White House told authorities not to crack down on 'Occupy' protesters, documents show

[Shadow]

The Obama administration told law enforcement authorities to go easy on Occupy Wall Street protesters, even though they were violating local laws, according to documents obtained by watchdog group Judicial Watch.

Emails from the General Services Administration show that the federal agency, acting on orders from the White House, told federal law enforcement authorities in Portland, Ore., not to enforce curfews on protesters camped out on federal property. JudicialWatch.org (http://www.scribd.com/collections/3740890/GSA-Occupy-Portland-8-7)http://global.fncstatic.com/static/v/all/img/external-link.png obtained the emails through a Freedom of Information Act request lodged last year.

In one exchange from Nov. 6, 2011, officials from the Department of Homeland Security and the GSA discuss a group of 11 protesters camped out at the federally-owned Terry Schrunk Plaza.

"They have chained themselves to a large drum filled with concrete,” reads an email from Department of Homeland Security/National Protection and Programs Directorate Chief of Staff Caitlin Durkovich to GSA Public Buildings Service Commissioner Robert Peck. “GSA controls the permits and has asked FPS [Federal Protective Services] not to enforce the curfew at park and the prohibition on overnight encampments…Our FPS Commander in Portland says they are standing down and following GSA’s request to only intervene if there is a threat to public safety,” she added in the email.

Peck -- who later resigned amid revelations his agency held lavish junkets at taxpayers' expense -- replied: “Caitlin: yes, that is our position; it’s been vetted with our administrator and Michael Robertson, our chief of staff, and we have communicated with the WH [White House], which has afforded us the discretion to fashion our approach to Occupy issues…The arrests last week were carried out despite our request that the protesters be allowed to remain and to camp overnight…”


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/08/gsa-urged-to-stand-down-on-occupy-portland-protests-by-white-house-documents/#ixzz230yiQ8My

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The Obama administration told law enforcement authorities to go easy on Occupy Wall Street protesters, even though they were violating local laws, according to documents obtained by watchdog group Judicial Watch.

Emails from the General Services Administration show that the federal agency, acting on orders from the White House, told federal law enforcement authorities in Portland, Ore., not to enforce curfews on protesters camped out on federal property. JudicialWatch.org (http://www.scribd.com/collections/3740890/GSA-Occupy-Portland-8-7)http://global.fncstatic.com/static/v/all/img/external-link.png obtained the emails through a Freedom of Information Act request lodged last year.

In one exchange from Nov. 6, 2011, officials from the Department of Homeland Security and the GSA discuss a group of 11 protesters camped out at the federally-owned Terry Schrunk Plaza.

"They have chained themselves to a large drum filled with concrete,” reads an email from Department of Homeland Security/National Protection and Programs Directorate Chief of Staff Caitlin Durkovich to GSA Public Buildings Service Commissioner Robert Peck. “GSA controls the permits and has asked FPS [Federal Protective Services] not to enforce the curfew at park and the prohibition on overnight encampments…Our FPS Commander in Portland says they are standing down and following GSA’s request to only intervene if there is a threat to public safety,” she added in the email.

Peck -- who later resigned amid revelations his agency held lavish junkets at taxpayers' expense -- replied: “Caitlin: yes, that is our position; it’s been vetted with our administrator and Michael Robertson, our chief of staff, and we have communicated with the WH [White House], which has afforded us the discretion to fashion our approach to Occupy issues…The arrests last week were carried out despite our request that the protesters be allowed to remain and to camp overnight…”


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/08/gsa-urged-to-stand-down-on-occupy-portland-protests-by-white-house-documents/#ixzz230yiQ8My

Many of us already knew that the Occupy Scum were given special protection by obama admin. and could tell by the comments made by Pelolsi, dems/libs during that time that it was so. Just as lib/dem Mayors gave them tons of protection even when they were doing so many criminal acts including rape and drug offenses.-Tyr

[Voted4Reagan]

Another LIE from the current administration.... They denied any support for these hippies while it was happening but now it is shown 1yr later that they allowed the laws of the land to be broken because it suited their agenda...

