Posts Tagged ‘Chuck Grassley’

It figures.

From the Washington Times:

President Obama called on Senate Republicans Tuesday to give his eventual Supreme Court nominee a fair hearing in his bid to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia, as cracks emerged in the Republican leadership’s position of automatically blocking any nominee.

“I expect them to hold hearings. I expect them to hold a vote,” Mr. Obama said at a press conference. “There’s no unwritten law that says it can only be done on off years.”  …

“This is the Supreme Court, the highest court in the land,” the president said. “It’s the one court where we would expect elected officials to rise above day-to-day politics. I understand the stakes. I understand the pressure that Republican senators are undoubtedly under. This would be a deciding vote. But that’s not how the system is supposed to work.”

Unless Democrats were running it.  They did everything in their power to stop Bork from getting on the Supreme Court, and they succeeded.

Senate Democrats had asked liberal leaders to form a “solid phalanx” to oppose whomever President Ronald Reagan nominated to replace Powell, assuming that it would tilt the court rightward. Democrats warned Reagan there would be a fight over the nomination if Bork were to be the nominee.  …

Within 45 minutes of Bork’s nomination to the Court, Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) took to the Senate floor with a strong condemnation of Bork in a nationally televised speech, declaring,

Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens.[6]

On July 5th, NAACP executive director Benjamin Hooks described their position on the Bork nomination: “We will fight it all the way – until hell freezes over, and then we’ll skate across on the ice.”[7] A brief was prepared for Joe Biden, head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called the Biden Report. Bork later said in his book The Tempting of America that the report “so thoroughly misrepresented a plain record that it easily qualifies as world class in the category of scurrility”.[8] TV ads produced by People For the American Way and narrated by Gregory Peck attacked Bork as an extremist, and Kennedy’s speech successfully fueled widespread public skepticism of Bork’s nomination. The rapid response of Kennedy’s “Robert Bork’s America” speech stunned the Reagan White House; though conservatives considered Kennedy’s accusations slanderous,[9] the attacks went unanswered for two and a half months

Democrats scream, lie, throw tantrums, and fabricate everything they can and stop at nothing to block a nomination.

But it looks like the GOP is going to give up on their constituents without a fight.  And they wonder why Trump and Cruz are popular?

SenateJudiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, Iowa Republican, didn’t rule out confirmation hearings and a vote by his panel on an Obama selection.

“I would wait until the nominee is made before I would make any decision,” Mr. Grassley said Tuesday in a conference call with Iowa radio reporters. “In other words, take it a step at a time.”

Dammit, Grassley, just hold the damn line.  Just say no.  Because if you let him appoint a replacement for Scalia, Ginsburg will finally retire and they’ll put in another justice immediately afterwards.  For the next 30 years we’ll have a hard left majority led by Kagan, Sotomayor, Breyer, and they’ll push Roberts over every time and probably Kennedy until he retires.

It’ll be just as bad as when FDR tried packing the court with his justices.

HotAir points out that not only is Grassley wavering under Obama’s pressure, Obama was a hypocrite who filibustered Alito’s nomination.  And he still thinks it’s cool what he did… but they shouldn’t, because now it’s going to be his nominee they stop.

Of course he had to filibuster Alito’s nomination.  Obama’s a Democrat and Alito was a nomination by a Republican president.  And of course the Republicans should respect the polite process of confirming Democrat nominations, because Democrats are shameless hypocrites and Republicans are apparently gullible idiots.

You can contact your senator and tell them to grow a spine here:

Also, we’re not even entirely sure Scalia’s death was of natural causes.

Veteran homicide investigators in New York and Washington, DC, on Monday questioned the way local and federal authorities in Texas handled the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

“It’s not unreasonable to ask for an autopsy in this case, particularly knowing who he is,” retired Brooklyn homicide Detective Patricia Tufo told The Post.

“He’s not at home. There are no witnesses to his death, and there was no reported explanation for why a pillow is over his head,” Tufo said. “So I think under the circumstances it’s not unreasonable to request an autopsy. Despite the fact that he has pre-existing ailments and the fact that he’s almost 80 years old, you want to be sure that it’s not something other than natural causes.”

Bill Ritchie, a retired deputy chief and former head of criminal investigations for the DC police, said he was dumbstruck when he learned that no autopsy would be performed.

Last night listening to the radio, I heard someone suggest that any really high-profile figure with massive implications for the nation should probably automatically have an autopsy done.

Seems quite reasonable, actually.


