Border control: This reassures me. Not. Update: Napolitano 2016?

February 4, 2013

At the moment I consider myself agnostic about the latest immigration proposal, this time from a bipartisan group of senators including Marco Rubio (R-FL). We all know the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli plan was a bust, because the promised border security arrangements were never implemented. And there are serious questions in this latest proposal: J. Christian Adams raises a few good ones. On the other hand, Rubio has promised to withdraw his support for the bill, should the border security provisions not be adequate.

One good sign they won’t be is just who gets to determine when and if the border is secure: Janet Napolitano.

Under a bipartisan Senate framework, Democrats say, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano would have final say over whether the border is secure enough to put 11 million illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship.

If Napolitano does not provide the green light for putting illegal immigrants on a pathway to citizenship, the responsibility for judging whether the metrics for border security have been met will be given to her successor.

This is the same idiot who declared, after the attempted Christmas Day bombing of Northwest Flight 253 over Detroit was stopped by an alert passenger at the last minute, that “the system worked.” And she’s to be put in charge of determining when the border is secure? What’s her criteria, tea-leaf readings?

And, to be blunt, I wouldn’t trust any politically appointed official in the Obama administration to make an objective call; the self-interest of the president’s party means that they have an interest in granting citizenship as soon as possible and as fast as possible to as many Latin American immigrants as possible, because they are more likely to vote Democratic. The pressure on Napolitano to declare the border secure ASAP would be tremendous. (Not that it would take much, as Janet has shown herself to be a willing tool.)

If this provision stays in the bill, I’d advise Senator Rubio to have a press release handy announcing his opposition.

via Bryan Preston

UPDATE: Janet Napolitano is thinking of running for president in 2016? Seriously??

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


DHS: “We can buy assault weapons to protect ourselves; you can’t. Hah-hah!”

January 28, 2013

Since the Newtown school massacre, there have been renewed calls for bans on so-called “assault rifles.” There was a march in D.C. this last weekend, and Senator Diane Feinstein (D-Nannystate) introduced legislation to ban all sorts of weapons, mostly based on cosmetic factors that scare lefties, but make no difference in the weapon’s lethality. One of the most common arguments made is that you “just don’t need” such a weapon to defend yourself. (1)

But those are the rules for peasants such you and me. If you work for the Department of Homeland Security, well, that’s different:

The Department of Homeland Security is seeking to acquire 7,000 5.56x45mm NATO “personal defense weapons” (PDW) — also known as “assault weapons” when owned by civilians. The solicitation, originally posted on June 7, 2012, comes to light as the Obama administration is calling for a ban on semi-automatic rifles and high capacity magazines.

Citing a General Service Administration (GSA) request for proposal (RFP), Steve McGough of RadioViceOnline.com reports that DHS is asking for the 7,000 “select-fire” firearms because they are “suitable for personal defense use in close quarters.” The term select-fire means the weapon can be both semi-automatic and automatic. Civilians are prohibited from obtaining these kinds of weapons.

The RFP describes the firearm as “Personal Defense Weapon (PDW) – 5.56x45mm NATO, select-fire firearm suitable for personal defense use in close quarters and/or when maximum concealment is required.” Additionally, DHS is asking for 30 round magazines that “have a capacity to hold thirty (30) 5.56x45mm NATO rounds.”

Republican New York state Sen. Greg Ball also issued a press release this week bringing attention to the weapons purchase request.

Calls made to DHS seeking information regarding whether or not the RFP was accepted and fulfilled were not immediately returned on Saturday.

Let’s keep this straight, shall we? When you want an AR-15 for home defense, you’re a dangerous, mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging, Bible and Constitution (and wife) beating radical who finds his manhood enhanced by getting your hands on an “assault weapon.” And should you want a magazine that holds ten or more rounds… You’re just fantasizing about shooting up a mall, aren’t you?

