he has gotten calls from many companies that have suffered similar raids, but they are afraid to speak out. Here are a few examples that have made national news:
War on Small Business?
In 2006, the IRS announced it would shift its focus to audit more small businesses. IRS data on tax audits seems to bear this out. Between the first and second half of the last decade, the audit coverage rate on businesses with assets between $10 and $50 million increased by 42 percent. Between 2001 and 2005 an annual average of 13,549 returns were audited for businesses with assets less than $10 million. Between 2006 and 2011, the average was 19,289, an increase of over 42 percent (pdf).
This has paid off in increased enforcement revenues, but are massive SWAT raids an essential part of this new strategy? In addition to the potential dangers and the outrage of having company employees treated like drug dealers or terrorists, the cost of these raids is staggering. Agents told Mountain Pure employees they had flown in from all over the country.
The Sharpsburg Raid
Sharpsburg, Maryland, population 706, is a quiet little town bordering the Antietam National Battlefield in rural Washington County. On Thursday, November 29, 2012 at about 12:30 pm, the quiet was shattered by an invasion of over 150 Maryland State Police (MSP), FBI, State Fire Marshal’s bomb squad, and County SWAT teams, complete with two police helicopters, two Bearcat “special response” vehicles, mobile command posts, snipers, police dogs, bomb disposal truck, bomb sniffing robots, and a huge excavator. They even brought in food trucks.
A heavily armed MSP Special Tactical Assault Team Element (STATE) executed a no-knock search warrant, smashing through the reportedly unlocked door with a battering ram. They worked until after 7:30 p.m., ransacking a modest, 20 ft. by 60 ft. single-family home for weapons, and searching for its owner, one Terry Porter. For hours, neighbors were left worrying and wondering, while countless police blanketed the area.
Local resident Tim Franquist described the scene:
“The event, or siege as we are calling it, involved convoys of police speeding to the area, two helicopters, armored vehicles, command centers, countless police cruisers and officers. They blocked off the roads and commandeered a campground as their staging area.”
Terry Porter is married with three children, has lived in the town all of his life, and owns a modest welding business. He is also a prepper. His preparations include an underground bunker, buried food supplies, and surveillance cameras. Porter really doesn’t like Obama, and tells anyone who will listen.
Unfortunately, one listener was an undercover officer for the MSP. The police had become interested in Porter through an anonymous caller who claimed that Porter “had been getting crazier and crazier…” and that he had “10 to 15 machine gun-style weapons, six handguns and up to 10,000 rounds of ammunition…” The MSP performed a background check and discovered Porter had a 20-year-old charge for aiding marijuana distribution, a disqualification for firearms ownership.
MSP detailed an officer to visit Porter’s shop on November 16th posing as a customer. The officer said Porter “openly admitted to being a prepper.” Not a crime. Porter also allegedly claimed to have a Saiga shotgun, and was willing to use it “when people show up unannounced.” Based on the Russian AK-47 design, some Saiga variants are fully automatic. On November 27th MSP obtained a search warrant.
Two days later they appeared at Porter’s door but could not find him. Porter later disclosed he “left out the back door.” Where he went has not been disclosed. However, local blogger Ann Corcoran, who lives nearby and followed the issue closely, claims he hid out in fear for his life. Given highly publicized, accidental shootings involving SWAT teams and the overwhelming force present, that’s a reasonable assumption.
The following day Porter turned himself in and took the police through his property. The raid produced a total of four shotguns, a 30-30-caliber hunting rifle and two .22-caliber rifles. He was charged with firearms possession violations and released on a $75,000 bond.
The raid was one of the largest in recent U.S. history, twice the size of the 1993 Branch Davidian raid in Waco, Texas, which initially involved 76 ATF agents. It almost rivaled the recent 200-strong statewide manhunt for California cop-killing cop, Christopher Dorner. Yet only a few local stories emerged and those presented a hysterical portrait of Porter while largely underreporting the police presence.
Why the Raid?
The MSP did not notify town officials or Washington County Sheriff Douglas Mullendore, who learned of the raid after it began, when they requested the use of his SWAT Team and Bearcat. The MSP also set up a command center at a campground within the national park without notifying the Park Police. Bills have since been introduced in the Maryland legislature by Washington County Delegate Neil Parrott (HB 0219) and State Senator Chris Shank (SB 0259) to require notification of local law enforcement before any outside agency serves a warrant.
