Fire Janet Napolitano?

[vector7]

April 16th, 2009 9:35 AM Eastern
RALPH PETERS: Fire Janet Napolitano

As seen on “FOX & Friends” in an interview with co-host Steve Doocy on April 16 at 8:45 a.m. ET.

COL. RALPH PETERS, U.S. ARMY (RET.)/FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR:
She [Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano] needs to be fired for her bigoted attitudes toward our military veterans. Then give her a job at the International House of Pancakes because she’s good with waffles.

Look, Janet “from-another-planet” Napolitano has forbade the use of the term Islamist terrorist or Muslim terrorist within the Department of Homeland Security. In fact, she doesn’t want the word terrorist used at all.

But you’ve read this report, Steve, and I encourage all Americans to read it. It repeatedly warns of our military vets being terrorists. She uses “terrorist.” It warns about people who oppose illegal immigration as being terrorist threats, as people who may differ on right-to-life issues as terrorist threats.

And it’s also racist. Because, you know, there’s no mention of minority violence, no mention of Muslim violence, of Islamist violence. It’s all basically, if you read it, you get the message that white Christians are a threat to the country, and oh, by the way, look out for those vets, because Hollywood and Harvard warned us, they’ll come in, they’ll move in next door and kill you and hurt your child. Steve, it’s disgraceful.

Share This Leave a Comment

This entry was posted on Thursday, April 16th, 2009 at 9:35 am 1,757 Responses to “RALPH PETERS: Fire Janet Napolitano”

[Malsua]

The woman is way over her head. She sees conservatives as terrorists. Definitely needs to go.

[American Patriot]

Actually... this is a subject that we all ought to be calling our congresscritters about. Fire her. Now. Our Reps ought to be leading the charge against her remaining in office.

[vector7]

Federal Lawsuit Filed Against Janet Napolitano Over Homeland Security’s Rightwing Extremism Policy

April 16, 2009

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, announced today that it has filed a federal lawsuit against Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. The lawsuit claims that her Department’s “Rightwing Extremism Policy,” as reflected in the recently publicized Intelligence Assessment, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment,” violates the civil liberties of combat veterans as well as American citizens by targeting them for disfavored treatment on account of the political beliefs. General - PDF Links Click here to read the Law Center’s complaint.

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on behalf of nationally syndicated conservative radio talk show host Michael Savage, Gregg Cunningham (President of the pro-life organization Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, Inc (CBR)), and Iraqi War Marine veteran Kevin Murray. The Law Center claims that Napolitano’s Department (DHS) has violated the First and Fifth Amendment Constitutional rights of these three plaintiffs by attempting to chill their free speech, expressive association, and equal protection rights. The lawsuit further claims that the Department of Homeland Security encourages law enforcement officers throughout the nation to target and report citizens to federal officials as suspicious rightwing extremists and potential terrorists because of their political beliefs.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center stated, “The Obama Administration has declared war on American patriots and our Constitution. The Report even admits that the Department has no specific information on any plans of violence by so-called ‘rightwing extremists.’ Rather, what they do have is the expression of political opinions by certain individuals and organizations that oppose the Obama administration’s policies, and this expression is protected speech under the First Amendment.”

Thompson added, “Janet Napolitano is lying to the American people when she says the Report is not based on ideology or political beliefs. In fact, her report would have the admiration of any current or past dictator in the way it targets political opponents.”

The Report specifically mentions the following political beliefs that law enforcement should use to determine whether someone is a “rightwing extremist”:

* Opposes restrictions on firearms
* Opposes lax immigration
* Opposes the policies of President Obama regarding immigration, citizenship and the expansion of social programs
* Opposes continuation of free trade agreements
* Opposes same-sex marriage
* Has paranoia of foreign regimes
* Fear of Communist regimes
* Opposes one world government
* Bemoans the decline of U.S. stature in the world.
* Upset with loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs to China and India
* . . . and the list goes on

The Law Center is asking the court to declare that the DHS policy violates the First and Fifth Amendments, to permanently enjoin the Policy and its application to the plaintiffs’ speech and other activities, and to award the plaintiffs their reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for having to bring the lawsuit.

Click here to read the Department of Homeland Security’s Report.

