Media Confirming Republican Insiders’s Report On Obama Gun Control Attempts

Reports now coming out in greater numbers regarding increasingly tepid support from within his own Democratic Party regarding Barack Obama’s attempts to further regulate Second Amendment gun rights in the United States.  Even some of the most liberal Democrats are distancing themselves from President Obama on this issue.

( “Apparently the NRA and some other groups were lining up primary challengers to Democrats who went along with the president’s gun control plans and letting those Democrats know it was coming.  That scared the heck out of them.”  -R.I. earlier this week )

___________________________

EXCERPT:  (Via Fox News)

Senate Dems hesitant on Obama gun control plan

President Obama’s gun-control package was always going to be a tough sell in the Republican-led House — but the plan is already running into resistance, or at least hesitation, from moderate Democrats in the Senate.

…Many of the Democrats voicing concern are up for re-election in 2014. A total of 20 Democratic seats are up in the next cycle — 22 when special elections are included. 

…Even Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who is considered to have a pro-gun rights record, said only that the chamber would “consider” the legislation.   LINK

__________________________

REPUBLICAN INSIDER: Obama Livid Over Gun Rights Backlash

455 days ago by in News | You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
About the

Be courteous to all, but intimate with few, and let those few be well tried before you give them your confidence. -G. Washington

7 Comments to Media Confirming Republican Insiders’s Report On Obama Gun Control Attempts
    • SallyAl
    • This might turn out all right but I fear that the “under the radar” filibuster rules change, assisted by our very own Mitch McConnell, will render any opposition to ANY legislation, pending or suggested, useless. The filibuster rules change needs to be the top headline on all online blogs, news sites, etc. I think this is the most dangerous assualt on life as we know it as it will enable the Senate to ram through ANYTHING (ala obamacare) they wish. Which is going to include any treaties, any cabinet nominations, etc. Those 2 items right there do not even get considered by the House so with treaties and cabinet secretaries running our country, we are doomed.

      Please UM, get RI or WHI or anydamnbody to address this. This is scary!

    • Holly
    • White House Dossier has a report about a new political organization called Organizing for Action. Koffler says “it’s a brand new political organization devoted not to a Party, not to an idea – but to one charismatic leader” and also that “it’s the reincarnation of his 2012 campaign.”

      Obama’s taking his agenda past Congress, both parties, special interest groups like the NRA, and right to the American people.

      The shark has been jumped.

      • cobra
      • Remember Obama’s promise to create a “civilian force better armed than the military” in 2007 or 2008?
        Hello SA or bolshevik gangs which became Checka…

    • ShainS
    • Thanks for the heads up, Holly. From here:

      “The move is a second try at a failed, similar effort last cycle. After the 2008 election, Obama folded his campaign into the national party committee as Organizing for America in a short-lived push to influence policy. The group quickly drew the ire of Democratic lawmakers who were upset by the flood of calls and emails on controversial issues like health care reform.

      But there was another, less-publicized reason the partnership didn’t sit well. The Obama operation is a behemoth, requiring vast sums of money to keep organizers in the field — cost structure that before the Obama years was limited to the final months of a campaign is now a full-time operation.”

      In other words: The DNC doesn’t like, want, or need any competition for Democrat funds.

      BTW — shouldn’t truth in labeling demand that it be called the DNF: Disorganizing for Non-Action (or Drifting Near Futility?

      A “charismatic” leader, you say? Where (aside from that snowbilly up in Alaska)? Obama? That dude’s about as charismatic as a clam. I mean, they have to stage fainting spells at his speeches for goodness sakes. Now, the TOTUS I could maybe understand — it having more charisma in its little tripod than the entirety of Obama …

      Then again, look at that picture of Obama that UM uses in this post; one halo isn’t good enough for him … he’s got to have two!

    • AmericaTheBeautiful
    • Wonder when more Americans will wake up…
      ……………….and realize Benghazi and now Algeria….. are about America’s HUMILIATION…Al Qaeda raping America’s men…and a president who sits idely by doing nothing. Disgusting.