A meeting following the raid attracted 60 concerned Sharpsburg citizens and leaders. Sharpsburg Vice Mayor Bryan Gabriel characterized the raid as “overwhelming,” and said it “could have put a lot of people at risk.” Erin Moshier, a citizen who attended the meeting added, “We all felt there was excessive force involved, and we felt that a member of our community was victimized and we wanted to get to the bottom of it and get some answers.” Both Gabriel and Sheriff Mullendore have issued statements of support for Porter, who they know personally. Citizens created a “Friends for Terry” website to help with his legal costs.
When asked why the police did not simply detain Porter in town or at a traffic stop, MSP Hagerstown Barracks Commander, Lt. Thomas Woodward said the police only had a property search warrant and had no authority to arrest Porter. However police do have authority to “detain the property owner for 24 hours” when executing a search warrant, so Porter could have been intercepted elsewhere, but they chose to execute that authority as part of the raid.
Lt. Woodward said that the state police have a good working relationship with Sheriff Mullendore. If that is the case, why didn’t they consult the sheriff first? If Porter were really that dangerous wouldn’t it be helpful to get more information from a trusted source better acquainted with him? Mullendore said they usually do give notice. Reportedly several state police who personally know Porter reside in Sharpsburg. Why were they not consulted?
Does the MSP detail SWAT automatically for gun search warrants? Some other police forces do. For example, in one fatal Florida SWAT shooting, a 21-man SWAT team was called in merely because the target had a concealed-carry permit. Are SWAT raids to become the order of the day for gun owners?
If Mr. Porter is indeed adjudicated a felon in possession of firearms, then he was in violation of the law. He didn’t help his case by bragging to the undercover officer about his doomsday preparations, especially the Saiga—which turned out to be nonexistent.
There is nothing wrong with being prepared, or even describing the actions you might take in a hypothetical “doomsday” situation, but in fairness to police, with all the lunatics coming out of the woodwork these days, and the heightened atmosphere of mutual distrust between law enforcement and citizens, the MSP might be excused for presuming the worst. But 150 police?
Recent events such as the kidnapping/bunker standoff in Alabama, and cop-killer Dorner, provide apt examples. Police never know what to expect. Still, in this case at least, it seems a little more investigation and consultation with local authorities could have resolved this issue quietly and with much less risk and cost.
Cost of the Operation
Neither the FBI nor the MSP have publicly disclosed how many of their officers were involved in the raid. However, Senator Shank and Delegate Parrott were told in a meeting with top MSP officials that the total, including federal, state, and local police, exceeded 150. From public information requests we know that the Washington County Special Response Team (SRT) sent 17, including four snipers, two medics, and their Bearcat driver. Only two of these actually participated, the driver and a sniper who accompanied him.
The FBI personnel were training nearby and when their assistance was requested, many, if not all, chose to participate. A witness on the scene guessed there were approximately 40 officers at the campground where the FBI staged. If we assume a total of 150, that would leave 93 MSP. The following table, based on police salaries gleaned from public sources provides a rough estimate of the personnel cost for this operation.
The MSP argued that only variable costs—those directly related to the operation—are relevant. By this logic, the operation cost very little, as salaries and other fixed costs are incurred anyway. But the personnel and resources involved would otherwise have been engaged elsewhere: tracking down criminals, enforcing other laws, and assisting in emergencies. There are clearly other, potentially more beneficial activities they could not simultaneously perform. This is called opportunity cost and must be considered.
This raid cost approximately $11,000 per hour, which dramatically illustrates one reason government spending is so wildly out of control. If agency managers considered the true cost of their decisions, they might work harder to prioritize their activities and not waste valuable resources on errands of questionable value.
High visibility events like the Sharpsburg raid present a one-sided picture of police as out-of-control, wasting time on seeming trifles. But their daily efforts, which go largely unreported, paint a much more balanced picture. For example, the MSP Gang Enforcement Unit has aggressively investigated violent street gangs, one of the largest sources of gun violence.