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life. It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America. The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization. You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

[American Patriot]

The Report specifically mentions the following political beliefs that law enforcement should use to determine whether someone is a “rightwing extremist”:

* Opposes restrictions on firearms
* Opposes lax immigration
* Opposes the policies of President Obama regarding immigration, citizenship and the expansion of social programs
* Opposes continuation of free trade agreements
* Opposes same-sex marriage
* Has paranoia of foreign regimes
* Fear of Communist regimes
* Opposes one world government
* Bemoans the decline of U.S. stature in the world.
* Upset with loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs to China and India
* . . . and the list goes on

Hey Wallis, do you fit in any of these? I know I do.

[Aplomb]

omg, I'm doomed. They are going to have to lock up at least half of the US population. That's gonna be tough, for sure.

[American Patriot]

She's resigned.

Peter Principle in Progress

Moving to a California University it seems. Probably to better indoctrinate people.

[MinutemanCO]

Agreed. Her usefulness to Obama and company has reached its upper limit. I wonder if she'll run for VP next to Hillary? God help us.

I can't even imagine what piece of garbage is going to end up in her place.

She's resigned.

Peter Principle in Progress

Moving to a California University it seems. Probably to better indoctrinate people.

[vector7]

Agreed. Her usefulness to Obama and company has reached its upper limit. I wonder if she'll run for VP next to Hillary? God help us.

I can't even imagine what piece of garbage is going to end up in her place.

Exactly my thoughts.

Janet Napolitano, Homeland Security chief, to head UC

By Larry Gordon July 12, 2013, 7:00 a.m.

Janet Napolitano, the U.S. secretary of Homeland Security and former governor of Arizona, is being named as the next president of the University of California system, in an unusual choice that brings a national-level politician to a position usually held by an academic, The Times has learned. Her appointment also means the 10-campus system will be headed by a woman for the first time in its 145-year history.

Napolitano’s nomination by a committee of UC regents came after a secretive process that insiders said focused on her early as a high-profile, although untraditional, candidate who has led large public agencies and shown a strong interest in improving education.

UC officials believe that her Cabinet experiences –- which include helping to lead responses to hurricanes and tornadoes and overseeing some anti-terrorism measures -- will help UC administer its federal energy and nuclear weapons labs and aid its federally funded research in medicine and other areas.

“While some may consider her to be an unconventional choice, Secretary Napolitano is without a doubt the right person at the right time to lead this incredible university," Sherry Lansing, the regent and former film industry executive who headed the search committee, said in a statement being released Friday. "She will bring fresh eyes and a new sensibility -- not only to UC, but to all of California. She will stand as a vigorous advocate for faculty, students and staff at a time when great changes in our state, and across the globe, are presenting as many opportunities as challenges.”

Napolitano, who is a Democrat, was appointed by former President Clinton as the U.S. attorney in Arizona and then won elections as state attorney general and twice as governor, a position she held from 2003 to 2009. President Obama then named her to lead Homeland Security, an agency with an annual $60-billion budget and 240,000 employees.

She has been a strong voice in favor of immigration reform that would provide a path to citizenship for those in the country illegally, a stance that has angered some Republicans who contend she has not done enough to secure the nation’s borders.

TALK BACK: Is Janet Napolitano a good choice for UC president?

A source close to Napolitano, who asked not to be identified because he was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly, said that Napolitano deliberated for a long time after the executive search firm hired by UC quietly contacted her.

“I think she loves working for President Obama and serving the American people, but at the same time, this is a unique opportunity,” he said.

Napolitano knows “UC is probably the premier institution in the country. She is motivated by the fact that being a part of UC, she will be a part of educating future leaders of tomorrow and be part of a state that sets so much of the agenda nationally.”


Napolitano, 55, is no stranger to California colleges since she attended Santa Clara University and was its first woman valedictorian before earning her law degree at University of Virginia. Her father was dean of the University of New Mexico School of Medicine, a family connection that UC regents also liked since they oversee medical centers. In Arizona, she helped to enact plans to provide full-day kindergarten and to renovate university buildings, winning fans among educators.

The Napolitano friend insisted that nothing was pushing her out of Washington now, although the Senate’s recently approved compromise plan on immigration faces an uncertain fate in the Republican-controlled House.

REACTION: Obama lauds UC's choice of Napolitano

The secretary faced some controversy in Congress when critics alleged the Boston Marathon bombings, reportedly perpetrated by ethnic Chechens from Russia who had been granted political asylum, exposed shortcomings in security.

