Tags
barack obama, Chase Bishop, Coup, FBI, felony, Hillary Clinton, inspector general, negligent discharge, Peter Strzok, President Trump
One assumes most of the people that work at the FBI are dedicated professionals, people that understand nothing destroys public confidence in their agency faster than engaging in politics. Yet, even the FBI, which bills itself, and not entirely without cause, as America’s premier law enforcement agency, is hampered by being forced to hire from the human race.
Recent revelations alarmingly indicate that people at the highest level of the FBI are progressive partisans, traitors who shielded the corrupt and criminal Hillary Clinton and her minions from the consequences of their treason and arrogant disregard of our nation’s security. It is also reasonable to think a large part of why the FBI and the DOJ protected Clinton and her minions is because in so doing, they were also protecting Barack Obama and his minions.
The reputation of the FBI is in tatters, at least in part because anyone of normal intelligence understands that what the FBI has apparently done had to be accomplished by lower-ranking agents, men and women willing, for whatever reason, to abandon their oaths and to work against America in favor of the Democrat Party (see Peter Strzok). Failing to elect Hillary Clinton, they relied on their “insurance policy,” and attempted a coup by any means possible, a coup that is ongoing. The cover up that continues to date is not covering the FBI in glory.
Even if most FBI employees are honorable people, how are we to know who they are? How are we to know which of them are trustworthy, and which, given the chance, would be delighted to persecute any of us they thought to be enemies of their progressive masters? When one knocks on our door and ask for our cooperation, can they be trusted? This, from Fox News, does not help:
The man in Colorado who was hit with a stray bullet fired inadvertently from an off-duty FBI agent’s weapon has recalled the moment he realized he’d been shot at a nightclub over the weekend.
Thomas Reddington, 24, remembered hearing ‘a loud bang’ and thinking a firecracker had gone off, he said during an interview with ABC. That is, however, he said until he realized his leg was bleeding.
‘I heard a loud bang and I thought, oh some idiot set off a firecracker,’ Reddington said during the interview. ‘I looked down at my leg and see some brown residue …’
‘So I’m still thinking it was a firework,’ he continued. ‘All of a sudden … from the knee down, became completely red. And that’s when it clicked in my head, oh, I’ve been shot.
And so he had, the round apparently striking an artery:
Chase Bishop
credit: denverpost
The encounter took place Saturday around 12:45 a.m. at the Mile High Spirits Distillery and Tasting Bar in Denver. A weapon belonging to an off-duty FBI agent accidentally fired after falling off the agent, striking the patron in the leg, while the agent was dancing at the establishment.
This initial report was incorrect. The agent, Chase Bishop, 29, was dancing–apparently showing off–for the crowd, and did a sloppy backflip. His handgun–the make and model have not been identified–fell out of his waistband and hit the floor, but did not fire. When Bishop reached down to grab the gun, he fired the weapon. He casually picked it up, and walked away. The Denver Post updates what is known:
Note the muzzle flash
Chase Bishop, 29, has been charged with one count of second-degree assault in connection with the June 2 nightclub shooting, according to a news release from the Denver District Attorney’s Office. [skip]
The results of a blood alcohol test have not been received, but District Attorney Beth McCann said in the news release said she was not going to wait.
‘We are filing this charge now rather than waiting until the BAC report is received, which we understand could take another week, because sufficient evidence has been presented to file it,’ McCann said. ‘If an additional charge needs to be filed after further evidence is received, we can file those charges then.
This is the statute involved–thus far:
§ 18-3-203. Assault in the second degree
(1) A person commits the crime of assault in the second degree if:
(a) Repealed.
(b) With intent to cause bodily injury to another person, he or she causes such injury to any person by means of a deadly weapon; or [skip]
(d) He recklessly causes serious bodily injury to another person by means of a deadly weapon; or…
As usual, there is more to the statute. I’ve included only those portions of the statue that appear to apply to this incident. Take the link for the entire statue, which is a felony.
The bullet hit the victim in an artery in his leg, according to previous news reports. The injury was serious but the man will recover, said his attorney Frank Azar.
FBI officials had refused to release Bishop’s name although he had been identified by other media outlets. The FBI also has not released any information about its policy for agents carrying weapons while off duty and in alcohol establishments
The FBI continued its silence Tuesday after the arrest became public.
‘In order to preserve the integrity of the ongoing investigation, we are unable to comment regarding this matter. The FBI will continue to fully cooperate with the Denver Police Department and the Denver District Attorney’s Office as this matter proceeds through the judicial process,’ Amy Sanders, an FBI spokeswoman in Denver said, via email.
Right. Integrity. One might be tempted, at this point, to observe the progressive argument that only law enforcement officials should be allowed to keep and bear arms seems, upon reflection, a bit silly, but I certainly wouldn’t stoop to that level of rationality and common sense. That would be unfair, wouldn’t it, gentle readers?
Steven Hayward at Powerline also did a bit of stooping:
I can’t help but wonder if this isn’t a metaphor, if not God’s little joke, for the drunken backflips and misfires that characterize the FBI’s investigations of Hillary and Trump.