But, when the DHS wants its agents to have similar weapons… Those aren’t “assault weapons,” silly! Those are for “personal defense!” And, unlike you, they really do need high-capacity magazines! Ten rounds? Bah! Let’s go for 30! And the option for full auto-fire!

Why? Well… because, it’s not the same thing, you bitter-clinger!

In all seriousness, I have no problem with DHS buying weapons for its agents’ personal defense; they do dangerous work in the service of the nation. But shouldn’t ordinary, law-abiding Americans have the right to make the same choices for themselves and their families?

Scratch that. It’s not “have the right,” which implies a debatable question or request. No, Americans have that right as an inalienable natural right that preexists government, and the Second Amendment is a recognition of that right, not a grant.

So, if the managers of DHS can decide that they and their people need these weapons for their personal defense, shouldn’t the government acknowledge that individuals have that same right?

via John Kass

Footnote:
(1) With the usually unspoken corollary: “And you don’t get to make that choice for yourself, either.”

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


ICE Chief of Staff resigns in face of sexual harassment allegations

September 2, 2012

Well, that didn’t take long:

ICE Chief of Staff Suzanne Barr has resigned after allegations of lewd behavior. In a letter to ICE Director John Morton, Barr denied the sexual harassment claims made against her.

“As such, I feel it is incumbent upon me to take every step necessary to prevent further harm to the agency and to prevent this from further distracting from our critical work. Therefore, it is with great regret that I submit my resignation as Chief of Staff for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.”

Last month James Hayes filed a lawsuit saying women closely connected to DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano were promoted over him. He also claimed Ms. Barr instilled a “frat-house” atmosphere at DHS “to humiliate and intimidate male employees.”

I reported on the two lawsuits alleging female-on-male sexual harassment and demeaning behavior at the Department of Homeland Security several weeks ago. At the time, I speculated that Suzanne Barr would be resigning to spend more time with her family, or some other excuse. We now know that a “decent interval” in the DHS is two weeks.

And, don’t forget — these are the people who are supposed to keep us safe.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Raunchy affidavits filed in DHS sex discrimination suit — Updated: Barr goes under the bus?

August 15, 2012

More allegations about Animal House-like behavior at the Department of Homeland Security have come to light, this time in affidavits filed in the first of two lawsuits (so far):

The affidavits were given as part of a discrimination and retaliation suit filed earlier this year by James T. Hayes Jr., the head of the New York office for Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Hayes claimed that Napolitano presided over a female “frat-house”-style department that routinely humiliated male staffers.

The two new affidavits described separate incidents in 2009. Both accounts described the actions of ICE chief of staff Suzanne Barr, who was also mentioned in Hayes’ lawsuit.

One of the employees claimed that in October 2009, while in a discussion about Halloween plans, the individual witnessed Barr turn to a senior ICE employee and say: “You a sexy” (expletive deleted).

“She then looked at his crotch and asked, ‘How long is it anyway?'” according to the affidavit.

“Several employees laughed nervously,” the affidavit said. The names of the workers making the claims have been redacted.

The other account recalled a trip to Colombia in late 2009, attended by ICE Director John Morton, Barr and Ray Parmer, who is special agent in charge for Homeland Security Investigations in New Orleans.

The account said Parmer and Barr were “drinking heavily” at the house of the deputy chief of mission for the U.S. Embassy there. It said Parmer took the BlackBerry of another employee, Peter Vincent, and sent “lewd messages” to Barr.

The affidavit went on to say: “During this party, Suzanne Barr approached me and offered to” perform oral sex.

The two accounts were submitted this week to the defense attorney in the case Hayes filed against Napolitano.

Is this the Department of Homeland Security or Cougar Town? Sounds like a perfect place for a President Romney to impose some adult supervision by appointing Rudy Giuliani as Secretary.

RELATED: Other DHS posts.

via Gabriel Malor

UPDATE: Well, that was fast.