The UC regents are expected to approve her nomination as UC’s 20th president on Thursday during a meeting in San Francisco. Napolitano is expected to take up the UC reins some time in September, officials said.

UC has an annual budget of $24 billion, 230,000 students, 191,000 faculty and staff, five medical centers and three national laboratories.

Her proposed salary has not been released, pending discussions among the regents. But since her Cabinet salary of about $200,000 is about a third of the annual $591,000 that current UC president Mark G. Yudof makes, the regents presumably will be able to avoid a potential furor and not feel pressured to give her a big pay raise over Yudof’s.

Yudof, a former top administrator at state universities in Texas and Minnesota, will step down after five years as UC president in late August, in part due to some health issues. Yudof, who plans to teach law at UC Berkeley, also has said it was a good time to leave as UC’s finances were improving and most tuitions are frozen, thanks to extra state tax revenues that are helping to reverse years of brutal budget cuts and fee hikes.

In an era of tight budgets, public universities are seeking leaders who can bargain as peers with governors and legislators and also impress alumni and parents. Napolitano will deal with Gov. Jerry Brown, who is a UC regent and has been pressing UC to move more quickly into online education and to improve graduation rates.

Robert Powell, the chairman of UC’s systemwide faculty Senate and who consulted on the UC search, said Napolitano stood out among the more than 300 potential candidates. She “has demonstrated an outstanding ability to deal with complex organizations under demanding circumstances,” he said.

Acknowledging that she will be a departure from UC’s traditions of having a president with strong records in campus administration or academic research, he stressed that her political skills will be important. “When she goes to Sacramento, clearly the conversations will be on a different plane,” he said.

As for any possible complaints that UC would be led by a Democratic politician, Powell noted that the regents’ search committee included Republicans who joined in the choice for Napolitano and that she won elections in a Republican state.

A switch from politics and the Cabinet to university leadership is not unheard of. Donna Shalala, secretary of Health and Human Services during the Clinton administration, became chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-Madison and is now president of the University of Miami. Former Indiana governor Mitch Daniels now heads Purdue University.

Napolitano, who is unmarried and has no children, underwent a mastectomy for breast cancer in 2000, just weeks before she addressed the Democratic National Convention. She has been mentioned as a possible nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court and as U.S. attorney general.

[vector7]

Flashback Leftist Opinions:
Janet Napolitano for Vice President with Hillary if Biden doesn't want a 3rd term as VP.

Last edited Tue Feb 5, 2013, 04:45 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

Someone mentioned Janet yesterday is thinking of running again for elective office in 2016.

What a better way to bring in Arizona than to have the person voted the best Governor of Arizona for years be on the same ticket with Hillary45 if Joe Biden don't want to be VP for a third term (which is what I personally would like to see as my top choice, or if Joe is going to be the new SOS in 2017.)

Hillary45/Janet Napolitano.

History times two and that would bring in Texas, KT a number of other red states, AND Arizona, perhaps the single worst run state in the nation now.

What better way to spit in John McCain and Jeb Bush's face at the same time.

And Janet Napolitano has done a simply boffo!!! job as Homeland Security Secretary, and Ms. Napolitano as a past Governor has all qualifications for being able to be a great Vice President with President Hillary Clinton45, and this wouldn't lose any democratic seat.

I like this.

History/History, and as Ms. Napolitano is part of TeamObama and TeamChicago, this would insure the continuation of all things Obama for another 8 years after President Obama's historic 8 years.

And with President Obama being elevated to the US Supreme Court by President Clinton in 2018, this could insure one helleva legacy.


After Hillary she is the next most viable woman candidate:

Hillary and the rest: The Fix’s ranking of the 2016 Democratic primary field

By Chris Cillizza, Aaron Blake and Sean Sullivan, Published: February 15 at 10:51 am

Time in the 2016 Democratic presidential race is rightly understood as “BHD” and “AHD”. As in, “Before Hillary’s Decision” and “After Hillary’s Decision.”



That’s because how the race plays out depends heavily on what the former New York Senator, First Lady and Secretary of State decides she wants to do with her political future.

With Clinton in the race, she is immediately a very clear frontrunner and many of the people currently thinking about running don’t. (That doesn’t mean, however, that Clinton has an uncontested fight for the nomination; some people — like Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley — almost have to run in 2016 due to timing issues.)