Glock 19 with Crimson Trace Railmaster Pro laser/light
The best information I’ve been able to find suggests the FBI issues various Glock models to their agents, in either 9mm or .40 S&W calibers. If this is accurate, that explains why Bishop’s handgun did not fire when it hit the floor. Glock has an internal drop safety that works. In various initial familiarization classes with police officers, I saw numerous officers accidently fling their Glocks downrange onto concrete floors. None fired. In fact, new Glock shooters are taught not to grab for their weapons if they’re dropping them–that could cause a negligent discharge if they grab the trigger–but to just let them fall.
In the above photo, we can see Bishop’s gun firing–the muzzle flash is apparent–as he grabs the trigger. Standard Glock triggers are 5.5 pounds, which has caused some to suggest Glocks are somehow dangerous, a topic I’ve addressed in the past. In truth, Glock owns the majority of the police market, its designs among the most popular handguns ever made. They are, in fact, safe, reliable, almost indestructible, and accurate, which is why they are so popular, and why so many law enforcement agencies embrace them. But as with every handgun, safety depends largely on following very simple rules:
1) All guns are loaded (until absolutely proved otherwise each and every time they’re handled).
2) Remove the magazine or all ammunition first, and always manually and visually inspect the chamber to ensure the gun is unloaded. Then do it again.
3) Always keep a gun pointed in a safe direction.
4) Keep the trigger finger out of the triggerguard and off the trigger until ready to shoot.
I also addressed the issue of negligent discharges in Negligent Discharges I have Known. Obviously, Bishop violated the 3rdand 4thrules. Many have asked if FBI agents are allowed to carry their handguns off duty, or while drinking. I’m not certain of the FBI’s actual policy, but virtually every law enforcement agency allows off duty carry. It’s necessary for the officer’s safety, and officers are expected, if the violation is serious enough or if people are endangered, to act when they witness crimes. I’ve no reason to suspect the FBI is any different.
Every law enforcement agency, however, absolutely expects their people to keep their handguns concealed. From the screenshot, it appears Bishop’s Glock was in an inside the waistband holster at his back, which explains how it was able to fly out of the holster. Such holsters have no retention devices, relying on the pressure of the belt, the friction of the holster, and gravity to keep the handgun in place. Pulling a backflip, Bishop overrode all of those passive features.
What is currently known also suggests Bishop had been drinking, perhaps heavily. These days it seems almost impossible for FBI agents to be fired. In the past, embarrassing the Bureau was more than sufficient grounds for termination. Bishop has surely done that, and absent a plea deal, will almost surely be convicted of a felony and sued civilly. A felony conviction should cause him to be terminated, but again, that sort of thing would appear to depend on the political value of the employee to those attempting a coup against President Trump and normal Americans. We may never know because integrity.
Ultimately, Bishop appears to have been, for whatever reason, engaging in terribly stupid behavior, behavior any rational FBI agent should have avoided like the plague. Dropping his gun, he was so distracted or impaired, he didn’t realize he was pulling the trigger. It’s possible he wasn’t even aware the gun fired; his actions would suggest that. It’s not the gun’s fault. It did what it was designed to do; it did not fire when dropped, but it did fire when the trigger was pulled. The gun doesn’t know why the trigger is pulled; it simply fires when it is.
Unfortunately, this is not helping the public look on the FBI with renewed confidence. The Inspector General’s report, to be released on 06-14-18, will likely not inspire confidence either.
Stately McDaniel Manor 
Statute? Statue? Now I’m confused.
But that doesn’t take much, these days.
Dear Navyvet:
Arrggh! Darned spell checker. It’s fixed. Thanks for the catch!
Not sure your point here. Apparently you presume to doubt the FBI’s previous Hillary and Obama investigations, or determination that none was needed based on their evidence, were the result of biased political FBI management… using what evidence you’ve been privy to?
Then somehow drawing a line from that to some dumb stunt performed by a drunk off-duty agent in a bar somewhere.. simply to agitate some whacked presumption of FBI, CIA, NSA, whatever agency you want to select, is somehow deficient in their management because of their inherent obsession with some deep state plot to be nasty toward Trump?
You talk of traitorous acts… try considering Trump’s obsession with befriending dictators and tearing down the reputations of our democratic institutions… and his alleged base loving him for it.
Dear Doug:
As we’re discovering today–06-14-18–the FBI and DOJ are indeed looking less than professional, and I suspect it’s going to get worse, much worse.
So, has ANY FBI official ever even TALKED to the family of the hostage they murdered in Houston? Last I heard they refused to talk to the family or the media, and made the Sheriff try to explain how their hostage rescue team murdered the hostage.
I can not recall a case where the FBI HRT has actually rescued a hostage. They are in the hsbit of killing people with fire as the primary weapon.
Mike, I believe the Federal Law Enforcement Safety Act spells out off-duty carry, in which I would bet is the FBI policy. In 18 USC § 926B(c),[10] “qualified law enforcement officer” is defined as any individual employed by a governmental agency, state or local municipality, or private agency/firm who:
1: is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of, or the incarceration of any person for, any violation of law, and [sic?] has statutory powers of arrest, or apprehension under section 807(b) of title 10, United States Code (article 7(b) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice); This includes state and public college/university police officers.