      As the press covers up the truth of Ambassador Stevens’ rape and murder..and others too…one wonders……Does Obama approve of what is happening to America and to Americans…he certainly has stood by…and watched it happen on live feed…And done nothing.
      Obama approves of America’s humiliation…no other way to explain the lack of justice …the lack of action…no other way to explain this president who stood by and let more American hostages get murdered in Algeria….The continuing rampage by Al Qaeda on Americans and this president remains mute…Yet, he has himself sworn in privately and early…Smoke that America…eh?

      Please explain Obama entertaining the Muslim Brotherhood in OUR White House. Al Qaeda is the enforcer for the Muslim Brotherhood…Obama dangling the Blind Sheif as a prize for the Muslim savages only encourages more attacks…more savagery and more hostage taking and more torture…and to have even suggested releasing the Blind Sheik for humanitarian reasons is simply encouragement…as Obama did in releasing the Lockerbee terrorist …the insanity of a traitor on display…These terrorist should be made to die like dogs. Wonder if those low information voters ( read stupid, lazy and greedy) would be outraged if they knew what Slim was up to?

      Stephen Hayes and Thomas Jocselyn get it….

      http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/debacle-ben-ghazi_696380.html?nopager=1

      On September 21, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke to reporters before a meeting with the Pakistani foreign minister. She addressed the September 11 assault on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya. “What happened was a terrorist attack, and we will not rest until we have tracked down and brought to justice the terrorists who murdered four Americans.”

      Clinton’s statement was notable. It was the strongest and most direct assessment of the attacks from any Obama administration official in the first 10 days after the deaths. By calling the incident a “terrorist attack,” Clinton acknowledged what President Obama had gone out of his way to avoid.

      The second part of Clinton’s comment generated little interest. Her vow to bring to justice the perpetrators of the attacks was the kind of perfunctory promise we expect to hear from any politician after any attack, particularly one so brazen. Of course it would be a top priority of the Obama administration and its lead diplomat to understand the attacks and punish those who committed them.

      Yet four months later, Clinton’s promise is notable precisely because it has gone unfulfilled. No one has been “brought to justice”—a fact that seems unlikely to change anytime soon. “We’re not even close,” says one U.S. official involved in the
      And jihadists in the region, no doubt emboldened by the lack of U.S. response to the attacks, have taken to taunting the American investigators and celebrating U.S. feebleness. Washington has very little to show for its investigation of the Ben-ghazi attacks. One leading suspect is in custody—Egyptian custody—and we’re being denied access to him. Another sipped a strawberry frappe in the lobby of a luxury hotel in Benghazi as he told a New York Times reporter that he felt no need to hide from the United States. And when a third suspect was freed from a Tunisian prison earlier this month, the U.S. government was given no warning, but extremists belonging to an al Qaeda-linked group apparently had advance notice.

      If there is any urgency to the U.S. government’s efforts to “bring to justice” the terrorists, it’s well hidden. It took the FBI team assigned to investigate Benghazi nearly a month to arrive there. Later, after they had supposedly scoured the U.S. consulate, on two separate occasions reporters found highly sensitive documents on the floor—some including the names of Libyans working with the U.S. government. Robert Mueller, the head of the FBI, visited Libya as part of the investigation for the first time last week.

      But nothing demonstrates the lack of urgency so much as the case of Ali Ani al Harzi, a jihadist who was detained in Tunisia for his suspected involvement in the attacks until his surprising release on January 8.

      U.S. officials first became suspicious of Harzi after learning that he had “posted an update on social media about the fighting [in Benghazi] shortly after it had begun,” according to Eli Lake of the Daily Beast. That post was “one of the first clues the intelligence community had about the perpetrators” of the September 11 assault on the U.S. consulate.

      Harzi did not stay in Libya after the attacks, but instead made his way to Turkey. It was there in early October, at the request of the U.S. government, that Harzi and a fellow Tunisian were arrested. Harzi was reportedly en route to join the jihad against Bashar al-Assad’s crumbling regime in nearby Syria.

