The rise and fall of the 9/11 conspiracy theory

   The rise and fall of the 9/11 conspiracy theory by   Jeremy Stahl

Piers Morgan: Alex Jones 'Terrifying,' A Perfect 'Advertisement For Gun Control'

Posted: 01/09/2013 8:45 am EST  |  Updated: 01/09/2013 10:15 am EST

Piers Morgan said on Tuesday that his infamous encounter with radio host Alex Jones would only help his gun control crusade.

The radio host more than lost his temper with Morgan on Monday, going on a monumental rant about guns. He then speculated that he might be murdered by undercover police officers.

"I can't think of a better advertisement for gun control than Alex Jones' interview last night," Morgan told CNN on Tuesday. "It was startling, it was terrifying in parts, it was completely deluded. It was based on a premise of making Americans so fearful that they all rush out to buy even more guns ... the kind of twisted way that he turned everything into this assault on the Second Amendment is exactly what the gun rights lobby people do."

At least one person agreed that Jones was a terrible spokesman for gun rights: Glenn Beck. Speaking on his radio show Tuesday, he said that Morgan had chosen well if his intention was to discredit the pro-gun movement.
"Piers Morgan is trying to have gun control," Beck said. "He is trying to make everybody who has guns and who believes the Second Amendment to be a deterrent to an out of control government look like a madman. So now he immediately books the madman and makes him look like a conservative."

Alex Jones' Piers Morgan Rant: Radio Host Unleashes Explosive Pro-Gun Tirade (VIDEO)

The Huffington Post  |  By Peter Finocchiaro Posted: 01/08/2013 1:15 am EST  |  Updated: 01/08/2013 1:03 pm EST

Radio host Alex Jones delivered an intense pro-gun rant on CNN's "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Monday.
Morgan invited Jones onto his show to discuss the conservative pundit's campaign to "Deport Piers Morgan" in the wake of the CNN host's advocacy of gun control following the Sandy Hook massacre.
Jones first came to prominence as a ferociously libertarian radio host who argued, among other things, that the U.S. government was involved in the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
Jones began the segment by arguing that world governments and "the megabanks that control the planet" are conspiring to take guns away from regular citizens. "They've taken everybody's guns, but the Swiss and the American people," he said. The 2nd Amendment, he then went on to argue, was created to "protect us from tyrannical government and street thugs."
Over the course of the tirade -- during which he referenced the recent high-profile gang rape in India and Chinese revolutionary Mao Zedong -- Jones' demeanor grew noticeably more irate before finally boiling over with the following declaration:

"I'm here to tell you, 1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms! Doesn't matter how many lemmings you get out there on the street, begging for 'em to have their guns taken. We will not relinquish them. Do you understand?! That's why you're going to fail, and the establishment knows, no matter how much propaganda, the republic will rise again!"

Watch the full segment below:

Jack Lew To Be Nominated For Treasury Secretary By Obama: Report

Posted: 01/09/2013 9:56 am EST  |  Updated: 01/09/2013 3:16 pm EST

 














 

President Barack Obama will nominate White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew to be Treasury Secretary, Bloomberg reports.
Outgoing Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is expected to leave his post at the end of the month.
Some Republicans have scoffed at the idea that Lew should be Treasury Secretary. The decision to replace Geithner with Lew could also disappoint critics hoping for dramatic changes in Obama's second term, as HuffPost's Mark Gongloff and Christina Wilkie reported earlier:

Throughout Obama's first term, Geithner has been constantly criticized as looking out for the interests of Wall Street over Main Street, particularly for what some critics say was his opposition to mortgage relief for underwater homeowners out of concern for bank profits. Lew seems likely to be less of a lightning rod than Geithner, who is the protege of bank-deregulator Robert Rubin. Lew is widely seen as a smart, tough negotiator and an able public servant. But his professed lack of expertise in financial regulation, along with his own tenure at Rubin's old firm, the original too-big-to-fail bank, Citigroup, has raised warning flags among critics. They fear a Lew Treasury might not aggressively push back financial industry efforts to water down the Dodd-Frank financial-reform law or keep an eye out for the next financial crisis.

Despite doubts, Lew has played a vital role in key past Obama negotiations. HuffPost's Sam Stein reported earlier:
White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew has been an unassuming figure during the Obama years. His media appearances are dull; his presentation is a bit bookworm-ish -- as if Harry Potter grew up and replaced his magic wand with Excel spreadsheets. When he speaks, the tone is usually measured and unemotional. Behind the scenes, however, Lew has proven to be Obama's most skillful consigliere in matters of political trench warfare. Time and again during the debt ceiling debate, as Republicans attempted to get the administration to bend on top domestic priorities, it was Lew who proved to be a stick in the mud. Then serving as Office of Management and Budget Director, his insistence on playing out the practical impact of those cuts irritated Republicans to no end

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jacob Lew, Obama Nominee And Former Citigroup Executive, Doesn't Believe Deregulation Led To Financial Crisis

First Posted: 09/21/10 09:27 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 06:45 PM ET 

Understanding the Second Amendment

Posted: 01/09/2013 8:05 am

Geoffrey R. Stone

Opponents of laws regulating the sale, manufacture and use of guns fervently invoke the Second Amendment. In their view, the Second Amendment ("a well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed") forbids the government to regulate guns. Period. End of discussion.