Between 2010 and 2012 alone, the Gang Unit made 621 gang arrests and seized 94 firearms. This does not include their extensive work with multi-agency task forces. Here, they have participated in successful operations against such violent gangs as the Crips & Bloods, Wise Guyz, B-6, the Black Guerrilla Family, Juggalos, the Dead Man Incorporated crime syndicate, and others, and have brought many of these offenders to justice.
Militarization of Police
The SWAT concept was popularized by Los Angeles Police Chief Darryl Gates in the late 1960s in response to large-scale incidents for which the police were ill-prepared. But the use of SWAT teams has since exploded. Massive SWAT raids using military-style equipment are becoming routine methods for executing search warrants. One study estimates 40,000 such raids per year nationwide:
“These increasingly frequent raids… are needlessly subjecting nonviolent drug offenders, bystanders, and wrongly targeted civilians to the terror of having their homes invaded while they’re sleeping, usually by teams of heavily armed paramilitary units dressed not as police officers but as soldiers.”
John W. Whitehead writes in the Huffington Post, that “it appears to have less to do with increases in violent crime and more to do with law enforcement bureaucracy and a police state mentality.”
The ACLU recently announced its intention to investigate the militarization of law enforcement. Ironically, despite the perception of heightened gun violence due to incidents like Newtown, ACLU points out that both crime rates and law enforcement gun deaths have been declining for decades (see chart).
Yet police forces are becoming increasingly militarized due to huge subsidies provided by the federal government:
“Through its little-known “1033 program,” the Department of Defense gave away nearly $500 million worth of leftover military gear to law enforcement in fiscal year 2011… The surplus equipment includes grenade launchers, helicopters, military robots, M-16 assault rifles and armored vehicles… Orders in fiscal year 2012 are up 400 percent over the same period in 2011…”
Congress created this provision in 1997 for drug and anti-terrorism efforts. It has since provided over 17,000 agencies $2.6 billion worth of equipment at no charge. One local agency now owns an amphibious tank, while another obtained a machine-gun-equipped APC.
Additionally, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) grants have allowed state and local agencies nationwide to purchase Bearcats. These 16,000 pound vehicles are bulletproof and can be equipped with all kinds of extra features.
Ironically, while SWAT teams probably got their biggest boost initially from conservatives, many fear law enforcement is becoming a tool to enforce leftist ideology. University criminal justice programs turn out graduates indoctrinated in liberal theology, which carries into modern law enforcement bureaucratic culture.
Today this trend is reflected in reports coming out of the Department of Homeland Security, the military, and various law enforcement “fusion” centers, that identify gun-owners, patriots, ex-military, Christians, pro-life activists, and tea party members as “potential domestic terrorists (pdf).”
The perpetrator of last summer’s attempted mass shooting at the Family Research Council headquarters now admits he was prompted by the Southern Poverty Law Center’s “Hate Watch” list. The radical leftist SPLC is now “consulting” with the FBI and DHS regarding “rightwing hate groups.” The group labeled AIM’s Cliff Kincaid a member of a sinister group of “Patriots” for writing critically of the United Nations, President Obama, and the homosexual lobby, among other things. Ironically, the SPLC “Teaching tolerance” project ran an article praising unrepentant Communist terrorist bomber Bill Ayers as a “civil rights organizer, radical anti-Vietnam War activist, teacher, and author,” with an “editor’s note” going so far as to say that Ayers “has become a highly respected figure in the field of multicultural education.”
Ammo, Military Equipment and Domestic Drone Use
The Internet is abuzz with news that the Department of Homeland Security is purchasing over 1.6 billion rounds of pistol and rifle ammunition, 2,700 Mine Resistant Armored Vehicles (MRAP), and 7,000 fully-automatic “personal defense weapons.” Some of this is worthy of concern, some maybe not so much. Meanwhile, the expanded use of aerial drones within the continental U.S. has created anxiety among the public and political leaders alike.
Reportedly, the order for 1.6 billion rounds of pistol and rifle ammunition would fulfill DHS requirements for the next five years, or 320 million rounds per year. DHS has 55,471 employees authorized to carry firearms, which comes to about 5,800 rounds per year, per employee. For perspective, during the first year of the war on terror, approximately 72 million rounds were expended in Iraq and another 21 million in Afghanistan by an estimated 45,000 combat troops. This amounts to about 2,000 rounds per war fighter.