      In mid-October, Harzi was deported from Turkey to Tunisia. During a televised interview on November 1, Tunisian interior minister Ali Larayedh explained that Harzi was “strongly suspected to have been involved in the attack of Benghazi.”

      The U.S. government, which had provided the intelligence that led to Harzi’s capture, asked the Tunisians for access to him. These requests were met with silence, then stonewalling. The State Department, apparently concerned about the stability of the country’s young, post-Arab Spring government, elected in October, did little to pressure the Tunisians for access. Republicans in Congress, led by Lindsey Graham and Saxby Chambliss in the Senate and Frank Wolf in the House, threatened the Tunisian government with consequences for its lack of cooperation.

      In early November, Graham and Chambliss announced that the Tunisians had agreed in principle to allow U.S. investigators to interview Harzi in the presence of his lawyer and a judge. But days passed, then weeks, and the FBI interrogators who had gone to Tunisia to question Harzi were not given access to him. One source familiar with the investigation tells The Weekly Standard that FBI agents spent five weeks in Tunis as the government resisted requests for time with Harzi.

      Meanwhile, legislators were urging the State Department to increase pressure on its Tunisian counterpart. Wolf worked behind the scenes to encourage State to condition future aid on access to Harzi. Since the new government was established, the United States has provided more than $300 million in aid. In September 2011, Tunisia qualified for additional funds through the Millennium Challenge Corporation’s Threshold Program.

      The State Department responded to Wolf’s efforts by putting him off. “We are in regular contact with the Tunisian government on this case and Tunisian authorities are cooperating with us through normal law enforcement channels,” wrote Assistant Secretary of State David Adams on December 17. “As this is an ongoing criminal investigation, we cannot provide further detail.” Adams did, however, make the case for more aid to Tunisia, regardless of its lack of cooperation. “Continued U.S. support is critical to Tunisia’s successful democratic transition,” Adams wrote, pressing the need for more funds for Tunisian security forces and economic development.

      The FBI finally interviewed Harzi on December 22 for three hours. Following that session, U.S. officials were divided about whether Harzi had provided valuable information but agreed that he remained an important suspect in the Benghazi attacks and a potential source of intelligence on al Qaeda and its affiliates.

      Harzi has strong jihadist credentials. As first reported by Eli Lake in the Daily Beast, U.S. officials have identified Harzi’s brother as “a midlevel planner for al Qaeda’s franchise in Iraq,” who arranges “the travel of fighters from North Africa to Syria’s al Qaeda-linked opposition, known as the al-Nusra Front.” The al-Nusra Front is a direct extension of Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), an al Qaeda affiliate that has sworn allegiance to Ayman al Zawahiri. In December, the State Department revealed that al-Nusra, which has become the most lethal part of the Syrian insurgency, is under the “control” of AQI’s leader.

      Harzi had tried to join his brother, and Al Qaeda in Iraq, before. In 2006, Tunisian authorities arrested Harzi under strict counterterrorism laws for showing a desire to wage jihad in Iraq. Harzi had been in touch with his al Qaeda brother, who was shuttling recruits into Iraq to fight the U.S.-led coalition. Harzi was imprisoned until after President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali’s government in Tunisia fell on January 14, 2011. Once granted amnesty and released, Harzi made his way to Benghazi by September 11, 2012.

      The same day the FBI conducted its interview with Harzi, a media outlet associated with the leading al Qaeda-linked extremist group in Tunisia, Ansar al Sharia Tunisia, posted online photographs purportedly showing three FBI agents who participated in that session.

      Ansar al Sharia Tunisia’s posting was first discovered by the SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors jihadist websites and online forums. The headline reads “Exclusive Pictures of the FBI Agents who Investigated Brother Ali al-Harzi (The Case of Killing the American Foreigner in Libya).” The group claimed that “despite being forcefully prevented from taking pictures, we were able to take some exclusive pictures” of the three FBI agents.