From Newser, the Black Tie yacht drunks are back and still after your rights, peasant:

(Newser) – The push for stricter gun laws might not be quite so dead after all in the Senate. The New York Times reports that efforts are “quietly” underway to get something done on background checks and illegal trafficking. Joe Manchin and Pat Toomey, the co-sponsors of the background-check bill that got yanked last week, say they have been talking to colleagues to get rid of some objectionable loopholes. One potential compromise would allow a person who lives in a rural area to sell a weapon to someone without having to find a sporting goods store to facilitate.

So they’re admitting that they’re targeting “urban” people?  At least they’re getting more honest about their racism.

Looks like that’ll be a 14th Amendment violation for lack of equal protection under the law.

A separate initiative to crack down on illegal trafficking, which includes buying a weapon for someone who can’t legally own one, is being spearheaded by Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand and Republicans Kelly Ayotte and Chuck Grassley.

That last name is very interesting.  Chuck Grassley has been the spearhead of the senate move against Obama’s Fast and Furious program wherein the ATF gave guns to the Mexican narcoterrorist cartels.  He’s well aware of how anti-gun this administration is, he’s seen how the Department of Justice has held back and said nothing about Fast and Furious, and he’s well aware of the violent hatred of the Constitution demonstrated by this adminstration when it used the ATF to undermine the Second Amendment in order to push for gun control and oppression of citizens.  He’s very knowledgeable on the subject.

The story notes this at the end:

Gun-control supporters are working on a national campaign to put pressure on those in the “no” camp.

Yup.  They never stop.  Ever.  They have a need to destroy your rights.  It’s what they do, it’s all they do, and they will never, ever stop until they have their boot stamping on a human face forever.

Slate calls this piece “The Battle Against The Clock“, but it’s really about not listening to cooler heads or understanding the issue:

The battle for gun control is a battle against the clock. After a tragedy like the massacre in Newtown, Conn., gun control advocates say lawmakers have about 30 days to channel public outrage toward enacting laws that might prevent another mass killing. After that, people get distracted, new challenges crop up, memories dim, and nothing gets done. Those who would like to stop gun control legislation know how this clock ticks, too. It is a battle between emotion and organization. How long can the emotion be sustained and how long can the NRA organization wait it out?

How long can Democrats dance in the blood of children and push people to give up their rights to resist oppression?

There are two avenues for change emerging out of the discussions held by Vice President Biden. One is a long list of potential legislative changes: laws to ban assault weapons, limit the size of high-capacity magazine clips, promote universal background checks, crack down on gun trafficking, improve mental health screening, and perhaps nudge Hollywood into tamping down some of the violence in video games and movies. That’s the grinding, nose-counting process that will take place in Congress. The second, larger task, as administration officials describe it, is broader and more fuzzy. It requires changing the culture of guns in America and shifting the conversation from one of protecting gun rights enshrined in the Constitution to one of protecting children.

That is a fundamental change of the culture of the United States.  That is destroying the right enshrined in the Constitution and replacing it with “for the children!”

gadsden flag for the children

Nothing pulls at heartstrings more than children.  And Democrats know that once people sit back a bit and realize that the dangers of a disarmed citizenry before an oppressive government invariably proves the maxim: “A madman in an armed society can kill dozens, a madman in a disarmed society will kill millions.”

Listening to those involved in this effort there are echoes of the 2008 Obama campaign—they describe an energy and swell of sentiment that just needs a person to shape and guide it. Activists who have been fighting for gun control for years describe a new unexpected passion among progressive groups. After meeting with the vice president and his staffers, they express surprise (and delight) at how seriously the president and his team are pushing this effort.

They want to fundamentally destroy the nation, to “change” it into something unrecognizable, wherein they shape the world to their heart’s desire by manipulating you the citizen.  Our Founders intended for the maximum amount of liberty and the smallest amount of government interference in your life.  These progressive groups progress towards tyranny in which they will dictate how you will live.  They’re not trying to change public opinion for more freedom and liberty, giving you choices of how you want to live, they’re trying to restrict you by telling you you’re stupid and it’s for your own good.  And the clock is ticking, because they can only lie for so long before people catch on to it.

One of the key messages, says a White House official, is to “drain the drama and fear” out of what the president is proposing. The message the president wants to send is that he’s not trying to trample on hunters and sportsmen. That’s a necessary precursor to any legislation because advocates for reform argue that the only way they will be able to build popular and political support is if they can split the NRA from its leadership.

The key message is to lie.

Hunting and sports have nothing to do with the Second Amendment.  Read it.