Yet the requisition may not be unreasonable. The largest order, 750 million rounds, came from DHS’s Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) for training. FLETC Public Affairs Director Peggy Dixon said that the purchase request was “a ceiling. It does not mean that we will buy, or require, the full amounts of either contract.” Another 650 million rounds are being purchased by Inspections and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to cover the next five years.
Since these are maximum figures, it is difficult to conclusively evaluate the purchase. Some have asserted that the practical effect—if not the deliberate intent—is to dry up the private market for ammunition. Congressmen are now demanding answers from DHS regarding these purchases. But most ammunition shortages are likely due to civilian demands. Obama and the Democrats’ palpable hostility to gun owners has caused ammunition and firearms purchases to skyrocket.
There are 80 million gun owners in the U.S. If each just purchased 100 rounds of ammo—enough for one afternoon at the range—that would equal 8-billion rounds. Many are purchasing significantly more.
Instead of asking why DHS needs 1.6 billion rounds of ammo, the real question we should be asking is, “Why does DHS need 55,000 law enforcement officers?”
MRAPs & Submachine Guns
The original story regarding a purchase of 2,700 MRAPs s was in error. The confusion centers on a 2011 order from the U.S. Marines to retrofit 2,717 of its MRAPs with upgraded chassis.
DHS has been using MRAPs since 2008 and currently has a fleet of 16 received from the Army at no cost. They are used by DHS special response teams in executing “high-risk warrants.”
Similarly, the purchase of 7,000 “Personal Defense Weapons” is not extraordinary for an agency of this size.
DHS’s Customs and Border Protection agency (CBP) has been operating Predator drones since 2005, with a current fleet of nine. Some in Congress seek to expand their use. In February of 2012, Congress passed the FAA Modernization and Reform Act, which includes a provision for commercial drone regulations. The FAA projects that up to 30,000 drones could be flying by 2020. A requisition memo describes these requirements for drones operated by CBP against border incursions by frequently armed drug traffickers and coyotes, but concern exists that this use will extend to U.S. citizens inside the border.
Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) filibustered the nomination of John Brennan as CIA Director, in order to obtain answers about lethal drone use against American citizens within the U.S. Holder finally sent Paul a letter, which said:
“It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: ‘Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?’ The answer to that question is no.”
Paul said they had been asking Holder for about six weeks. But Holder didn’t answer the question at all. Paul did not specify Americans “engaged in combat on American soil.” He asked about attacks against any Americans on U.S. soil. Holder had said in earlier testimony that the President did have the authority to kill Americans on American soil in certain circumstances.
Given the Obama administration’s contempt for the Constitution and its broad definition of “domestic terrorists” to include pretty much anyone they don’t like, there is cause for genuine concern.
The Sharpsburg raid occurred prior to the Newtown tragedy, but nonetheless reinforced the widespread impression that MSP is an anti-gun organization. Did the MSP decide to make an example of Porter to send a message to Maryland gun owners, or were they genuinely afraid that Porter was about to go postal? That question is unclear, but a Maryland law enforcement source who has attended briefings on the subject said that state police are “gearing up for confiscation.”
In 1989 Patrick O’Carroll of the Centers for Disease Control, stated:
“We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths. We’re doing the most we can do, given the political realities” (emphasis added).
The CDC further revealed its strategy in 1994:
“We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes. Now it [sic] is dirty, deadly, and banned.” Dr. Mark Rosenberg, Director of the CDC’s National Center for Injury Control and Prevention. Washington Post, 1994 (emphasis added).
Do these themes sound familiar? They represent a single component of a vast effort by media, politicians, Hollywood, educational institutions, and professionals to vilify gun ownership. One left-wing organization, Third Way, created a “messaging strategy,” encouraging the term “gun safety” because “gun control has become a loaded term that leads voters to believe that the candidate supports the most restrictive laws.”
Since Newtown, however, the anti-gunners have pretty much dropped any pretense. Here is a small sampling of recent anti-gun lunacy:
In an unguarded moment recently, U.S. Rep Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) revealed the Democratic intentions:
“We want everything on the table…This is a moment of opportunity. There’s no question about it…We’re on a roll now, and I think we’ve got to take the—you know, we’re gonna push as hard as we can and as far as we can.”