2: is authorized by the agency to carry a firearm;
3: is not the subject of any disciplinary action by the agency which could result in suspension or loss of police powers;
meets standards, if any, established by the agency which require the employee to regularly qualify in the use of a firearm;
4: is not under the influence of alcohol or another intoxicating or hallucinatory drug or substance; and
5: is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.
I believe section 4 is going to be a problem for the Agent.
Dear SPD3454:
Thanks for the great info. I suspect you’re right. Of course, accidentally shooting someone isn’t going to be helpful either…
My late brother was on the job in Baltimore for years. He was required to carry while off duty in the city, maybe in Maryland as a whole, I am not sure.
I once chatted with a couple of US Marshals, who let me know that in their opinion FBI stood for “Famous But Incompetent.” Maybe someone here with more experience than I can opine on this suggestion: Why not have the Marshals investigate the various FBI scandals? If all US Marshals hold the same opinion of the FBI that the ones I spoke with did they would certainly take to the task with gusto.
Many years ago (20 or so) I assisted a local sheriff’s department occasionally on the weekends. The department had a very nice training facility that included classrooms, a kitchen, and a firing range with a verity of targets including moving targets and steel drop targets. During the week the facility was used by the FBI, US Marshalls Service, various state and local agencies. On the weekend, if volunteers were available to assist, it was open to the public.
It was never hard to tell when the FBI had been there to “train”. Steel handgun targets damaged by rifle fire, target holders broken, range littered with trash, food left on charcoal grills, a kitchen full of dirty dishes, and a classroom that needed cleaning. None of the other agencies left it like that. Based on my experiences there, I have long thought the FBI had problems with a lack of personal responsibility and arrogance. It doesn’t seem any of that has changed.
Dear Occasional Thinker:
It was always my experience that FBI personnel thought very highly of themselves indeed, often without justification.
This incident confirms my determination to continue carrying Smith and Wesson 3rd generation pistols. The manual safety mechanism which rotates the firing pin out of alignment with the primer is an absolutely certain guarentee that the gun will not fire. The magazine disconnect safety is an insurance policy against failure to check the chamber.
And I always cited the BATF as proof that guns and booze don’t mix.
Meanwhile in Oregon, a member of the FBI-HRT is on trial for making fslse ststements to investigators of the Finnicum shooting.
According to the FAQ page at fbi.gov, FBI agents are required to be armed “at all times,” unless otherwise instructed by a superior. And personally owned handguns are allowed if they meet the Bureau’s standards. IIUC, the approved handguns are the full-size and compact Glock in 9mm, .40, and .45. The subcompact Glocks are authorized for back-up and off-duty. And (again, IIUC), their SWAT and/or HRT may carry 1911 .45 pistols.
In G. Gordon Liddy’s autobiography “Will,” it sounded as if off-duty carry was encouraged, but not mandatory. Of course, that was then, this is now.
My impression is that the Glock .40 (model 22 or 23) was standard until recently, and that the FBI is going back to a 9mm (model 19) as standard issue, because it was easier for trainees to qualify with it.
Presumably, a felony conviction would render a person ineligible for certification as any type of law enforcement officer, but I suppose there is the possibility that this case could be plea bargained down to a misdemeanor.
And don’t you love how the initial news reports made it sound as if the gun discharged by itself when dropped. Oh well, at least (AFAIK) they did not describe it as “fully semi-automatic.”
At the beginning of the current FBI scandal, I began to ponder the nature
of conspiracies. Having noticed that it involved too many people, I
developed the first rule of conspiracies: If they are too complex and/or
involve too many people, the chances that they will be discovered will
rise exponentially.
Too many people equal too many chances that someone will blab in
exchange for immunity. All it takes is to turn one or two conspirators
and the whole house of cards comes tumbling down. The people
in the FBI started to look like the Keystone Cops. Peter Strxoker
(AKA Wyle E. Coyote, AKA Super Spy) and his mistress left a trail
that Mr. Magoo could have followed.
A month ago, someone leaked that the IG report would result in a
criminal indictment against Andrew McCabe. In the last two weeks,
McCabe offered testimony against Hillary Clinton in exchange for
immunity and a key figure in the phony “Russian collusion” story
has been arrested by the Feds.
Obama could not corrupt the entire agency, but he could fill the
middle and upper management positions with political cronies loyal
to him and the Democrat party. The vast majority of FBI agents
are loyal to their mission and the constitution, not to any president.
It is my understanding that a lot of agents are itching to erase this
stain on the agency.
Dear Leonard Jones:
It has become obvious that the conspirators in the DOJ and FBI never thought they’d be caught. Rather, they expected Hillary Clinton to win and knew they’d be rewarded for their betrayal of America. Like you, I hope there are agents anxious to set things right, and I hope they take the opportunity if it is given.
Reblogged this on Gds44's Blog.