But it is more complicated than that. At the outset, let's put aside the argument that the "well-regulated militia" clause signficantly narrows the scope of the Second Amendment. Although most judges and lawyers endorse that interpretation, the Supreme Court, in its controversial five-to-four decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, rejected that understanding of the text.

So, let's consider that matter "settled." Let's assume, then, that the Second Amendment reads: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Now, that sure sounds absolute. But it's not that simple.
Consider, for example, the First Amendment, which provides: "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech." This also sounds absolute. But does the First Amendment mean that the government cannot constitutionally regulate speech?

But how can this be so? Doesn't the text mean what it says? Here's the catch: Even though it is true that "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech," we still have to define what we mean by "the freedom of speech" that Congress may not abridge. The phrase "the freedom of speech," in other words, is not self-defining. And as Justice Holmes demonstrated with his hypothetical, it does not cover an individual who falsely shouts "fire!"in a crowded theater.

But that is only the beginning, for despite the seemingly absolute language of the First Amendment, the Supreme Court has long-held that the government may regulate speech in a great many situations. In appropriate circumstances, for example, a speaker can be punished for defaming another individual, for making threats, for selling obscenity, for distributing child pornography, for inciting a murder, for "leaking" confidential information, for using a loudspeaker at night in a residential neighborhood, for handing out leaflets on a public bus, for erecting a too-large billboard, and for using naughty words on television, to cite just a few of many possible examples.

Thus, although the First Amendment seems absolute in its protection of "the freedom of speech," the Supreme Court has reasonably recognized that it does not guarantee us the right to say whatever we please, whenever we please, wherever we please, in whatever manner we please. The "freedom of speech" is subject to regulation.

The same is of course true of the Second Amendment. Even if we agree that the Second Amendment forbids the government to "infringe" the right to "keep and bear arms," that does not mean that the government cannot reasonably regulate the manufacture, sale, ownership and possession of firearms. Indeed, this is precisely what Justice Scalia said in his opinion for the Court in Heller.

It is time for opponents of gun control to stop mindlessly shouting "The Second Amendment!!" as if that ends the discussion. It does not. Just as there is no First Amendment right to falsely yell fire in a crowded theatre, there is no Second Amendment right to carry an AK-47 there.
And that is only the beginning of what the Second Amendment does not guarantee.

• Comments 1,821

Walmart Will Send Representatives To White House To Talk Gun Control

First Thoughts: Biden's gun violence listening sessions begin

Low expectations for NRA meeting with White House on guns … Obama’s two options on guns – incremental or bold, either one puts him in a box. … The U.S. is signaling it wants out of Afghanistan and using “zero option” as negotiating tactic with Karzai … With Afghanistan policy, cabinet picks, a confident Obama’s fully implement the “Obama Doctrine.” … 2016 watch: There are several governors/potential 2016 hopefuls giving State of the State addresses. What they say could lay the groundwork for 2016 bids … 2014 watch: A conservative group goes after McConnell, Strickland won’t run again for governor in Ohio.

By Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Brooke Brower

*** Joe Biden’s gun violence listening sessions begin:
Beginning today, Joe Biden begins the series of gatherings at the White House, aimed at trying to create some consensus on what to do about gun violence. These are the meetings President Obama promised would take place in the wake of Newtown, and these are the meetings that are designed to come up with recommendations in time for the president to push in his State of the Union. The most intriguing session could be tomorrow when gun groups, including the NRA, are represented at the White House. But let’s not get too optimistic about the NRA’s participation. This meeting may be for show, pure and simple. Both sides had to do it. The White House had to issue an invite to the NRA, and the NRA had to say yes, which the NRA says will indicate the seriousness with which they take this offer. The NRA is sending a representative (not LaPierre) to hear what the White House has to say, but it is just one of several gun-advocacy groups that will participate in this Biden guns summit.

The vice president returned to Washington Thursday and is scheduled to meet with victim groups and gun-safety organizations. The Daily Rundown's Chuck Todd reports.

 
*** Not much common ground with the NRA:
If there is any common ground between the NRA and the White House, it could be on the idea of mandating state participation in the mental-health database and stronger mental-health screenings. But nothing on gun restrictions themselves, not on clips either. As for today’s meeting, Biden meets with victims’ groups and gun-safety advocates. And he’s also expected to meet with representatives from the video game and entertainment industry, but those meetings have yet to be scheduled. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) on TODAY said that despite New Jersey having some of the toughest gun laws in the country, that banning guns is not enough. “I’m willing to have that conversation,” Christie said of a federal ban on powerful, high-capacity weapons, “but you’ve got to deal with these other issues.”

Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

Vice President Joe Biden stands on the steps of the Capitol as Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., nearly a year after suffering a major stroke, marks his return to the Senate by walking up the steps to the Senate door.

*** Two options on gun measures:
The White House has a self-imposed deadline of the end of this month to come up with some tangible items. They can go one of two ways: (1) Incremental (magazines and mental-health screenings): This will show the White House trying to create proposals that can pass, but there will be a lot of disappointed people, or (2) Bolder (really pushing for reinstating the assault-weapons ban, mandatory background checks of all purchases, including private sales, a national gun ownership database): But the risk of the bold approach is that it can’t pass Congress. It’s a bit of a political box for the White House; they’d like to do something, and there is a chance to “do something,” but what is possible and what some gun-control advocates really want are not in the same ballpark.

The New Jersey governor talks with TODAY's Matt Lauer about the state of the Republican party, gun control, and his frustrations over the postponement of a vote on disaster aid for superstorm Sandy victims, saying, "people are suffering."

*** U.S. wants out of Afghanistan:
Afghan President Hamid Karzai hits Washington this week. He will meet with the president at the White House Friday. Coinciding with that visit, White House national-security officials held a conference call yesterday, in which they said, per NBC’s Ali Weinberg, that leaving no troops at all in Afghanistan after the scheduled 2014 drawdown is a possibility. It’s clear President Obama wants as minimal a presence in Afghanistan post-2014 as possible (short of covert ops and special forces). The “zero option” is all about negotiating leverage with Karzai. (The range being talked about seriously is from 3,000 up to a high of 15,000, pushed by military types.) Yes, Karzai says publicly he wants the U.S. out of Afghanistan, but he really needs and wants more U.S. troops there for security. But clearly, this is not going to be a sustained nation-building effort.

*** ‘Obama Doctrine’ being fully implemented:
The mercurial Obama Doctrine is now clear and being fully implemented with the president free of politics. In his first term, Obama was boxed in politically by the Pentagon and had a cabinet full of politically palatable holdovers (Gates, Petraeus) and a rival (Clinton). He probably regrets the Afghan surge but he can never say it, because soldiers died. Compare that to now – the U.S. on the verge of complete withdrawal from Afghanistan (minus covert/special ops) and a national-security team of Hagel, Brennan, and Kerry. The U.S. needs some presence in Afghanistan to launch attacks on al Qaeda, et al, but Obama policy will likely make it look more like how the U.S. operates in Pakistan and Yemen than George W. Bush’s Iraq and Afghanistan.

Rep. Tom Cotton, R-Ark. Joins The Daily Rundown's Chuck Todd to talk about why he wanted to join Congress, and his colleagues should say "no" to Obama more often. 

*** Governors to watch for 2016:
While we still don’t know when the president is delivering his State of the Union, there are 50 “State of States” coming up. And there are a bunch we’ll be looking at delivered by potential 2016 hopefuls -- from Chris Christie in New Jersey (on the cover of Time, by the way, as “The Boss”) to New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Bob McDonnell (R) in Virginia, Bobby Jindal (R) in Louisiana, and Martin O’Malley in Maryland. Christie, who delivered his yesterday, focused on Sandy and pragmatism (mildly rebuking his party on TODAY: “We’ve lost two elections in a row. The answer is no… we have to be thinking about doing something different.”) Cuomo, who delivers his today, will focus on guns and pushing for stricter limits on them. McDonnell, who also makes his “State of the Commonwealth” address tonight, unveiled his transportation funding plan, which remarkably called for the elimination of the gas tax. That’s traditionally been what’s funded transportation projects both statewide and at the federal level. But McDonnell also proposed making the source of transportation funding with higher sales taxes and other fees, including even a $100 annual fee on hybrid cars and alternative-fuel vehicles. For those governors thinking about running for president, these speeches could provide a baseline for what they’re platform might be.

*** Three-way race in Virginia?
Speaking of Virginia, the governor’s race to replace McDonnell could get a little more interesting. Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, who’d have a hard time winning a GOP primary against Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, is leaving the door wide open to an independent bid. “I have been tremendously encouraged,” Bolling told a local TV station, adding, “Unfortunately when the Republican Party needs to be a big tent party it seems to me we are doing everything we can to become a pup tent party. That is not the right direction for the Republican Party.” He says he’ll make his decision on whether to enter this year’s race by mid-March. By the way, a Quinnipiac poll shows a statistically tied race between Cucinelli and Democrat Terry McAuliffe, with lots of undecideds. McAuliffe has the narrow 40%-39% edge. Bolling only gets 13% in a potential three-way with McAuliffe and Cucinelli both at 34%.

*** 2014 watch:
Conservative group launches Internet ad against Mitch McConnell: “Whose side are you on? … Former Democratic Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland said yesterday he won’t run in a rematch against incumbent Republican John Kasich. … The Boston Globe digs into where Ed Markey, thinking about a run for the Senate, has gotten his money over the years. He was chairman of the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications, and “the communications and electronics industries have been Markey’s largest sources of campaign cash….”