The increased militarization of police forces and the associated use of SWAT teams for routine law enforcement are a dangerous trend. Given Obama’s seeming willingness to abuse the power of his office on so many fronts, it is reasonable to expect more, not less, of the kind of abusive police overreach described in this report, while police forces and capabilities will continue to grow.
Obama’s obvious hostility to gun owners is fueling legitimate fears of gun confiscation, furthering an atmosphere of mutual distrust and paranoia between police and civilians. This raises the specter of armed confrontations should there be attempts to confiscate firearms. As one law enforcement official said at a recent gun hearing, “Good people are going to die trying to take these guns and good people are going to die trying to keep them.”
Ironically, despite its professed commitment to stopping “gun violence,” the Obama Administration authorized gun-running to Mexican drug cartels and Jihadists in Libya and elsewhere in the Middle East. Some hearings and investigations have been held into these schemes but there has been little accountability for this “gun violence.”
At an AIM conference before the 2012 presidential election, impeachment proceedings against President Obama were discussed. Citing his experience with the Clinton impeachment, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), then-chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, talked about hearings held by his committee featuring constitutional experts who said “no other administration has ignored laws like this administration…” In regard to impeachment, however, he said that the standard was extremely high, and the process long and involved. He concluded, “I really think the better answer is to turn the attention to the American people and saying, ‘If you feel that strongly about the President, one way to register that discontent is to vote for the other person.’”
In the end, of course, Obama won re-election, and the abuses continue. However, Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX), has suggested impeachment may be an option if the President continues to govern through unilateral executive orders and attempts to impose his anti-Second Amendment agenda through such measures.
More footage of military vehicles being delivered surfaces online
Footage of hundreds of armored trucks, similar to ones reportedly purchased recently by the Department Of Homeland Security has appeared online, raising more questions over their intended use.
The video was uploaded to YouTube last week by a user who stated that it was shot in the middle of the desert between Hackberry and Peach Springs, Arizona.
It shows hundreds of military style trucks loaded on to a train, presumably in the process of being delivered domestically for law enforcement or military purposes.
The video raises significant questions in the wake of reports that the Department of Homeland Security, headed by Janet Napolitano, recently purchased around 2,700 MRAP trucks that many believe are to be deployed to local law enforcement agencies around the country.
It is clear that the DHS does have fleets of armoured vehicles intended for use in the US.
Here is a demonstration video of such a vehicle by ICE agents: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=0pS9aw5pcJo
Does the latest video show these same type of trucks in the process of being delivered?
The footage is the latest in a spate of similar videos to surface on the internet in recent months showing huge amounts of military equipment packed onto trains en route within the US.
As we reported today, the DHS’ mass arms build-up continues, with the report that the agency has bought another 360,000 rounds of hollow point ammunition to add to the roughly 2 billion bullets already bought over the past year.
Such stark activity with little to no background detail has prompted several Congressmen to ask the federal government for an explanation. According to some elected representatives, the DHS has refused to answer specific questions on the purchases, stating only that the ammunition is for “training purposes” over the next five years, and has been bulk ordered to save money.
Efforts by government media mouthpieces to dismiss the story have only caused it to become more viral.
The DHS has also purchased 7,000 fully automatic assault rifles, as well as cementing a $2 million dollar relationship with a contractor that recently had to apologize for producing shooting targets of pregnant women, children and elderly gun owners depicted in residential settings.
The DHS has also been busy buying large supplies of body armor, leading to shortages. Last year, the agency put out an urgent order for “riot gear” in anticipation of civil unrest. The agency has also ordered bullet-proof checkpoint booths and hired hundreds of new security guards to protect government buildings over the course of the last 12 months. None of this has been addressed by the mainstream media.
Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.com, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.
This article was posted: Monday, March 25, 2013 at 1:07 pm
The Denver Post, on February 15th, ran an Associated Press article entitled Homeland Security aims to buy 1.6b rounds of ammo, so far to little notice. It confirmed that the Department of Homeland Security has issued an open purchase order for 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition. As reported elsewhere, some of this purchase order is for hollow-point rounds, forbidden by international law for use in war, along with a frightening amount specialized for snipers. Also reported elsewhere, at the height of the Iraq War the Army was expending less than 6 million rounds a month. Therefore 1.6 billion rounds would be enough to sustain a hot war for 20+ years. In America.
