DOJ Media Probe – Why We Don’t Care.

DOJ Media Probe Headerby Benjamin T. Moore, Jr.

trea·son (noun)

1. Violation of allegiance toward one’s country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one’s country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.

DOJ Media Probe - Koch Brothers

Charles and David Koch

It is very disheartening to realize that effectively, there is very little difference between the Koch brothers and those who own and run our media outlets. In both cases you have extremely wealthy people who have agendas and the means to pursue those agendas in a manner that excludes competing viewpoints. Yes, everyone has a voice. However, when you’ve got wealth, you have a megaphone that allows you to shout down competing positions.

DOJ Media Probe - Cable News NetworksWe recently became aware that the Department of Justice obtained the phone records of reporters working for the Associated Press. If you had asked me to speculate on the odds of Fox News, Huffington Post and MSNBC all being in agreement on an issue, I’d of put those odds right about even with Hell freezing over. Imagine my surprise when I awoke one fine day to discover that all the News channels were in complete agreement on an issue.

DOJ Media Probe - Attorney General Eric Holder

Attorney General Eric Holder

Any issue that could make Fox News and MSNBC see eye to eye, simply demanded further investigation. Even more so as more and more media outlets began to pile on. As usual – for Fox – their target was Attorney General Eric Holder. I will admit, based on the reporting it was disturbing to think that the Federal Government would acquire the confidential work product of renowned news reporters… in secret!

Having been burned a time or two, I’ve learned to look prior to leaping based on some media outlet’s say so. What I discovered was shockingly simple. Contrary to the impressions being spread, there was good reason for what was done and it was in fact a matter of National Security.

There is a distinct difference between a “whistle blower” speaking in confidence to our “free press” and someone using the press to reveal “Top Secret” information. Information, that once revealed would weaken our nation, put at risk the lives of those who work with our assets on foreign soil and ultimately put at risk the lives of Americans right here at home.

DOJ Media Probe

DOJ Media Probe - Underwear Bomber

Underwear Bomber

Most of you will recall the “Underwear Bomber.” What most do not realize is how close he came to succeeding. Unlike the “Shoe Bomber” who paused to say his prayers first, allowing enough time for a vigilant Stewardess to “Cold Cock” him before he could put a match to the fuse of the bomb hidden in his shoes, the “Underwear Bomber” was successful in setting off his device. Fortunately for everyone on that plane, rather than detonate as planned, it simply burst into flame, burning severely some rather sensitive portions of his anatomy.

DOJ Media Probe - Anwar Al-AwlakiThe people we’re at war with, are not stupid. They analyse what went wrong, and seek to improve their devices for their next attempts. It turns out, we were fortunate enough to capture and get our hands on one of their new and improved devices. It was whisked to our labs over here for examination and analysis. The “intel” from that device would have given us a lot of information. How their bomb making techniques have improved. What chemicals they’re currently employing. How they’re triggering the new device and most importantly, whether or not our current security protocols and technology would be able to catch these new devices.

"DOJ Media Probe - FBI Crime Lab

FBI Crime Lab

That information is only good so long as “They” don’t know we’re on to them. Nobody with the clearances to even know we had one of their devices, nobody with the clearances to analyze their device, should be spilling the beans to ANYBODY, let alone a reporter(s) working for an international news agency.

When the DOJ read the AP article in March of 2012 outlining the operation, stating that our CIA had seized the device and that it was being examined and analysed by the FBI, as you might imagine, there was an immediate investigation launched behind the scenes. This was information that had to of come from an inside source.

DOJ Media Probe - Espionage

We’re talking about espionage.

When people make honest mistakes, they do not seek to cover their tracks. Clearly whomever leaked the information was not an amateur nor was his or her leaking of the information accidental. If it had been, they would have discovered the person responsible and dealt with them. The “DOJ Media Probe” is mute testimony to the serious nature of this situation. They had to approach it from the media end and work backwards. Now they’ve got a double headed situation. If they’d walked through the front door of the Associated Press and made their request. The reporter may have tipped off his or her source that they were on to him. This may have provided time for the destruction of evidence and possible escape. They needed to know whom was in contact with the Associated Press. Someone who would also have had access to, or the security clearance high enough to have access to sensitive information at that level.