ICE chief of staff on leave after new allegations of lewd conduct surface

The top Homeland Security official accused of cultivating a “frat-house”-style work environment has “voluntarily placed herself on leave” amid an internal review, the department told FoxNews.com late Tuesday evening — just hours after FoxNews.com contacted the agency about new allegations against her.

The official, Suzanne Barr, is chief of staff for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

(…)

“ICE has referred these allegations to the DHS Office of Inspector General and the ICE Office of Professional Responsibility for review. Ms. Barr has voluntarily placed herself on leave pending the outcome of this review,” ICE Public Affairs Director Brian Hale said in a written statement.

Why do I have a feeling Ms. Barr will be “resigning to pursue other career options”, soon? Someone wholly innocent would fight these allegations tooth and nail. This sounds like the start of a “decent interval,” if you know what I mean.

Question for any Arizonans reading this: Did Napolitano have management problems like this when she was governor?

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Napolitano’s DHS: another sex-discrimination lawsuit filed

August 13, 2012

Following up on this item, I think we’re starting to see a pattern:

A second employee at US Immigration and Customs Enforcement is suing Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano over claims his career was curtailed due to anti-male bias at the agency, The Post has learned.

Jason Mount alleges in court papers that he was denied 43 promotions because he’s a white male and that he took a lower-grade job because of “how serious the discrimination and retaliation had become.”

Mount, 37, filed suit on July 31, about two months after ICE official James Hayes Jr. sued Napolitano for $3 million for allegedly pushing him out of a top job in Washington, DC, to make way for Dora Schriro, later named New York City’s jails commissioner.

(…)

His DC federal court filing details dozens of incidents in which he was allegedly passed over for promotions despite being fully qualified.

The litany of allegations include Mount’s September 2010 application to fill an assistant-special-agent-in-charge, or ASAC, post with Homeland Security Investigations in Boston.

Despite receiving “a rating of 100 percent on the knowledge, skills and abilities rating factors for the position,” Mount says, he was never contacted “to take part in an interview or further selection activities.”

Instead, court papers say the job went to a woman who was one step lower than Mount on the federal civil-service pay scale.

In addition, the woman, Linda Hunt, hadn’t completed an 18-month tour of duty at HSI headquarters in Washington, which “is required to be considered for an ASAC position,” the suit says.

Because of “the severe and pervasive retaliation and discrimination,” Mount says, he “essentially committed career suicide” in December 2011 and asked for a reassignment, “stating that he would be willing to accept a downgrade” in rank and pay.

Once could be a disgruntled employee just looking for payback; twice makes that less likely and starts to indicate a pattern. What lends credibility to Mount’s claims, in my opinion, is his refusal and that of his attorney to talk to the press about the suit. Usually, I’d expect people making bogus claims to go find their nearest Gloria Allred clone and call a press conference, hoping to win in the court of public opinion and persuade the other side to settle out of court (or at least get TV appearances and a book deal), knowing their case is weak on the merits. This, on other hand, has the look of someone who wants to go before a jury.

We’ll see. It could be bogus, but my gut feeling is that this is a case of smoke indicating fire. Yet another reason to elect a new administration that can bring some adult supervision to the DHS “animal house.”

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Your DHS professionals in action: maturity is a relative thing

August 10, 2012

It’s nice to see that the women’s movement in this country, at least on the Left, has come so far that they now feel free to subject their male colleagues to the same frat-house disdain and abuse they and their forebears endured:

Janet Napolitano-run Homeland Security treated male staffers like lapdogs, federal discrimination lawsuit charges

A blistering federal discrimination suit accuses agency honcho Janet Napolitano of turning the department into a female-run “frat house” where male staffers were banished to the bathrooms and routinely humiliated.

James Hayes Jr., who now is New York’s top Homeland Security cop, claims Napolitano filled top spots in Washington, D.C., with two of her gal pals who were bent on tormenting male employees.

The suit identified them as Dora Schriro, who is now running the city Department of Correction, and Suzanne Barr, the chief of staff for the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Soon after Schriro and Barr were hired in January 2009, male staffers were treated like lapdogs, Hayes claims.