Add to this perplexing outré purchase of ammo, DHS now is showing off its acquisition of heavily armored personnel carriers, repatriated from the Iraqi and Afghani theaters of operation. As observed by “paramilblogger” Ken Jorgustin last September:
[T]he Department of Homeland Security is apparently taking delivery (apparently through the Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico VA, via the manufacturer – Navistar Defense LLC) of an undetermined number of the recently retrofitted 2,717 ‘Mine Resistant Protected’ MaxxPro MRAP vehicles for service on the streets of the United States.”
These MRAP’s ARE BEING SEEN ON U.S. STREETS all across America by verified observers with photos, videos, and descriptions.”
Regardless of the exact number of MRAP’s being delivered to DHS (and evidently some to POLICE via DHS, as has been observed), why would they need such over-the-top vehicles on U.S. streets to withstand IEDs, mine blasts, and 50 caliber hits to bullet-proof glass? In a war zone… yes, definitely. Let’s protect our men and women. On the streets of America… ?”…
“They all have gun ports… Gun Ports? In the theater of war, yes. On the streets of America…?
Seriously, why would DHS need such a vehicle on our streets?”
Why indeed? It is utterly inconceivable that Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is planning a coup d’etat against President Obama, and the Congress, to install herself as Supreme Ruler of the United States of America. There, however, are real signs that the Department bureaucrats are running amok. About 20 years ago this columnist worked, for two years, in the U.S. Department of Energy’s general counsel’s office in its procurement and finance division. And is wise to the ways. The answer to “why would DHS need such a vehicle?” almost certainly is this: it’s a cool toy and these (reportedly) million dollar toys are being recycled, without much of a impact on the DHS budget. So… why not?
Why, indeed, should the federal government not be deploying armored personnel carriers and stockpiling enough ammo for a 20-year war in the homeland? Because it’s wrong in every way. President Obama has an opportunity, now, to live up to some of his rhetoric by helping the federal government set a noble example in a matter very close to his heart (and that of his Progressive base), one not inimical to the Bill of Rights: gun control. The federal government can (for a nice change) begin practicing what it preaches by controlling itself.
Remember the Sequester? The president is claiming its budget cuts will inconvenience travelers by squeezing essential services provided by the (opulently armed and stylishly uniformed) DHS. Quality ammunition is not cheap. (Of course, news reports that DHS is about to spend $50 million on new uniforms suggests a certain cavalier attitude toward government frugality.)
Spending money this way is beyond absurd well into perverse. According to the AP story a DHS spokesperson justifies this acquisition to “help the government get a low price for a big purchase.” Peggy Dixon, spokeswoman for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center: “The training center and others like it run by the Homeland Security Department use as many as 15 million rounds every year, mostly on shooting ranges and in training exercises.”
At 15 million rounds (which, in itself, is pretty extraordinary and sounds more like fun target-shooting-at-taxpayer-expense than a sensible training exercise) … that’s a stockpile that would last DHS over a century. To claim that it’s to “get a low price” for a ridiculously wasteful amount is an argument that could only fool a career civil servant.
Meanwhile, Senator Diane Feinstein, with the support of President Obama, is attempting to ban 100 capacity magazine clips. Doing a little apples-to-oranges comparison, here, 1.6 billion rounds is … 16 million times more objectionable.
Mr. Obama has a long history of disdain toward gun ownership. According to Prof. John Lott, in Debacle, a book he co-authored with iconic conservative strategist Grover Norquist,
I responded: ‘Yes, I guess so.’
’I don’t believe that people should own guns,’ Obama replied.
I then replied that it might be fun to have lunch and talk about that statement some time.
He simply grimaced and turned away. …
Unlike other liberal academics who usually enjoyed discussing opposing ideas, Obama showed disdain.”
Mr. Obama? Where’s the disdain now? Cancelling, or at minimum, drastically scaling back — by 90% or even 99%, the DHS order for ammo, and its receipt and deployment of armored personnel carriers, would be a “fourfer.”
If Obama doesn’t show any leadership on this matter it’s an opportunity for Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and Rep. Michael McCaul, chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, to summon Secretary Napolitano over for a little national conversation. Madame Secretary? Buying 1.6 billion rounds of ammo and deploying armored personnel carriers runs contrary, in every way, to what “homeland security” really means. Discuss.