Yes, the DOJ Media Probe truly is a matter of national security. This has nothing to do with “Whistle Blowers” or weakening the First Amendment protections of our “Free Press.” This truly is a matter of National Security. It is important to note, the DOJ actually showed an amazing amount of restraint. They could have easily seized AP offices around the country, put everyone out, padlocked the doors and then combed through all of their files at their leisure. Instead, they did not even record the contents of the conversations of the AP reporters, they simply made a log of whom they were talking to.

Media Reaction

This entire scenario has given us a wonderful insight into what is wrong with our “for profit” News outlets. At one time they taught in journalism classes, the goal of any news report is to answer four questions:

  1. Who?
  2. What?
  3. When?
  4. Where?

A Journalist adds one more question, “Why?” No opinions, just the facts as you know them to be. The Newspapers did add Opinionated Editorials which we abbreviate as “Op-Eds.” These were entertaining and provided food for thought, but we understood these were the opinions of the writer and not necessarily based in fact. We weighed them as such and there was no attempt to pawn these off as “News.” They even had their own section in the Newspapers.

DOJ Media Probe - Andy Rooney

The late, great Andy Rooney

Today we have opinion masquerading as news! Andy Rooney’s segment at the end of “60 Minutes” was an Op-Ed. He made no bones about it. Everyone understood that Andy was not reporting on the News. FOX News, MSNBC and CNN have more “Op-Ed” shows than they do actual News shows. When it comes to actual News, I’d give the edge to CNN. The other networks are basically all opinion unless there is an actual breaking story unfolding. Even then, most often they fill empty air with “talking heads” who proffer their opinions about what is unfolding. It’s all entertainment.

Proof There Is Really Little Difference Between The Networks

The DOJ Media Probe has certainly provided proof that there is really no difference between the major Cable News outlets and many of the Printed and Electronic Media outlets. If any of them had gone back to the fundamentals of News Reporting and Journalism, the whole DOJ Media Probe wouldn’t have been much more than a 5 minute piece. Who? What? When? Where? Why?

The true story had nothing to do with the DOJ Media Probe. The true story was whether or not one of their own was complicit in treason? Isn’t it interesting that they all seem to be ignoring this angle of the story? It is this very uniformity in their approach that gives cause for pause and raises one’s suspicions. When News Agencies who have a track record of disagreeing on almost every issue they focus on, suddenly line up and fall in step? That’s not just unusual, that’s like waking up tomorrow to discover that the Sun is now rising in the West and setting in the East. You might want to seriously examine, what happened over night while you were sleeping.

Mind Control And Media Manipulation

DOJ Media Probe - Mind ControlMost people never stop to realize that one of the most powerful tools of mind control and manipulation is the News Media! You turn on your television each evening and you’re not only being told what is important, but what you should think about it. The world is a big place. History is being made around the globe everyday. There simply is not enough time to cover everything. Thus, someone has to go through, pick, choose and aggregate what should or should not be covered. This is where the mischief begins.

No problem! We all agree this is necessary. However, have you ever wondered whom decides what is presented? What criteria do they use? Take the Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting for instance. Absolutely tragic. The liberal media – MSNBC in particular – have used this tragedy as an excuse to run anti-gun pieces night after night after night. Almost each show on MSNBC devotes some portion of its time to beating the drum for gun control. It’s no longer news. Anybody who was interested or not, now knows everything that happened surrounding the shooting. Well, the official story at least.

DOJ Media Probe - Mind Control RepetitionHow many children died? Around 20? Presumably, it is out of concern for the children that MSNBC, night after night, like a broken record on a record player you cannot unplug, gives all it’s viewers their daily overdose of anti-gun medicine. Clearly they’re no longer reporting the news. They’re not even engaging in legitimate “opinionated editorials.” What they’re endeavouring to do is manipulate society and cause it to move in the direction that they have chosen. Incessant repetition is one of the main tools of brain washing.

Why do I call this, “attempted societal manipulation?” If MSNBC or for that matter, any of the Cable News Outlets were really concerned about children, they’d be discussing the nearly 20,000 children that die every single day because of starvation or treatable disease. Every day, 1,000 times more children die than were murdered in Sandy Hook Elementary school. Yet, not a peep from the liberal media. By way of analogy, it’s like someone on the Titanic complaining about a leaky faucet in their Stateroom.

Either you care about children or you do not. MSNBC’s hypocrisy knows no bounds or, what they’re actually doing is using their platform to advance an agenda. In this, they’re no different than the Koch brothers or other monied interests on the “Right” who use their wealth to buy elections and purchase politicians. The end objective is exactly the same. Subvert democracy and shape society to their liking. Perhaps it is because the nearly 20,000 children who are dying are not white? Maybe it’s because they weren’t shot with a semi-automatic rifle? Maybe somehow they’re less dead because they weren’t shot?

Why We Don’t Care About The DOJ Media Probe

I am happy to report that as of today, the American people have not completely succumbed to the mind control methods being employed against them. Based on the polling, we get it! The American people know that one of the primary functions of government is to provide for the safety and welfare of the American Citizens. When a News Agency begins to publish top secret information that could ultimately cause the deaths of innocent American Citizens, we not only expect our government agencies to take action, we demand that they do.

DOJ Media Probe - Associated PressIf anything, the Justice Department under Attorney General Eric Holder, may have shown too much restraint. By giving a “heads up” to the terrorist, the Associated Press may have caused the bomb makers to refine their methods and technologies such that their next attempts will meet with success. The blood of all the innocent victims of the next attacks, will be laid at the doors of the Associated Press.

Why Senate Background Check Bill Failed

Why Senate Background Check Bill Failed Headerby Benjamin T. Moore, Jr.

The Simple Answer Is Not Always Correct

Why Senate Background Check Bill Failed - Senate Voting ChartIf the why makes no difference to you, we could simply say, they didn’t have the votes, blame it on the all powerful NRA lobbyist and be done with it. However, reality is rarely as simple as it seems.

Ever since the events at the Sandy Hook Elementary School on 14 December 2012, there has been a constant drum beat in the “Liberal Media” for more “gun control” legislation. It has been like having “Kentucky Fried Chicken” for dinner night after night after night. Though it is probably not very healthy, I do enjoy a bucket of KFC on occasion. I like cake and ice cream too. However, if I knew that each night, I was going to have KFC followed by ice cream and cake, I’d begin dreading coming to dinner.

We all – those of us with hearts – bleed whenever innocent children are victims of senseless violence. Those of us who are parents – indeed I’ve personally lost a child to murder – marvel at the fortitude of the parents who lost their children to this senseless tragedy. I can tell you right now, I would never be able to stand before a camera and speak intelligently had my child been a victim. I just could not do it.

Why Senate Background Check Bill Failed - Emilie Parker

Poster Child for a tragedy or the marketing of an agenda?

In fact, I am a little offended by the news media as well as political interests, using these parents at a time when they are still wrapped in the fog of their grief, to advance a political agenda. Although there were 26 victims, the media has pretty much settled on the image of little Emilie Parker to be their “poster child” for this tragedy. Blond hair, blue eyes and an infectious smile, I can certainly see why from an advertising and marketing perspective, why they would make such a choice. However, that is the problem isn’t it? Advertising and Marketing. What are they using her to sell us? What about the other victims? Unless you’ve been to a web site or seen a program where they show all their faces, you probably have no idea what they look like. Yet, they died too. Their families are shattered too.

Brady Law Provisions

If we are going to talk about background checks, it might be nice to know what the current law is. Most people who have never purchased or who do not own a firearm, might be surprised to know that all firearms purchases through licensed dealers – gun stores – are automatically subjected to a federal background check. This includes sells made by licensed dealers at gun shows! I’m sure you’ve seen the news stories of people purchasing firearms at what you’re told is a gun show, apparently without a background check. The angle of the camera is such that you’re given the impression that the transaction is being taped by a hidden camera. Remember the admonition to “believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see.”

March 30, 1981 there was an assassination attempt on then President Ronald Reagan. His press secretary, James Brady was shot in the head but thankfully survived. Considering the extent of inter-cranial damage he sustained, his recovery has been truly remarkable. As a result of this tragedy, his wife and he – not unlike the Gabby Gifford and her husband – formed a gun control PAC and lobbied the United States Congress successfully to pass stringent gun control laws. The “Brady Laws” were the result of their efforts. A national instant background check system was put in place, run by the FBI. Here are some of the provisions that already exist today. The Federally prohibiting criteria are as follows:

  • A person who has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year or any state offense classified by the state as a misdemeanor and is punishable by a term of imprisonment of more than two years.
  • Persons who are fugitives of justice—for example, the subject of an active felony or misdemeanor warrant.
  • An unlawful user and/or an addict of any controlled substance; for example, a person convicted for the use or possession of a controlled substance within the past year; or a person with multiple arrests for the use or possession of a controlled substance within the past five years with the most recent arrest occurring within the past year; or a person found through a drug test to use a controlled substance unlawfully, provided the test was administered within the past year.
  • A person adjudicated mental defective or involuntarily committed to a mental institution or incompetent to handle own affairs, including dispositions to criminal charges of found not guilty by reason of insanity or found incompetent to stand trial.
  • A person who, being an alien, is illegally or unlawfully in the United States.
  • A person who, being an alien except as provided in subsection (y) (2), has been admitted to the United States under a non-immigrant visa.
  • A person dishonorably discharged from the United States Armed Forces
  • A person who has renounced his/her United States citizenship
  • The subject of a protective order issued after a hearing in which the respondent had notice that restrains them from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such partner. This does not include ex parte orders.
  • A person convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime which includes the use or attempted use of physical force or threatened use of a deadly weapon and the defendant was the spouse, former spouse, parent, guardian of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited in the past with the victim as a spouse, parent, guardian or similar situation to a spouse, parent or guardian of the victim.
  • A person who is under indictment or information for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.

This information is already contained in the FBI’s database and is available usually within 30 seconds. Remember, by law every firearms sell through a licensed dealer is submitted to the FBI’s instant background check database. This law was passed by the 103rd Congress, it was signed into law by Bill Clinton November 30, 1993 and went into effect February 28, 1994. It is the current law of the land.

What Is The “Gun Show Loophole?”

No doubt you’ve heard this phrase bandied about quite a bit of late. The anti-gun movement would have you believe that all anyone has to do is wait for a gun show in their area and walk in and purchase whatever type of firearm they want. I even heard someone claim on a national news show, that you can go into a gun show and purchase a full auto machine gun without even having to show any identification. Not only was this just plain ignorant, it was deplorable journalism. This claim could have been put to the lie by simply making a phone call to any gun dealer in the phone book. It certainly sounded sensational though!

What they’re calling the “gun show loophole” is in essence an individual sale between two persons neither of whom is a licensed gun dealer. You might just as correctly call it the “McDonald’s loophole” or perhaps the “Facebook loophole.” Two people can meet virtually anywhere, get to talking about firearms when one of them mentions they have a firearm for sell and the other agrees to purchase it. This doesn’t have to occur at a gun show.

What most people do not realize – take the Indy 1500 gun show for instance – not every person sitting behind a table selling their products is selling guns or is a licensed firearms dealer. The “Indy 1500 gun show boasts it has 1500 tables. Some people are selling knives, camping gear, books, military memorabilia such as medals and patches. There are even people selling fishing equipment. Depending on the rules of the show in question, if one of these persons had a personal firearm they were interested in selling, you could see it sitting on their table. As a private individual, they are not bound by the laws a licensed firearms dealer is. They are a private individual just like you and I. So if when you see a video clip of someone purchasing a firearm at a gun show without a background check – assuming you’re not viewing a staged re-creation – this is what you’re seeing. The same transaction could have occurred at the McDonald’s across the street.

Should Personal Firearms Sells Be Subject To Background Checks?

Why Senate Background Check Bill Failed - Background Check Tax

A Tax by any other name.

Good question! How exactly would you enforce that? I have a .22 caliber single shot rifle that was my grandfather’s. It was passed down to me by my father. I will probably pass it down to my son. There is no paperwork on it and as far as I know, there never has been any paperwork on it. As far as the ATF is concerned, this firearm does not exist. It is a family heirloom. Yes it fires and is in good working order. When I decide to gift one of my sons with this rifle, what are the odds we will go into a licensed dealer and pay the tax – that’s what it is – to have it entered into the system and federal background check run? I’ll tell you. The odds are slim to none and Slim left town.

Trying to enforce such a provision in the law would be nearly impossible. The expense would make enforcing such a law prohibitive. We simply do not have the manpower required in local, State or Federal law enforcement for such an undertaking. So whom are we kidding? Did I mention “Sequestration?”

Why Senate Background Check Bill Failed

After reading through the provisions of the Brady Law which is current law, what exactly would you like to see added to that? Remember, we’re not talking about an “assault weapons ban” or an “extended magazine ban,” we’re only talking about background checks. Most reasonable people would conclude, the problem is not that we need a new law. If there is a problem, the problem is with enforcement. Any additional laws passed would face the exact same problem. Laws are meaningless if they’re not enforced or impossible to enforce. We call it “The Honor System.”

Why Senate Background Check Bill Failed - Masturbation KitSenators generally like their jobs. They want to keep them. People feel strongly on both sides of the gun issue. I would give the edge to the pro-gun side. They tend to have longer memories and they do vote. When you’re asking a Senator to put their careers on the line and make a principled vote, it must be meaningful. Simply engaging in what amounts to political masturbation won’t fly. Ultimately, it is an insult to the victims of gun violence. It is passing a law that actually does nothing, and is designed to shut them up and make them go away.

It is worse than most people know. Mother Jones has an excellent expose` on this fact. Senators Joe Manchin (D) and Pat Toomey (R) put their heads together to come up with an amended Bill that they thought would have a chance of passing. The problem is, if anything it weakened current Brady laws. Here are some of their amended provisions from the Mother Jones website:

  • Exempts many sales from background checks: The bill doesn’t alter current laws exempting background checks for gun transfers between friends and families. It also wouldn’t require checks for other private sales if the guns weren’t “advertised.” That weakens the effectiveness of background check reform in a big way.
  • Leaves open a gun-show loophole: Because of the private sales exemption, the bill doesn’t entirely close the so-called gun-show loophole, as UCLA law professor Adam Winkler notes. Someone looking to buy a gun could find a private seller and “agree to meet after the show at a convenient location and make the sale, with no background check.”
  • May exempt background checks in some rural areas: As part of their effort to woo rural senators, Manchin and Toomey may add a measure allowing dealers who live more than 100 miles away from a licensee to skip background checks.
  • Exempts background checks for concealed-carry permit holders: Gun buyers who got a concealed-carry permit within the past five years wouldn’t have to undergo background checks for commercial sales.
  • Reduces the time the FBI has to block a sale: Current law gives the FBI 72 business hours to block a sale by a licensed dealer at a gun show if the buyer’s background check is flagged. The bill would reduce that to 48 hours and, after four years, reduce it again to 24 hours. The FBI would still have to destroy information about the buyer’s identity within 24 hours after a sale.
  • Allows the interstate sale of handguns: Currently, licensed dealers can only sell rifles and shotguns across state lines. The bill would expand that to include handguns. Licensed dealers would also be allowed to sell guns to other dealers at gun shows outside of their home state.
  • Weakens laws that restrict transporting guns across state lines: The bill would establish a federal regulation protecting lawful gun owners from arrest when they cross state lines with their firearm, which would weaken laws in states with tighter state and local regulations.
  • Expands legal immunity to private sellers: In 2005, Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which prevents victims of gun violence from suing gun manufacturers and dealers for negligence. The Manchin-Toomey bill would expand that immunity to private gun sellers who don’t have a commercial license.
  • Makes a national gun registry even less likely than before: Senators like Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) are still warning that the bill is a step toward a national gun registry—even though it would punish people who try to create one with up to 15 years in prison.
  • Expands gun rights for veterans in questionable condition: Current law prohibits veterans from buying guns if the Department of Veterans Affairs considers them “‘mentally incompetent’ to manage their own funds,” after which they are put into the national background check database. The Manchin-Toomey bill would allow veterans unfit to manage their funds to continue buying guns while they appealed the VA’s decision, and expand the ability of veterans already in the system to file appeals to have their name removed. It would also overturn a law that bans members of the military from buying guns sold by dealers in their home state. (These Points are directly from the Mother Jones website)

Thus, if you were a Senator, willing to put your career on the line to cast a principled vote, this is not the hill you’d want to die on. Why did the Senate Background Check Bill Fail? It added absolutely nothing to the existing Brady Laws, if anything it weakened them. If the only tool in your toolbox is a hammer, all your problems seem to look like nails. When you’re a legislator, your first response is to pass a new law. Really? How many laws do we need? Murdering people is already illegal. Even with the threat of the death penalty, it hasn’t seemed to stop murders from occurring.

Gun violence is a symptom of a problem within our society. 24 hours a day we are bombarded by the media with stories designed and tailor made to instil fear in society. From global warming to an asteroid potentially ending life on Earth at any moment, to Yellowstone erupting, North Korea starting a nuclear war, to a fertilizer factory exploding and wiping out a neighborhood. We are being fed a steady diet designed to create fear and panic. In this atmosphere, you’re telling people that they don’t need firearms to keep them safe? That is a heavy lift and a tough sell. Did I mention terrorist running and gunning through your neighborhood, shooting it out with the Police?