      U.S. officials tell The Weekly Standard that the release of the photos was a clear attempt to intimidate the Americans and show that the FBI could not act with impunity. In its posting, Ansar al Sharia Tunisia warned the Tunisian people that their government had allowed the FBI “to begin investigating your sons under post-revolutionary protection.” In a bit of hyperbole, the group also claimed that the Islamist Tunisian government was trying to join the American union.

      Shortly after the FBI’s visit with Harzi in December, Ansar al Sharia Tunisia released a video on YouTube showing a lawyer discussing Harzi’s case. The lawyer addressed the FBI’s role in the questioning. The video begins with an introductory sentence that reads: “Lawyer Hafiz Ghadoun talks about the case of Brother Ali al Harzi—Allah free him—and confirms the presence of investigators from the FBI [sent there] to interrogate him.”

      On January 7, a judge in Tunis ruled that there was not enough evidence to continue holding Harzi, and the Benghazi suspect was quickly released. Washington had no prior warning that Harzi would be freed, but Ansar al Sharia Tunisia apparently did.

      The following day, the group posted a video on its Facebook page showing Harzi walking out of jail into the arms of his joyous supporters, who are not identified. Harzi thanks Allah for his freedom, but begs that his still-imprisoned comrades not be forgotten.

      Why did the Tunisians allow Harzi to rejoin his jihadist brothers? “The government is more afraid of them than us,” says a senior congressional Republican with access to the intelligence on Benghazi. For good reason. The U.S. government hasn’t so much as issued a statement expressing regret that the Tunisians released Harzi.

      There’s a reason Ansar al Sharia Tunisia has taken such great interest in Benghazi and Harzi’s case. Many of the suspects in the consulate attack are members of Ansar al Sharia—the same name used by Harzi’s cheerleaders in Tunisia—a militia based in Benghazi.

      In August 2012, just weeks before the assault on the consulate, the Defense Department and Library of Congress published a report (“Al Qaeda in Libya: A Profile”) that discussed connections between the two Ansar al Sharia groups. The report’s authors concluded that Ansar al Sharia in Libya “has increasingly embodied al Qaeda’s presence in Libya, as indicated by its active social-media propaganda, extremist discourse, and hatred of the West, especially the United States.” Moreover, the “Facebook sites of Ansar al Sharia in Libya and the group in Tunisia appear similar in design and content and also share contacts, suggesting coordination between the groups.”

      On September 14, three days after the attack in Benghazi, Ansar al Sharia Tunisia stormed the U.S. embassy in Tunis. The embassy and an American school were ransacked, causing millions of dollars in property damage. An al Qaeda-style black banner was raised over the embassy where the American flag usually flies.

      Ansar al Sharia Tunisia is headed by Seifallah ben Hassine (aka Abu Iyad al Tunisi), who has been designated an al Qaeda-affiliated terrorist by the United Nations and the U.S. government. Other designated al Qaeda terrorists hold leadership positions in the group as well.

      While the Obama administration has not publicly drawn a connection between the terrorist groups that assaulted the U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi and Tunis, others have. In early January, for instance,Al-Hayat (an Arabic paper in London) reported that members of Ansar al Sharia Tunisia travel to Libya to receive extensive terrorist training in camps “under the supervision of” Ansar al Sharia Libya. Mike Rogers, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, has seen enough evidence to conclude that the two Ansar al Sharias are effectively the “same organization.”

      We are left, then, with an uncomfortable set of facts. Despite its many promises, after four months of a criminal investigation, the U.S. government has made little progress on bringing the Benghazi attackers to justice. The Obama administration, which came to office trumpeting “smart power,” has shown itself unable to produce cooperation even from governments receiving vast sums of aid from the United States without congressional threats. And now, the same terrorist organizations that supplied the attackers for the assaults on American facilities in Benghazi and Tunis are openly threatening FBI investigators and celebrating the release of one of the few suspects in the 9/11/12 attacks.

      There’s not justice, it’s humiliation.

      Stephen F. Hayes is a senior writer at The Weekly Standard. Thomas Joscelyn is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Leave A Response

* Required

-->