Free Republic

“The prices for the DuPont storm rooms with Kevlar are set by the local distributors and range from about $5,750 for a 4 foot by 4 foot shelter and up to $15,000 for a 12 foot by 12 foot shelter. “

"...Also depending on the house, kids are safer in school. A kid from a trailer park is DEFINITELY safer than in school."

That's the rub I've wrestled with in my own head (glad I don't have to make these calls): do you keep all the kids in one place in the hopes that the school is missed, or send them all home - knowing that being so spread out that there could be several that never return.

Meanwhile, there's a woman on KCTV being extricated from her home with a board or something through her leg.

You just can’t evac a school given the warning time available - better to stay in the strongest part of the building than being caught out in the open with debris flying by at lethal speeds.

That said, given the forecast, it might have been good to dismiss and get everyone home at noon.

...and it just ‘roped out’ to nothing....wow - literally within seconds. Hope it stays that way.

Incredible helicopter shots - live video.

I want to know (a) the chain of command in the DOJ that pursued this; and (b) the name of the judge signing the search order.

um.... what?

Well played.
:/

Maybe 'Margaret Weiss' is a White House email/visitors alias. :D

You gotta love it - here's a statement heading that staff report you linked: "Consistent with President Obama's commitment to transparency, this report is being publicly disclosed on our website as it is transmitted to Congress."

...except, of course, that there is No One with the surname "Weiss" listed among White House staff members present on Any of the staffing reports sent to Congress for the years 2009 through 2012. Whether that report 'lags' by a year or not, she should have been on at least one of those reports, you'd think.

Good link - thanks.

Fair point - unfortunately, that info is not being made public.

I'll throw in something else: see those WH visits on 12/1 and 12/3/2009? Please also note that Executive Order 13522 was issued on 12/9/2009 - a measure that gave federal employee unions much greater power within those agencies... and shielded all conversations had between union bosses (like Kelley) and the respective agencies.

There's more about this and the possible (likely?) connection to the IRS scandal at this site.

I don't even think now that this was quid-pro-quo... it's starting to look a lot more like a systematic plan.

Well, at 11:18 on the morning of 3/31/2010, Obama was at Andrews AFB talking about 'Energy Security'. That afternoon, he signed something making it 'Cesar Chavez Day' (hence the ceremony - but that was with United Farm Workers leaders and Chavez' family members).

There was something called the 'Workplace Flexibility Forum' that is shown when you click on her entry for that date. At 1pm, the White House's Council of Economic Advisors issued something called 'The Economics of Workplace Flexibility' that undoubtedly involved union people - and probably was the over-arching reason for her visit on that day.

Yes - you're correct: we should do a better job than what The Left does in these matters. However, I don't believe in coincidence when it comes to this Administration, and while I'm doing this extra legwork to see if this American Spectator report sounds credible, you have to say that the timing is rather striking, to say the least.

Colleen Kelley's logged White House visits:

In searching that same White House visitors log, I find that this was the only time that Colleen Kelley (head of the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU)) visited the President specifically, though she did make four other visits in the period Feb 1, 2009 through Jan 1, 2013:

Here is the list of her White House check-ins (with person visited):

Potus - 3/31/2010
Greg Nelson - 1/14/2010
Potus/Flotus - 12/3/2009
Margaret Weiss - 12/1/2009
Margaret Weiss - 11/4/2009

At the time of this Jan 2010 visit, Greg Nelson held the title of "Associate Director for Energy, Environment, and Technology, Office of Public Engagement" according to his Linked In page. I can't even invent a reason why Kelley would need to visit Mr. Nelson.

I cannot find anything definitive on who Margaret (possibly also "Margo") Weiss is, or what her role is at the White House.

Five visits within five months.... then nothing else.

"...pretend he’s “outraged” at his president..."

Yeah, that lawsuit should have been filed the day after the "seizure", I'm betting he could have actually cooperated with the government. Had this not become public, I don't think we hear a sniff from them.

