Monday, October 14, 2013

Intrepid Reporter Emily MIller Uncovers the Unspeakably Evil Conspiracy to Allow a Double Standard

Dianne-feinstein

Conservative Read

Is there a double standard in Washington, D.C. when it comes to gun politics? Are gun control supporters given certain allowances that gun owners and gun rights advocates are not privy too?

It appears that’s the case if one is to accept a new report by intrepid journalist Emily Miller, the Opinion Editor of the Washington Times.  

Miller investigated how Sen. Dianne Feinstein obtained the “illegal” firearms she displayed at a D.C. press conference earlier this year when the senator from California rolled out her 2013 Assault Weapons Ban.

Those firearms included a Bushmaster XM-15, a Tech 9 handgun, Smith & Wesson M&P15, a Glock 19 with an extended magazine, among others.  According to the District’s strict gun laws, it is illegal for anyone to possess these firearms whether it’s in the city or on federal property.

So, how did Feinstein get her guns?  After invoking rights under the Freedom of Information Act, Miller uncovered the following:

Emily Miller
On Dec. 24, 2012, lobbyist Chuck DeWitt contacted Washington Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier, “Sen. Feinstein has asked us to bring examples of assault weapons used in the worst incidents over the past few years,” DeWitt wrote.

Lanier agreed to help supply some of the firearms while the rest would come from the Philadelphia Police Department, however it was on the condition that the media would be kept in the dark on where the guns came from.

Please make “no mention of the fact that the weapons came from D.C. or were recovered by MPDC in the official language or speeches,” said Keith Williams, the commander of the MPD’s Crime Scene Investigation Division to Feinstein’s press secretary, Tom Mentzer.

Aware of the law, Mentzer was worried that if Feinstein didn’t disclose where the weapons came from, she’d be accused of possessing illegal firearms.

“By not mentioning where the weapons came from, we open ourselves up to the same charge against David Gregory,” Mentzer replied in an email.
Now, here’s where the alleged double standard kicks in.  Shortly after the California senator introduced her AWB, Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) wanted to bring a AR-style rifle and a semiautomatic hunting rifle to a Senate Judiciary Committee on Feinstein’s ban.

The two pro-gun senators wanted to demonstrate to the committee that the ban is really about cosmetics, e.g. pistol grips, barrel shrouds, flash suppressors, etc. and not about how the two semiautomatic weapons function (they function the same) but the request was denied due to the district’s strict gun laws.

As Miller reported, in the wake of this denial, Feinstein’s staff gloated: “I was gratified to hear Sens. Cruz and Graham complaining that getting weapons into their hearing today was ‘unworkable,’” Mentzer emailed Williams and another officer with a news story about the Republicans not being able bring in even a legal rifle. “I find you guys ENTIRELY practical, for the record.”

13 comments:

  1. I hear the choir tuning up for a round of "I told you so." But is anyone surprised? If you're a gun control freak, you can get around any gun law you wish.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I love how you toss in the "if this report is to be believed" comment. Try to discredit Miller through innuendo rather than actually trying to discredit her by making the same FOIA request to find out for real.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Who said "if this report is to be believed?"

      Delete
    2. I see. Comment to that effect was by the original source, so they're the ones who tried to toss in that seed of doubt rather than you--you merely belittled the reporter in the title of the post. Sorry for the mix up.

      Delete
    3. Yes, I belittled the writer and all the rest of you who pretend catching someone in a double standard in the world of politics is a big deal.

      Delete
    4. True, saying a politician has a double standard is about as surprising as saying that water is wet. This, however, is a case of double standards in the application of the law by a law enforcement agency. This is one area where politics isn't supposed to come into play for the sake of the integrity of the system.

      Delete
    5. Actually, Mikeb, I don't see any comments from you about this article. But do explain: Are you tolerant of politicians holding a double standard? That's cause for throwing the bums out in my book.

      Delete
    6. On the spectrum of abuse of power, having a double standard is about as mild as it gets. Of course, you and yours pretend it's really big. You're liars because you really know it's not that big a deal, compared to say, bribe taking or starting unnecessary wars.

      Delete
    7. You and yours excuse it when it's your side doing it--after all, it's minor. Of course, it's this acceptance of such bad behavior that allows it to corrode the system and pave the way for the commonplace acceptance of the greater ills. When you excuse the lesser you undermine your supposed opposition to the greater.

      Delete
    8. When that double standard is used to favor those who wish to infringe on our rights, then yes, it's a big deal.

      Delete
    9. I hate to tell you, but it's your side that makes a big deal of these kinds of things. That's because your argument is weak and you know it. You have to grab at every straw you can.

      Delete
    10. As I said: gun controllers and progressives excuse and minimize this petty corruption, building a culture of corruption that is corrosive and leads to bigger corruption.

      Delete
  3. "Please make “no mention of the fact that the weapons came from D.C. or were recovered by MPDC in the official language or speeches,” said Keith Williams, the commander of the MPD’s Crime Scene Investigation Division to Feinstein’s press secretary, Tom Mentzer."

    Silly man. To quote Mr. Universe, "You cant stop the signal" Or perhaps the old Russian proverb is more appropriate, Two can keep a secret, if one is dead.

    ReplyDelete