Earlier today, Paddy posted a video of a heckler interrupting the Boston bombing Presser with an accusation of a false flag staged attack, directly from the Alex Jones school of conspiracy theories.
As Nicole Sandler and I discussed on her radio show today, there has been way too much speculation about the tragedy– some of it irrational, much of it erroneous, some of it thoughtful. What has been appalling is the default position of those who automatically blame any attack on anyone who they conclude is a "Muslim terrorist." Never mind the white American terrorists who killed and/or threatened abortion providers or the Timothy McVeighs in this country.
Josh Rogin and Senator Dianne Feinstein are doing what they can to stop some of that conclusion-jumping.
The Saudi national injured in the Boston Marathon bombings Monday is "not a suspect," Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) told The Cable Tuesday.
"As far as I know, he is not a suspect," Feinstein said Tuesday afternoon. She declined to specify how she knew but said she had been briefed Monday night by Sean Joyce, the No. 2 official at the FBI. Feinstein said her information about the Saudi national was not dispositive because the investigation was still ongoing. [...]
Feinstein said she didn't know yet if the attack was from a foreign or domestic source.
"It's hard to tell," she said. "I think the device will determine a lot of that."
Investigators have already searched the home of the 22-year old Saudi student, who was injured during the bombings and remains in the care of a local hospital. Officials at the Saudi Embassy in Washington, D.C. have also not been informed that the student is either a suspect or a person of interest.
Place blame after the facts come out, not before. Please and thank you.
Milwaukee police chief Edward Flynn wouldn’t let Lindsey Graham get away with pestering him repeatedly with NRA talking points at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing about Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-CA) proposed assault weapons ban.
…We absolutely do nothing to enforce the laws on the books…
Just for the record, from my point of view, the point of a background check…
How many cases have you made? How many cases have you made?
It doesn’t matter, it’s a paper thing. I want to stop 76,000 people from getting guns illegally. That’s what a background check does. If you think we’re going to do paperwork prosecutions, you’re wrong.
Feinstein found it necessary to scold Graham who then briefly brown-nosed the chief. But he continued to badger Flynn, who had no problem interrupting L’il Linds with his own points.
How many cases have you made for somebody violating the background checks?
“We don’t make those cases. We have priorities. We make gun cases. We make 2,000 gun cases a year, senator, that’s our priority. We’re not in a paper chase. We’re trying to prevent the wrong people from buying guns. That’s why we do background checks. If you think I’m going to do a paper chase, then you think I’m going to misuse my resources.“
“We don’t chase paper. We chase armed criminals.”
Think Progress has more, including:
Graham said that limited resources for police departments is a reason to bolster gun ownership, arguing that citizens would have to take the law in their own hands and protect themselves. “What this police chief is facing, is what every police chief is facing, less money so you may have to defend yourself,” he explained.
Hmm, who does that remind you of? Ah, got it, this guy: Sheriff’s pro-gun radio ads to be paid by taxpayers. “This has nothing to do with public safety and everything to do with self-promotion.”
Senator Dianne Feinstein on CNN’s “State of the Union”:
“This has always been an uphill fight. This has never been easy. This is the hardest of the hard. Now, will it only be assault weapons? No, most likely. There will be a package put together. If assault weapons is left out of the package … I’ve been assured by the majority leader I’ll be able to do it as an amendment on the floor, which is the way I did it in 1993.”
“We do have support, don’t mistake it.”
“I concede [it's a very tough road] because the NRA is venal. They come after you. They put together large amounts of money to defeat you. They did this in ’93 and they intend to continue it.“
Then Candy Crowley actually questioned Feinstein on whether or not the NRA is venal. After which she defended children using guns. Come on, Candy, seriously?
Please watch the entire video.
So now, as Feinstein– who happens to be my senator– said, she has Harry Reid’s word (uh huh) that even if the assault weapons ban doesn’t end up in the gun legislation, she will still get to bring it up an amendment:
(Reuters) – The senator leading the charge to revive a assault weapons ban conceded on Sunday, just days before hearings on gun control open, that winning Senate passage will be tough but said she has been assured she will have the chance to bring it up for a vote.
