America, You Asked For It!

Political News and Commentary from the Right

How Will Importing Dangerous Terrorists Make America Safer?

by Rep. John Boehner (R-OH)

Today the Obama Administration is announcing it plans to import the terrorists held at the Guantanamo Bay prison – some of the most dangerous terrorists in the world – to the Thomson Correctional Center located outside Chicago, Illinois.  This decision puts the interests of liberal special interest groups before the safety and security of the American people.  Here’s how I addressed this issue at a press conference on Capitol Hill this morning:

The American people don’t want dangerous terrorists imported on to U.S. soil, and time after time the House and Senate have reaffirmed this position with bipartisan votes rejecting the Administration’s plan. Yet this Administration is defying the will of the American people and importing them anyway. What’s worse, this decision is completely unnecessary considering that these terrorists were already being tried by military commissions, which were specifically designed under the law to prosecute such heinous acts.

Republicans have offered a better solution.  In May, we introduced the Keep Terrorists Out of America Act (H.R. 2294) to (1) affirm Congress’ opposition to transferring or releasing terrorists held at the Guantanamo Bay prison into the United States; (2) prohibit the Administration from transferring or releasing any terrorist detainees at Guantanamo Bay to any state without express approval from the state’s governor and legislature; and (3) prohibit the President from transferring or releasing a terrorist detainee into the United States unless he provides notification and certification to Congress.  Our proposal reflects the will of the American people, and it puts a premium on their safety and security first and foremost.

In their rush to bring Guantanamo Bay terrorists on to U.S. soil, Washington Democrats have repeatedly failed to articulate an overarching strategy to confront and defeat the terrorist threat.  At the very least, the American people deserve to know how importing these dangerous terrorists and giving them the same rights as U.S. citizens will make us any safer.  I have yet to see a good explanation, but Republicans will stand with Illinois families and seek every remedy at our disposal to stop this dangerous plan.

December 16, 2009 Posted by | War on Terror | , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

A Jury of His Peers?

by Gary Varvel at GOPUSA

November 24, 2009 Posted by | War on Terror | , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Voter intimidation gets thumbs up…

…from President Obama’s Justice Department, as long as the intimidator intimidates those the President prefers not vote.

On November 4, 2008 two members, Minister King Samir Shabazz and Jerry Jackson, of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense (NBPP) stationed themselves outside a polling place at 1221 Fairmount St, Philadelphia, PA. (See video) On January 7, 2009 (eleven days before the inauguration of President Obama), the Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against these two men, NBPP, and Malik Zulu Shabazz (acting chairman of NBPP) for violating Section 11(b) of the 1965 Voting Rights Act by engaging in and attempting coercion, threats, and intimidation of voters and those aiding voters at the polling place.

The complaint alleges Samir Shabazz “brandished a deadly weapon…pointed the weapon at individuals, menacingly tapped it [on] his other hand, or menacingly tapped it elsewhere.” He and Jackson were also accused of hurling racial threats and racial insults at both black and white voters while the polls were open as well as making “menacing and intimidating gestures, statements, and movements directed at individuals who were present to aid voters.” Malik Zulu Shabazz and NBPP “managed, directed and endorsed the behavior, actions and statements” of their co-defendants, according to the complaint. In addition Malik Zulu Shabazz was accused of making statements “adopting and endorsing the deployment, behavior, and statements” of Samir Shabazz and Jackson following the election.

After the defendants failed to appear in court or present a defense, the court ordered the DOJ to prepare a motion for default judgment against them. On May 1, 2009, DOJ sought an extension to comply with the order. DOJ stated the extension was necessary to “craft an appropriate and equitable remedy” because it had not “had the benefit of discovery” in the case and did not anticipate “that the Defendants would make no showing whatsoever.” The court granted DOJ’s motion on May 4.  The defendants unwillingness to appear or defend themselves had cost them the case.  All that remained was for the DOJ to file the necessary motion and the court to grant it.

Instead, on May 15, DOJ filed a proposed default judgment order against Samir Shabazz and dropped its case against the other three defendants.  The court then handed down its judgment against Shabazz that prohibits him from displaying a weapon within 100 feet of any or to intimidate, threaten or coerce voters or those assisting voters.1  No fines, no admission of guilt, really not even a punitive act of any kind!