The “necessary precursor” is to lull the gullible into believing that their long-range sniper rifle isn’t next.

Photo by Oleg Volk.

Photo by Oleg Volk.

If the membership can be convinced that the president is not an ideologue trying to grab their guns, they will be less likely to believe the NRA leadership who paint him that way.

If the big lie can be believed, they can get the foot in the door and get more bans passed.

If the president does make a full push to enact gun control laws or change public sentiment, it will be another test of the bully pulpit and its limitations. When President Obama pushed his health care reform it became less popular. His efforts to pressure Republicans during his first term in a variety of budget fights did not work. Neither of those causes had a galvanizing moment behind it though. The president has also shown signs that he’s going to be a little more combative in his second term than he was in the first.

The “bully pulpit” is used by someone who is, in fact, a bully, pushing a lie against citizens’ rights.  Obamacare trampled citizens’ rights and is still being fought against because people know how it will impact them – they’re seeing limits on religious liberty already, wherein individuals who don’t believe in certain treatments are forced at the point of the government’s gun to pay for them.

The budget fights are a matter of Obama paying for his Curley Effect destruction of one income level to favor the income leve that votes for him due to handouts.  A combative president who seeks to crush citizens’ rights used to be something so-called liberals were concerned about, but they aren’t.  They’re all on board with the leftist-progressive utopia that can only be made at the point of the government’s gun.

Vice President Biden reports to the president Tuesday on the findings of his inquiries, and after that, the president will back a set of specific recommendations. He won’t offer legislation. Congress will have to come up with the language themselves. Based on conversations with administration officials and gun control activists, few think that an assault weapons ban is possible, though the president will push for one. A plan for stronger background checks is likely to have more support, as are laws that would crack down on gun trafficking. Whether the president can even build support for that depends on his will—and how long he can keep the time from running out.

Biden doesn’t care what anyone but the gun-banners are saying.  That’s all there is to it.  He’s anti gun, so’s Obama.  It’s a farce.

An “assault weapons ban” is just a ban on modern firearms, putting the citizen at a disadvantage against criminals (who never follow laws) and additional disadvantage against the government (who, as history has shown, do what they like once they aren’t held accountable).

Then there’s this line:

A plan for stronger background checks is likely to have more support, as are laws that would crack down on gun trafficking.

If you’ve been reading this thinking that I sound a bit peeved, I am.  The first part of that is banning private sales – as in you can’t sell a gun to your brother or sister – because the government has to get involved in your life and regulate your rights.

The second part is worse.  Anything this government says about “trafficking” is infuriating beyond measure.

Couldn't shoot straight, but we know their real target.

The Obama administration’s ATF sent guns to Mexican narcoterrorist cartels in order that they could then recover the guns at murder scenes.  The objective was to undermine the Second Amendment and work to demonize US gun owners.  This was called Operation Fast and Furious (aka Project or Operation Gunwalker – before the real name was learned).

This is Susana Flores Maria Gamez, a Mexican beauty pageant queen murdered by narcoterrorists armed by Obama’s government.

maria-susana-flores killed by F&F

This is Brian Terry, US Border Patrol agent and Marine veteran, murdered by narcoterrorists armed by Obama’s government.

brian terry

This is Jaime Zapata, US ICE agent murdered by narcoterrorists armed by Obama’s government.

jaime zapata

There are hundreds upon hundreds, possibly up to thousands of Mexicans and US citizens murdered by Obama’s deliberate plan to run guns to Mexican narcoterrorists in order to undermine the Second Amendment.  ATF Phoenix SAC Bill Newell was the go-to guy for years worth of “US guns are going to Mexico” stories that were proven false by Stratfor; and he was the same man who was in contact with the White House through his friend Kevin O’Reilly; the same White House calling for gun bans.

For anyone in this current regime to go off saying that it’s time for laws against “gun trafficking” by destroying US citizens rights is insult to deliberate criminal injury.  They want to take your rights away and they’ve been trying for years – and they’ve been trying the same things over and over.  They tried to frame you and ended up killing hundreds if not thousands of our Mexican neighbors, and at least two federal law enforcement agents.

At about the 13 minute mark, Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley gives a pretty decent summary.  When you listen to it, for those who haven’t heard it, you’ll see why this current round of gun control is that much more infuriating.  The Obama administration has murdered people intentionally and is still covering up murders – all to push their gun control agenda against you, the citizen.