Sadly, we can’t be exactly sure what “assured” means coming from Harry Reid these days.
Proud to be a Dem time*:
Roll Call: They may not have the votes for passage, but Senate Democrats say they aren’t giving up on their push to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.
Dianne Feinstein, whose bill to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act has 30 co-sponsors, says they won’t give up, even if a repeal takes years to accomplish. Hey, look how long it took to dump Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.
But, as usual, The Boehner is a spoil sport:
In February, President Barack Obama said DOMA was unconstitutional and instructed the Justice Department not to defend it in court. Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), following a party-line vote by the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, took steps to defend the law in court cases
*The blog title quote comes from the Roll Call piece.
My Twitter pal Chris Geidner has all the details, so please click over, but here’s the gist:
White House press secretary Jay Carney announced today that President Barack Obama supports the Respect for Marriage Act, a bill to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act that will have its first Senate hearing on July 20. In response to a question from Metro Weekly, Carney said Obama is “proud to support” the bill that “would take DOMA off the books once and for all.”
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, announced Tuesday a bill to repeal the federal law that defines marriage as a “legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife” and that allows states to reject legal same sex marriages from other states. [...]
She said her bill would “strike the Defense of Marriage Act from law and would free the government to allow for the same type of benefits they allow for married couples to also be applied to same-sex couples.” [...]
Feinstein’s repeal bill has gained 27 Democratic co-sponsors. She noted in the hallway after her remarks that there has been no Republican support for the bill. “I think it’s a hard time because of the tea party and the ideological bent, but I think that’s going to change,” she said.
She added that the bill would have a hard time getting through the House were it pass in the Senate, but “we’re in this for the long march, not just the short hop.”
I yearn for the day when the GOP neanderthals will join the rest of us in the 21st century. How novel that would be.
My senator, Dianne Feinstein, had a thing or two to say about clues that led the CIA to Osama Bin Laden. Her staff has been able to examine records that documented CIA interrogations; only a few have had access to this information.
Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee expect to release findings this summer from an 18-month investigation into the CIA‘s interrogation of terrorism suspects, a review that could provide some clarity on whether harsh techniques — or even torture — played a role in helping the CIA find Osama bin Laden.
Guess what, BushCo! She begs to differ with the toxic hot air you’ve been huffing and puffing all over the hosts of every possible talk show on every possible cable news outlet.
For example (via the L.A. Times):
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who chairs the intelligence committee, said Thursday that the detainee who gave the CIA its best understanding of the courier who ultimately led to Bin Laden — identified by U.S. officials as Hassan Ghul — did so before he was subjected to unspecified harsh interrogation techniques at a secret CIA prison in Poland.
And by “harsh interrogation techniques” she meant torture. Because that’s what it is, despite the incessant euphemisms. It’s torture. And torture is what BushCo did to prisoners, because they selected just the right legal team to write up just the right memo stating that torture was legal. Clever them.
BushCo has been putting out the word that Ghul was a big help… once he was subjected to unspeakable abuse. That doesn’t quite jibe with that relevant little detail that specifies that he revealed what he revealed about Bin Laden’s messenger before he was tortured. Guess what else Feinstein’s staff dug up:
Moreover, a U.S. official disclosed that Ghul was not named in a 2005 Justice Department memo that approved use of sleep deprivation, slapping, nudity and water dousing, as The Times reported last week. The memo referred to a detainee named Janat Gul, the official said, and no one suggests he provided information about Bin Laden’s courier.
Curses. Foiled again.
The Political Carnival T-Shirt
Modeled by @suzannegypsy
Lt. Col Barry Wingard is the lawyer for Gitmo detainee Fayiz Al-Kandari. For their ongoing story + related topics, please click on the link below:
Kuwaiti Citizen Detained at Guantanamo since 2002
The Political Carnival is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com.
Photographs on The Political Carnival site (please read):
Photographs from other sources sometimes appear on TPC for humorous or illustrative purposes. As it is not our intention to use these images in any inappropriate manner or to infringe upon any rights held by others, anyone holding legal rights in the use of these images who wishes to have them taken down please contact us immediately requesting such removal, with which we will comply promptly.