If nothing else - and of course, there’s a LOT else - this business with the EPA and the IRS demonstrate clear violations of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection clauses. I’m pretty sure that if anybody digs into other agencies, we’ll see that this pattern is repeated at every other agency that performs any kind of regulatory or enforcement function (Justice Dept. for sure).

Of course this is impeachable. And of course it won’t be pursued because the GOP has become part of the problem.

"Someone's got to go to prison, Ben."

Normally, I hear these things during hearings and keep thinking “Stop with the filibuster and ask a question!” In this particular case, though - Rep. Kelly was getting more ticked off as he went.

This was a lecture. And it resonates.

In 2012? Sounds like FrankenSenator was at least 2 years behind. The IRS was already all over that by then.

It wasn’t partisan (or illegal!!), but it was just bad customer service.... soooo... exactly how many liberal groups are complaining that they have been harassed?

Reports I’m seeing are magnitude 5.0. 34 miles NW of Ottawa.

Yeah - he'll say "I" have troops in harm's way... then turn around and say that he's not responsible for them being there.

This whole episode just underscores how he views the military - as a tool to fulfill his needs; nothing more.

We here believe otherwise. The President should be holding the umbrella for those who protect him.

Another way of saying “Poor Barack! He’s clearly not responsible for any of this - he’s being undone by rogues.”

As an aside, Disney’s policies here certainly helped my own family during a (bona fide) Make-a-Wish trip last year.

On the other hand, the fact that these 30-90 minute lines for certain attractions is a real problem for them, because you can certainly argue that it limits both the level of value and enjoyment received from their park guests (we never would have gone otherwise). But the place has been open for 40+ years now, so I guess they’ve decided they’re okay with all that. It’s certainly this problem that is making others try to ‘game’ the system.

*sigh* - then don’t give the 16 year old a phone if it’s such a concern.

No, I respectfully disagree: one is a reasonable, legal act and the other is wrecklessly illegal.

Look - I get it. You are looking for some sort of justice. But blaming the un-guilty isn’t going to do it. MADD got started over such an outrage - if you think it is worth the effort.

By the way: Sprint has an app for their Android phones (”Drive First”) that prevents texting when the phone is moving over 10 mph. $2 per month.

I'm not trying to minimize any of that pain - in any way, shape, form, or fashion.

That said: suing Verizon or Sprint or AT&T is an attempt to to hold somebody responsible who isn't responsible. This is not the same scenario that you paint regarding an illegal sale of a firearm or somebody serving an underage drinker.

If it were me, I would probably be strongly considering a wrongful death suit against the parents/guardians since I do believe that parents should be personally responsible for their children. If you want to advocate for some sort of lock-out software in which a phone in motion (GPS could do this) cannot be used for texting, then go ahead and try that.

"I’d prosecute or just plain sue the person/persons paying the cell phone bill for the 16yr old. And the company that sold them the plan that included texting.

Really??? How about the company making the phone? And the company that wrote the user manual? And maybe FedEx for delivering the phone to the family? And the car manufacturer for selling the car in which the driving-while-texting occurred - since, after all, that's half of the problem? And the car dealership...

No, no, no, and no! If we as conservatives need to unite on anything to start with, it's personal responsibility. Don't litigate unrelated others for the stupidity of individuals.

And people think voter fraud claims are overblown. This thing just blew up, big time. Rush is all over it.

Gee, I wonder what kind of hoops (none) ProPublica had to jump through to get its own non-profit status.

I was thinking that this whole scandal was done to scare people into not associated with any Tea Party groups. With this revelation, it's getting massively bigger.

Tiger is well-known to apply some considerable gamesmanship ploys during a round as a means of unnerving or intimidating his competition. My guess is that he went even further here with Garcia.

Who travels with a pressure cooker anyway?? I’d guess a blind TSA agent could spot this one a mile away.

Let’s seeee....