“Thomas Jefferson once said that,  quote ‘The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution.’  Now politicians and bureaucrats prefer to talk about anything but the Constitution because you know what that Constitution does? It places inconvenient restrictions on their ability to concentrate more power in government.  They even blame the Second Amendment for their own failure to enforce law.  The gun grabbers in our government exploit any examples of lawlessness and violence as an excuse to infringe upon the rights of law abiding citizens.  That’s why the Second Amendment defenders are often the most outspoken advocates for law and order.”

– Sen. Chuck Grassley

Big news.  Oversight report can be read here, and Oversight reports’ exhibits here.

From Daily Caller:

The latest congressional report on Operation Fast and Furious found that the gunwalking-program-turned-scandal was the result of a “deliberate strategy created at the highest levels of the Justice Department aimed at identifying the leaders of a major gun trafficking ring.”

The report is the second installment in a three-part series from Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Sen. Chuck Grassley and House oversight committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa.

That “deliberate strategy,” congressional investigators argue, sprang from “a series of speeches about combating violence along the Southwest border” that Attorney General Eric Holder delivered shortly after taking office.

And from Katie Pavlich at Townhall here (also big kudos to Katie – your added attention to citations in recent weeks have been noticed!):

The most recent report contains damning information and documentation showing Attorney General Eric Holder’s Deputy Chief of Staff Monty Wilkinson and DOJ Official Patrick Cunningham discussing plans for Holder to participate a press conference announcing the “take-down” or the end of Operation Fast and Furious before Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was killed on December 15, 2010. Guns from the Fast and Furious program were left at Terry’s murder scene. Holder claims he didn’t know about Operation Fast and Furious until May of 2011. The email below was sent on December 14, 2010 at 12:28 pm, just 12 hours before Terry’s murder. (email pic here)

And from Breitbart (first part is quoting the report):

“He spoke about the development of a prosecution and enforcement strategy with respect to firearms trafficking, noting that the ‘administration launched a major new effort to break the backs of the cartels,’ … In particular, the attorney general said that the Justice Department was committed to adding ‘100 new ATF personnel to the Southwest Border’ and that Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) would add ‘16 new positions on the border.’ Most importantly, the attorney general noted that there must be ‘an attack in depth, on both sides of the border, that focuses on the leadership and assets of the cartel.’”

After these speeches, congressional investigators found  “a Firearms Trafficking Working Group was formed,” which was tasked with “exploring and recommending proposals to enhance law enforcement efforts to curb firearms trafficking, focusing specifically on investigation, interdiction, training, prosecution, and intelligence-sharing.”

From ABC News:

On Tuesday, Congressman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) pressed the Department of Justice to provide information about 57 Fast and Furious weapons found at Mexican crime scenes, which were first exposed by a Univision News special investigation on September 30.

In a letter obtained by Univision News and sent to Attorney General Eric Holder, Issa and Grassley inquired about the previously unreported Fast and Furious guns that were linked to violent crimes and featured in the Univision News report. The letter pays special attention to three firearms connected to an ATF gun-tracing operation that were used in a massacre of 15 teenagers in Villas de Salvarcar.

The letter from Issa and Grassley to Holder is here:

2012-10-02 DEI CEG to DOJ (Fast and Furious Recoveries)

Therefore, please answer the following questions:
1) With regard to the “57 more previously unreported firearms,” referenced in the Univision story, please provide any information the Department has gathered about these recoveries and their connection to Fast and Furious.
2) With regards to the three weapons used on January 30, 2010:
a. Were these three weapons connected to Fast and Furious?
b. Who purchased these weapons, and when?
c. When were these weapons recovered?
d. When did the Department first learn of the connection between these weapons and Fast and Furious?
e. Why did the Department fail to report these weapons to Congress along with the 28 other weapons recovered in Mexico in connection with violent crimes?

There are a few more questions, but it’s worth it to read the whole letter.

Lots of good info in this speech.

Grassley’s very knowledgeable on the subject, and here he jumps back and forth to notes quite a bit just to make sure he’s correct on each point.

“Thomas Jefferson once said that,  quote ‘The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution.’  Now politicians and bureaucrats prefer to talk about anything but the Constitution because you know what that Constitution does? It places inconvenient restrictions on their ability to concentrate more power in government.  They even blame the Second Amendment for their own failure to enforce law.  The gun grabbers in our government exploit any examples of lawlessness and violence as an excuse to infringe upon the rights of law abiding citizens.  That’s why the Second Amendment defenders are often the most outspoken advocates for law and order.”

– Sen. Chuck Grassley

Around the 13 minute mark, Grassley goes on about the history of Fast & Furious.  It’s a very good, very clear summary.