Barr “moved the entire contents of the offices of three employees, including name plates, computers and telephones, to the men’s bathroom at ICE headquarters,” the suit says.

Barr also stole a male staffer’s BlackBerry and fired off a message to his female supervisor indicating that he “had a crush on [her] and fantasized about her,” Hayes claims.

Sometimes, Barr took a more direct approach. In one case, she called a male colleague in his hotel room and screamed at him using sexually humiliating language, the suit says.

Hayes claims that after he reported the abuse to the Equal Employment Opportunity office, Napolitano launched a series of misconduct investigations against him.

And this is the mindset of people charged with the solemn responsibility of protecting us from another 9/11.

I feel more secure, don’t you?

Now, of course, we don’t know the truth of Mr. Hayes’ claims; he could just be an embittered ex-employee who’s just making stuff up for some reason. But it rings true. For some reason, and to put it bluntly, many on the Left lack maturity. Whether it’s vandalizing the White House or excusing people who poop on police cars — and now, it seems, workplace sexual harassment– time and again Our Betters on the Left (all bow) seem to think it’s okay for them to do things they would denounce as crimes against nature, were they committed by Republicans.

That’s not to say Republicans and conservatives don’t have their problem children, too. (John Ensign, anyone? Larry Craig?) But we, at least, usually police our own and send the offenders away. That’s because conservatives recognize that this behavior is juvenile, wrong, and unworthy of someone granted the public trust and the dignity of office.

For many on the Left, that seems to be a feature, not a bug.

via izzysroses

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Lying or incompetent? The Janet Napolitano edition

October 28, 2011

So, which is it, Madame Secretary? Or is it both?

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet “The System Worked” Napolitano testified before the House Judiciary Committee and did her best Sergeant Schultz impression, claiming she knew nothing about Operation Fast and Furious (aka Gunwalker) until Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was killed late last year:

House Republicans on Wednesday turned their sharp questioning over “Operation Fast and Furious” toward Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, who acknowledged her agents were twice told to “stand down” in deference to what she called a “very troublesome” operation.

Napolitano, at one point likening the questioning to a cross-examination, said repeatedly she only learned of “Fast and Furious” after Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was killed in December. She emphasized the operation, conceived and run by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, “was an ATF operation,” under the auspices of the Justice Department, not her department.

Well played, Janet! Denying knowledge of Gunwalker while pointing a big finger at Justice! Guess your boss isn’t the only one who can throw people under the bus.

Call me “cynical,” but Secretary Napolitano’s testimony lacks a certain something… Let’s call it “credibility.”

Look at the facts: Janet Napolitano was Governor of Arizona from 2003 to 2009, when Barack Obama appointed her DHS Secretary. Arizona has a huge problem with cartel-related smuggling and violence. She would have been intimately familiar with the problems on her southern border. It is inconceivable that, both as the immediate past governor of a key state, a cabinet official,  and head of the agency charged with security of the US border, she would not have been briefed on a major cross-border gun-smuggling operation, particularly when we were running it.

Consider also that Dennis Burke, her former chief of staff when she was Arizona’s governor and a senior adviser to her at DHS, was the US Attorney for Arizona during Operation Fast and Furious and participated in the inter-agency task force overseeing the operation fiasco.

This is Napolitano’s former chief of staff, someone she worked closely with for years, whom she probably helped get the US Attorney’s job, and who was her protege in Arizona politics. Does she seriously expect us to believe he never briefed her, never even mentioned it to his friend and mentor? Remember, Gunwalker started in mid-2009; Agent Terry was killed in November, 2010.  For over a year, Burke told his friend the Director of Homeland Security nothing? Nor was she briefed by anyone at the DoJ?

Seriously, Janet?

Lying, incompetent, or both, folks. You make the call.

RELATED: Earlier posts about Gunwalker.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 13,395 other followers