1. Benghazi
2. Conservative organizations targeted by the IRS
3. Kathleen Sebelis raising money from regulated insurance companies
4. Fallen Navy SEALs insulted by gov’t-invited Islamic “cleric”
5. Fast and Furious (almost forgotten at the moment)
6. The “red-line” of chemical weapons crossed without an answer (this one will get lost, for sure)
7. Ignoring court orders about recess appointments (ditto)
8. AP phone records

I’m pretty sure I’m missing something. Time to call for new electio... oh wait, we don’t have a Prime Minister.

So, I’m curious: do casinos have some sort of ‘user agreement’ that everyone must sign? Something like “I promise to lose money when playing your games?”

“Looked totally dumb-founded that he’d been found guilty of first degree murder” - reporter from Blaze.com on Hannity.

Involuntary in death of adult patient.

On snap - that's right: he killed two that day instead of the one intended.

involuntary??

"You don't negotiate very well, do you?"

I've got money that says he walks.

Obviously, I hope you're wrong, but the real concern is that if this guy - the poster child for child sacrifice - can't be convicted of anything heinous, then who else could ever be put on trial for anything abortion-related?

If they can’t convict this guy, there may never ever be another attempt.

This Sept. 12 transcript tells me a couple of things:

1. They knew it was a terror attack immediately.

2. I fear we’re all being distracted by the talking points bit - that constitutes a stupid/clumsy effort to obscure the landscape. The real problem is that they should have tried to defend their people, and failed to do anything whatsoever - whether by totally misreading the event, or by deliberate inaction. The system either failed, or they caused it to fail. One of those outcomes needs to be fixed. The other is criminal.

3. So why change the story??? My suspicion is that they created the Internet Video diversion because they wanted to make it look like a small protest had gotten out of hand, and that this is why they failed to send support. This lie was perpetuated all the way the Sept 25th at the United Nations - effectively telling the lie to the entire world.

I therefore expect the diversion story occurred because they knew exactly what was going on and purposely chose to do nothing. Obama knew the truth on 9/12 and said so - that’s what the transcript indicates: no hint of an internet video - and the diversion path was chosen after that... somebody decided that having dead Americans required an explanation.

There’s another interesting phrase in that transcript of Obama’s remarks from 9/12:

“I’ve also directed my administration to increase our security at diplomatic posts around the world.”

Oh.... Canada.

"Look at the timeline. .."

Right - I don't doubt that there's some gaps in that account, though it's still pretty good. That was also published before the testimony given this week... I'll be watching to see if Mr. Ross uses any of that information to publish an update.

Didn’t Obama give a speech at the UN and repeat the same lie about the video?

Yes - that's identified in the timeline on 9/25 - AFTER Hillary even started talking about a terror incident.

"That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity."

Yeah, the show is over. They will now say they’ve ‘answered the questions.’ I gotta believe that my summary in #452 is going to be pretty close to the position they stand with.

Hillary discussed “the video” DURING the memorial service in front of the families.

Yeah - it was the only public explanation given (regardless of Carney's lies today) at the time... for a solid week... until the evidence became so embarrassingly weighted in the other direction.

"No one is asking about who ordered the Stand down..."

Well, you see, that's the beauty of this beautiful picture that Carney just painted for us:

"The CIA - it was them, you see - just wasn't sure enough about its facts and couldn't tell the White House definitively that there was a terror attack going on. For all they knew, it could still have been about a protest (after all, there was precedent for that possibility in Cairo!). So that's why we mentioned that there may have been a Libyan protest along with making sure that we also left open the possibility of other causes. I'm sure we communicated that to you all.

So based on all of that, the President had to make that difficult, gut-wrenching heroic call to have our gallant troops stand by (not 'stand down', per se) in the hopes that the situation would clarify itself in the next few hours.

Well unfortunately, at that point, our equally heroic Employees had already lost their lives, so it was too late to do anything further on their behalf. Rather than concern the American people with this information, the President wisely thought it best to simply keep to his original schedule and get back to the campaign while his administration worked hard to get to the bottom of this situation."

Here's a good timeline graphic... from this thread.

Note the dates from 9/13 to 9/20. First public pronouncement of a 'terror attack' seems to have been made on 9/21.