Without Clinton in the race, the 2016 contest will be the most wide open nomination fight for Democrats since 1992 or 1988. (In 2008, Clinton’s presence in the race made it, seemingly, less wide open — although Barack Obama proved politics is an unpredictable endeavor.)

Clinton has been clearly unclear when asked about her plans in recent months — emphasizing that she simply isn’t thinking about what’s next just yet. “I’ve said I really don’t believe that that’s something I will do again,” Clinton told Barbara Walters in December about a run for the nation’s top office. (It’s not clear how her concussion and subsequent blood clot will influence that decision — if at all.)

Because Clinton is the prime mover in the race, she may not have years to make up her mind on running. As long as we are living in “BHD” days, it will be very tough for the likes of O’Malley, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and even Vice President Joe Biden to rally the support among donors and activists that they will need if they want to run and win. Everyone in the Democratic world — or at least the vast majority — will wait to see what Hillary does before making up their own minds.

What IS clear: Clinton is an even stronger frontrunner for the Democratic nomination in 2016 than she was in 2008. (That’s probably a good thing for her given how that last race turned out.) Judging by the polling out there, she is the heaviest favorite to be the Democratic presidential nominee since Al Gore in 2000 and, if you leave out sitting vice presidents, Hillary may well be the biggest favorite for the nomination in the post-World War II era.

Given that, it’s fair to read our rankings of the 10 candidates most likely to wind up as the Democratic nominee in 2016 as Hillary and then everyone else. She is the top tier. Plain and simple.

10. Elizabeth Warren: Sure, the freshman Massachusetts senator has kept a low profile since joining the upper chamber. But the immense enthusiasm she stoked among liberals last fall and her ability to raise massive sums of money make her a potential candidate to watch. Unlike many of the other names on this list, Warren hasn’t been making the kind of overt moves toward a national bid that typically precede a White House bid. But she hasn’t been on the national stage long, either. The next year and a half will say a lot about whether Warren is even toying with a bid for higher office. If she even hints at running, she moves way up the Line.

9. Brian Schweitzer: Count the former Montana governor among those who are very clearly leaning toward running for president. There has been some talk that Schweitzer could run for Senate, either against Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) in a primary in 2014 or if Baucus opts to retire. But Schweitzer makes clear he’s got his eyes on another prize. Schweitzer may well be the most colorful character on this list, from his bolo ties to his hail-fellow-well-met attitude to the fact that he uses a branding iron to punctuate his routine vetoes. But as a red-state governor is strongly supportive of gun rights (see his recent comment after the tragedy in Newtown, Conn.) and may not have exactly what the liberal base is looking for.

8. Kirsten Gillibrand: Outside of New York, not a lot of people know who Gillibrand is. But among her constituents in the Empire State, she’s quite popular. Gillibrand is also strong fundraiser who has offered her financial might to other candidates. If Clinton doesn’t run there will be room in the field for a prominent female candidate. Gillibrand could be that candidate.

7. Janet Napolitano: We were caught by surprise when we read our WaPo colleague Karen Tumulty’s report that the former Arizona governor and current head of the Department of Homeland Security was interested in running for president. Napolitano has an incredibly impressive resume and a demonstrated appeal in a Republican-leaning state. Raising the sort of money that she would need to be a viable candidate would be a major challenge, however.

6. Mark Warner: The Virginia senator surprised many by passing on a presidential run in 2008, instead running for an open Senate seat and cruising to a huge win. He’s got a reelection campaign to worry about in 2014, but he remains very popular in the Commonwealth and isn’t considered a top GOP target. His success as both governor and senator in a swing state bordering Washington, D.C., makes him a hot commodity in the nation’s capital, but we have yet to see the understated Warner really make a big move on the national stage. Plus, do his centrist credential fit a Democratic primary electorate?

5. Deval Patrick: The Massachusetts governor’s impressive Democratic National Convention speech put him on the radar of most anyone who wasn’t already thinking of him as a potential White House contender. He’s a close ally of the president and one the country’s most prominent African American politicians. He is also going to be be looking for something to do after he wraps up his second term as governor next year.

4. Martin O’Malley: The Maryland governor is term-limited in 2014, which means he will have plenty of time to wrap up his day job and turn attention to what many expect will be a run for the presidency. The former Baltimore mayor checks a lot of boxes on the presidential scorecard: He looks the part, is a disciplined messenger, has been chairman of the Democratic Governors Association, and has been a successful governor. He’s also got the political know-how, having served as an advance man in Iowa for Gary Hart’s presidential bids (O’Malley is also the basis for a character on “The Wire”.) The question is whether he has that “wow factor” that makes a candidate a player on the national stage. The jury on that is still out.