Some may be thinking there was no proof, no witnesses willing to testify to the acts described in the complaint.  Even if that were so, DOJ had the case in hand after the defendants’ refusal to appear to defend themselves.  But there was at least one witness.  And a very credible (even to ultra left-wingers) witness at that.   Bartle Bull, an attorney who cut his professional teeth on the civil rights movement of the 1960’s, was also working as a poll watcher on election day.  

Michelle Malkin has posted Mr. Bull’s sworn affidavit on the case here.   In it, Mr. Bull unequivocally states that he observed the two men intimidate and attempt to intimidate voters and poll workers.  The following quotes are directly from his sworn statement.

“In all my experience in politics, in civil rights litigation,  and in my efforts in the 1960’s to secure the right to vote in Mississippi through participation with civil rights leaders and the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, I have never encountered or heard of another instance in the United States where armed and uniformed men blocked the entrance to a polling location.  Their clear purpose was to intimidate voters with whom they did not agree.”

“…I heard the shorter man make a statement directed towards white poll observers that ‘You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker.'”

“I considered their presence to be a racially motivated effort to intimidate poll watchers aiding voters, as well as voters with whom the men did not agree.”

If these were the statements of a Republican, liberals would certainly level charges of dishonesty. But this comes from one of their own–a civil rights attorney who worked on the campaigns of such left-wing icons as Robert F. Kennedy and Jimmy Carter. Democrats can’t write this off as a product of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy.

So, how did the Obama DOJ deal with such a damning condemnation by one of their own?

They buried it.

That’s correct. Mr. Bull’s affidavit was dated April 7, 2009–almost three months after the President’s inauguration. But the court never saw it. The affidavit was never filed!

According to this Washington Times exclusive, a DOJ spokesman in the supposedly “most transparent administration in history” refused to reveal the source of the pressure that forced career DOJ lawyers to drop the case they’d pursued since January. The Times’ sources for the article insisted on anonymity “because of fear of retribution.”

It appears Obama’s DOJ is not only protecting thugs who intimidate the President’s political enemies, but also creating an atmosphere of fear and intimidation within the Department. The same career attorneys whose advice Eric Holder promised he would listen to in his confirmation hearings now fear reprisals if they publicly disagree with their boss.

Obama’s promised change has arrived.  After this, we can count on a lot more left-wing security (that’s how Shabazz and Jackson described their role in Philadelphia–security) at polling places on election day.   This outrage is an open invitation for the NBPP and any other radical left-wing group to place intimidators at the doors to harass voters and poll-watchers.

During the campaign Obama mentioned his desire for a civilian security force.  Perhaps the NBPP will be his recruiting ground.

May 31, 2009 Posted by | Obama | , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

New attack on 2nd Amendment–HR 2159

The 2nd Amendment is once again under attack, this time by a bipartisan anti-gun coalition in the US House.

Rep. Peter King (R-NY) has introduced H.R. 2159 (aka “Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009”) seeks to give Obama’s gun ban enthusiast Attorney General Eric Holder sole discretion to decide who can and who cannot purchase a firearm. No trial, no hearing, just Eric Holder’s whimsical determination that a person might be involved in a terrorist act, now or sometime in the future, will be enough to keep an American citizen to exercise his/her constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

According to the NRA, “H.R. 2159 would give ‘the Attorney General the authority to deny the sale, delivery, or transfer of a firearm or the issuance of a firearms or explosives license or permit to dangerous terrorists. . . . if the Attorney General determines that the transferee is known (or appropriately suspected) to be or have been engaged in conduct constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to terrorism, or providing material support thereof, and the Attorney General has a reasonable belief that the prospective transferee may use a firearm in connection with terrorism.'”

[Read full text of HR 2159]

Not long ago, the Department of Homeland Security distributed a classified memo declaring virtually every conservative American and veteran a potential terrorist. So all of us considered “right-wing extremists” by the current administration are likely to find ourselves on Holder’s list of Americans who will be denied this constitutional right.

I seem to recall, in the not too distant past, liberals up in arms claiming President Bush was using fear of terrorism as an excuse to suspend Americans’ constitutional rights. (And Obama continues these very same practices today.) I guess these liberals consider it okay for a Democrat to trash the Constitution.

The bill has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee.  Sign this petition today and contact your representatives to tell them DON’T mess with our 2nd Amendment rights!

May 18, 2009 Posted by | Bill of Rights | , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments