Friday, July 31, 2009

Did Obama's Secret Service Draw Guns on Conservative Protesters?

It's hard to tell from the picture, probably taken from a cellphone, but the image is said to depict one of the vehicles in President Obama's Secret Service motorcade with windows open and guns drawn. Gateway Pundit shares a letter from a demonstrator:

During the motorcade when the president was arriving, there were several vehicles following the limo that contained the secret service. All of the vehicles had all the windows rolled down, and back hatch open on the SUVs with the men holding their, I assume assault rifes, machine guns, drawn on everyone lining the streets. Needless to say it took my breath away at the sight of them, and made my friends and I dizzy with fear. I have seen the secret service before, but never like this. While they were intimidating, I never felt in danger. The guns were not drawn when the motorcade was leaving the event. But I turned on a local talk radio program as we were leaving and all the calls were about witnessing the guns being pointed at them and nothing else until the end of the program.
The reader asked if "this was normal"?

To which
Gateway Pundit responds, "It's not normal for the secret service to pull their assault guns on conservative protesters as they drive through town."

Well, it's pretty clear that the administration's not tolerating a lot of dissent.

Here's Betsy Newmark, in response to
The Politico's article on the cancellation of town hall meetings by Democratic congessional members:
Gee, the American people are fed up and they don't want to take it anymore. Instead of looking at the level of anger and readjusting their behavior, the tendency of these congressmen is to dismiss the protesters and cancel the meetings. While I don't approve of a mob blocking a speaker's right to speak, these groups represent a real anger that their representatives would do well to address. These elites may have found all the "tea bagging" jokes amusing when the Tea Party protests were held earlier this year, but the numbers and intensity involved have not dissipated. People are angry and they're taking advantage of their access to their representatives to make that emotion felt. They would do better meet with members of the protesters and answer their questions than to simply decide to shut down their meetings. That would be treating the symptom rather than the cause.

And now they know how conservative speakers at college campuses feel.

More at
Memeorandum. See also, Atlas Shrugs, "That's Why I Fear My Gov't .... Because I Don't Know if the People Are Awake Enough to Do What Needs to Be Done .... And That is to Start Shouting From Rooftops." Pamela's got video of the motocade.


Dave said...

Unless they were aware of a specific threat that was present, which is possible, what other reason would they have for having the windows open?


Libby said...

...welcome to the 'change' everybody asked for...

Grizzly Mama said...

This is very, very bad.

Greywolfe said...

Folks, I don't doubt that there may have been a credible threat. I am damn sure that there are a lot of people that would rather see the poser dead than have him spend another 3 1/2 years beating down our country even further.

Grizzly Mama, as the man said, "you ain't seen nothing, yet!" It's going to get a LOT worse. I am generally not a "watch out for the Black Suburbans!" type but, even I expect to see websites shut down and bloggers and internet radio jocks picked up and bullied.

I sort of look forward to it.

repsac3 said...

I hate to spoil your fun guys, but did any of you actually follow the link to Gateway Pundit, and read the comments? The correct explanation appears in the second comment on the page, and should allay your fears about these gun-toting crazies with a bead on the teabaggers...

Actually, that's the Secret Service Counter Assault Team. They always ride around with the rear window open and their weapons at the ready. Here's one photo:

U.S. Secret Service Counter Assault Team member has his assault weapon at the ready while sitting in the rear of a motorcade SUV as Barack Obama arrives at meeting in the Chicago FBI building.

Here's another:

Tom W. | 07.31.09 - 12:28 am"

These "hired guns" are the same people who protected Bush. They're total professionals and patriots. To think they're going to open fire on civilians because Obama is angry is an absolute smear and an insult.
Tom W. | 07.31.09 - 1:01 am | #


"Everyone calm down a little. I work with some of these folks and this is no different than any other event Ihave been at. People are trying to see something that isnt there. We have enough issues to be concerned about without inventing things like this to get spun up about. - Chuk | 07.31.09 - 1:14 am"

Hatin' on the Secret Service--a nonpolitical agency that protects Republicans & Democrats alike--an agency staffed with some of the most noble and fearless men & women in the world, willing to step in front of bullets, on purpose, to protect and defend others?

Personally, I'd rethink that...

Greywolfe said...

Long time no see Repsac3. Don't get me wrong, I am not hating on them. In fact, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and say they have good reason to keep weapons at the ready with this alleged President.

I wouldn't want their job for nothing. I sure as hell wouldn't step in front of a bullet for anyone we've had in office since Reagan. Him I'd take one for. The rest, not so much.

JBW said...

If only you'd been serving in '81, eh Greywolfe? Just kidding, guy. Nothing but love, nothing but love.

But "alleged" president? Come on, cupcake. Birther, right? Am I right? Right? Don't leave me hanging...

repsac3 said...

Hey Grey...

It's a combination of moderation and enjoying the summer that's kept me away...

I can appreciate that you were not so surprised to see "Obama's" Secret Service doing their job... ...and yet--as usual, I'm sorry to say--your comments scare me most of all. I'd suggest steering clear of the "eatThreas, on the esidentPres," no matter how indirect they actually are, or how much free speech you know God gave you... There were several stories about folks who allegedly got visits from the secret service, just based on internet posts or bumperstickers, posters, t-shirts, etc., under Bush. And while I don't *know* that any of 'em were true, I kinda look at it like saying the word "bomb" in an airport. Best to play it safe, and avoid the potential hassle, no matter how free your speech is supposed to be... (Some believe that that professor Gates guy should've thought that way too, btw... While it's not *illegal* to be rude to a police officer, it isn't smart.)

Take that advice any way you will... I'm just suggesting though, that saying "I am damn sure that there are a lot of people that would rather see the poser dead than have him spend another 3 1/2 years beating down our country even further." or "...they have good reason to keep weapons at the ready with this alleged President..." may be misconstrued, no matter how innocently you mean them...

(I had no issue with the Secret Service questioning folks based on threat assessments, but I did get kinda bent about Bush political personnel getting law enforcement to eject anti-Bush folks from public Bush events... ...and was no fan of those caged off "First Amendment Zones," either.)

Greywolfe said...

Same crap happened under clinton. I've come to see Dems and Republicans as coffee refular and coffee light.

Dennis said...

Why would anyone with a brain want to make a martyr out of Obama by hoping someone kills him. That is stupid. Obama will do enough damage to himself that it won't take long for him to be seen as a disaster.
The Secret Service is doing its job plain and simple. There is always a credible threat when it comes to any office holder. Too many crazies out there.

JBW said...


Blogger Greywolfe said...

Well, at least she didn't call him "Mr. President". I still don't think he deserves the title. Not until I see a copy of his original Birth Certificate.

July 14, 2009 5:20 AM

Somehow I guess I always knew...

Greywolfe said...

JBW, yes, I am what you'd call a
"Birther". And why shouldn't I be a bit on the concerned side. He's spent over $1,000,000.00 keeping every record from his birth through law school graduation secret that it begs the questions.

It doesn't make sense for a man to put out that much money hiding a simple piece of paper, when showing that one piece of paper, would stop all the questions and law suits.

So, it forces me to believe that he does not have the right and he doesn't want anyone to know that for certain.

On the other hand, if you can come up with a reasonable explanation, me and my funny hat would be more than willing to listen.

Dave said...


You would spoil freshly made potato salad just by driving past a building it was stored in.


repsac3 said...

Grey: While reading around this morning, I happened upon a response to your "He spent $1,000,000..." query.

It's from Friday's,(a source generally trusted by you folks on the right, since it's owned by Murdoch's NewsCorp and, as CEO, he can tell 'em what to report--Fox Wins! [Honesty & truth? Not so much...]) about halfway down the page.

Friday's column makes more sense if you read Thursday's, first: (It’s Certifiable -, but in any case, here is the portion of Friday's WSJ that applies to your question:

• “Why has Obama spent X dollars defending himself against lawsuits when he could just produce the original birth certificate and make the whole thing go away?”

X varies, just in our emails of the past 24 hours, from “thousands” to “almost a million”; one reader set the amount at “$950,000.” As far as we know, all these estimates have a common source: thin air.

In any case, while this question sounds eminently reasonable, in fact it betrays a complete lack of understanding of the legal process. The “defense” against these frivolous lawsuits has consisted of filing a motion for summary judgment, which in every case has been granted.

In a motion for summary judgment, a defendant in a lawsuit asks the judge to dismiss the case as meritless before trial. In considering whether to grant such a motion, the judge is obliged to treat all facts in dispute as if they were resolved in the plaintiff’s favor. He may dismiss the case only if he finds it is without merit as a matter of law. The defendant’s introduction of additional factual evidence into the record would make the process more costly and time-consuming, not less.

The production of a 1961 birth certificate would make these lawsuits “go away” only if one assumes that it would persuade the plaintiffs to withdraw their claims, or not to file them in the first place. This assumption is completely fanciful. As we noted yesterday, birthers “claim without basis that today’s birth certificate is a fake; there is nothing to stop them from claiming without basis that yesterday’s is as well.” Sure enough, an outfit styling itself the Western Center for Journalism has produced what purports to be a report from “an investigator” commissioned by “a retired CIA officer”--neither of them has a name--arguing that the original birth certificate might be fraudulent.

I'm pretty sure that none of that will do a thing to convince you--& that's fine by me, because I'm one of those who think birfers taint everyone on the Right with the crackpot label, and the more you folks speak out, the better it is for everyone--but I did want you to see what the non-birfer Right is saying.

Off to spoil someone else's freshly made paranoia salad (now with extra wingnut!!)... ("Please don't let your Secret Service kill us, Barry... We respect the office... We just hate YOU!!")

Greywolfe said...

Repsac according to the FEC Obama has paid the law firm trying to block the revelation of his original long form birth certificate $699,000. This was for the period from Jan.09 to Mar. 09. It also reveals that he paid $378,375.52 for the time between Oct. 16, 2008 and Dec. 31, 2008.

Just seems like a lot of money to keep "nothing" from coming to light. Also, we'll have to wait and see what is found out about the Kenyan Certificate that came to light and is being submitted to the courts for authentication. Check for my post on this.

Skye said...

Casper3 - Good to see you are on top of the disinformation. I've seen numerous presidential motorcades pass by, yet never did the SS ever lose control of their weapons - having them hang out of the window so carelessly.

Not sure if their heart is in the game with this CIC.

Hey, did you get a chance to check out the Free Speech Zone at the DNC convention last year? Love how the D's embrace diverse opinion.

repsac3 said...

Oh Ciolko...

Folks @ Gateway Pundit posting disinformation?

Let's all go with your anecdotal account. Far more reliable than those pictures and links posted by those commie commenters at GPundit...

I'm sure the Secret Service is slackin' off, cause that's what they do. It's not like they're dedicated professionals, or anything. Day workers, that's what they are... Just Obama hatin' fools. Teabaggers, really. (Just be careful... I hear rumors that you're wrong, and they're actually Obama's private FEMA Camp army, and they're lookin' to round you sheepdogs up. (or kill you.) ((or something.))

As for Free Speech Zones at the Dem Convention? I'm against "Free Speech Zones," wherever they are, and whatever party is responsible for them. Sorry that wasn't clear enough for you to comprehend the first time. (Next time, I'll type slower for you.)

Anonymous said...

The Service always has their weapons out & ready to rock & roll.So does the State Dep. security.The thing to worry about would be if they had the mini-gun in the follow-ups out,& pointed toward the crowd..