3. Andrew Cuomo: Even after theNew York governor’s polling numbers took a dip following his signing of some tough new gun control laws, he remains among the country’s most popular governors. And he comes from a populous state with a deep donor pool. Nationally, Cuomo’s won plaudits from the left for shepherding a law legalizing gay marriage and spearheading other liberal policies. But not all liberals are Cuomo fans. His refusal to take a stand against a state legislative power sharing arrangement with Republicans irked some commentators who hold sway on the left. All that said, he’d be a very formidable White House contender. If Biden and Clinton both pass, he’d have an early leg up on the rest of the field.

2. Joe Biden: Biden is ranked this high because 1) he’s a sitting vice president, which makes him instantly formidable and 2) he seems likely to run. But just because Biden’s at No. 2 doesn’t mean he’s got great odds. The vice president has run for president twice and fared very poorly each time, so expectations will be tempered by that. But he’s certainly done himself a lot of good serving as Obama’s lead negotiator on some big issues in recent months, and he looks like a very serious contender.

1. Hillary Clinton: If she runs, she is the clear favorite, If she doesn’t, she’s the most coveted endorser in the race. It’s hard to imagine her making clear which way she’s headed until after the 2014 midterms. But, the longer Clinton waits, the more antsy the people ranked below her on this Line get since the contest can’t really start in earnest until we know what she’s planning.

[American Patriot]

Someone needs to bitch slap that smarmy look right off her stupid face.

I wish Laura Bush would do it.

Better yet, Nancy Reagan.

[Phil Fiord]

It was said Nappy was underutilized as head of DHS. I beg to differ. She has been head of the most grossly overfunded anti civilian agency ever. Underutilized? What? Make her actually crack the whip?

[vector7]

New ICE boss’ background as defense attorney for murderers, pedophiles raises questions about his credentials


The acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement is a former criminal defense attorney who represented accused and convicted murderers, sex offenders and pedophiles and fought for the release of violent convicted offenders — a background some critics say makes him a less than ideal choice to lead the federal government’ssecond-largest law enforcement agency.

John Sandweg, 38, who was recently named acting director of ICE, worked between 2002 and 2009 defending violent criminals in Arizona, and helping then-governor and current Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano raise campaign funds. Critics questioned Sandweg’s credentials, with one calling him “in no way qualified” and his appointment the latest example of Napolitano’s “blatant politicization” of the agency.

“I am deeply disappointed by this appointment and believe it is disrespectful to the thousands of dedicated professionals at ICE who are working tirelessly to enforce our laws and provide for our security,” said Rep. John Carter, R-Texas, who chairs the House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee. “I urge the administration to re-think this appointment and promptly appoint a qualified, confirmable applicant for this essential post.”

A former administration official said news of Sandweg’s installation as acting director was met with disgust and disbelief within parts of DHS.

“He has zero law enforcement experience and he [is running] our country’s second-largest law enforcement agency — and that’s a real job, it’s not a figure-head position,” the former official said.

Last week, Sandweg took over as acting director of ICE after director John Morton stepped down. He is believed by some to have the inside track for the nomination for the permanent position. Napolitano has announced her own resignation and has already been picked to head the 10-campus University of California system.

In response to a request for comment on Sandweg’s appointment, DHS provided an internal message Napolitano sent to senior DHS staff on Aug. 2, in which the outgoing secretary praised Sandweg.

“Since joining DHS in 2009, John has served as one of my closest advisors on matters related to immigration enforcement, border security, and federal law enforcement,” Napolitano wrote. “John brings significant experience in the development and implementation of our border security and immigration enforcement strategies and will continue to build on our common sense approach that prioritizes public safety and national security.”

ICE is the main investigative arm of the Department of Homeland Security and is responsible for enforcement of immigration law. As acting director, Sandweg oversees more than 20,000 employees in offices in all 50 states and 47 foreign countries. David Aguilar, who recently retired as deputy commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, told FoxNews.com Sandweg is more than up to the job.

“I think he’s extremely qualified to serve as the acting director of ICE and that’s in my opinion, that’s the opinion of a 35-year cop,” said Aguilar, who says he worked closely with Sandweg over the last five years on issues specific to immigration and the border.