Another EPIC FAIL by OBAMA and Co.

[revelarts]

Look you know I'm No Obama fan or an much of an OWS guy But I say GOOD ON HIM this time.
A partisan move on his part 4 sure, but GOOD ON HIM anyway. It's a shame he felt/knew he needed to ask cops to treat folks easy.

This the 1st time in awhile -that i know of- where an official acknowledges peaceable protesters proper right of way and police are asked to back off or take it easy on the people.

the freedom inherent to all of us can't be reserved to JUST people we Agree with.
And I'd like to Imagine that ANY president, Gov or mayor would tell the cops to treat people with respect and decency while they exercise their right to protest peaceably.

It used to be people didn't Get permits for protest. do you think the original tea party folks got a stinking permit?

But we are a loooong way down the road for those days.

[gabosaurus]

What is the alternative? Going back to conditions in the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago?

Not "cracking down" on the Occupy protesters (whose actions I did not endorse) took away any chance by radical groups to seize the spotlight for themselves.

One of the reasons why I quit protesting was the lunatic fringe groups and media vultures who egged them on.
When I went to the GOP convention in 2004, there were a lot of demonstrations. Ninety percent of them were peaceful. I spent much of one morning chatting with NYPD officers who were working. I bought a few of them lunch because they couldn't leave their posts.
But there were groups of idiots who were there to cause trouble. There was one guy who called and texted TV stations telling them the time and location of their next "action."
One photographer offered me $50 to throw a rock at a police officer. He said I wouldn't get in trouble because I was a "cute female." True story.
It is also where I found out that Michael Moore and Jesse Jackson were egotistic assholes. Moore arrived in a limo, marched at the front of a protest line long enough to be on TV, then left.

[revelarts]

What is the alternative? Going back to conditions in the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago?

Not "cracking down" on the Occupy protesters (whose actions I did not endorse) took away any chance by radical groups to seize the spotlight for themselves.

One of the reasons why I quit protesting was the lunatic fringe groups and media vultures who egged them on.
When I went to the GOP convention in 2004, there were a lot of demonstrations. Ninety percent of them were peaceful. I spent much of one morning chatting with NYPD officers who were working. I bought a few of them lunch because they couldn't leave their posts.
But there were groups of idiots who were there to cause trouble. There was one guy who called and texted TV stations telling them the time and location of their next "action."
One photographer offered me $50 to throw a rock at a police officer. He said I wouldn't get in trouble because I was a "cute female." True story.
ever here of agent provocateurs.
Some where caught in Canada and new York. Police dressed as protesters instigating violence but ejected from groups of real protesters but photographed and later exposed as police officers.




It is also where I found out that Michael Moore and Jesse Jackson were egotistic assholes. Moore arrived in a limo, marched at the front of a protest line long enough to be on TV, then left.
lol
gabby say it aint so.
lol

[revelarts]

Another LIE from the current administration.... They denied any support for these hippies while it was happening ....

this transparency thing is really biting him hard isn't.
lol

[Thunderknuckles]

Look you know I'm No Obama fan or an much of an OWS guy But I say GOOD ON HIM this time.
A partisan move on his part 4 sure, but GOOD ON HIM anyway. It's a shame he felt/knew he needed to ask cops to treat folks easy.

This the 1st time in awhile -that i know of- where an official acknowledges peaceable protesters proper right of way and police are asked to back off or take it easy on the people.

the freedom inherent to all of us can't be reserved to JUST people we Agree with.
And I'd like to Imagine that ANY president, Gov or mayor would tell the cops to treat people with respect and decency while they exercise their right to protest peaceably.

It used to be people didn't Get permits for protest. do you think the original tea party folks got a stinking permit?

But we are a loooong way down the road for those days.
Agreed.
:salute:

[aboutime]

Another LIE from the current administration.... They denied any support for these hippies while it was happening but now it is shown 1yr later that they allowed the laws of the land to be broken because it suited their agenda...

Another EPIC FAIL by OBAMA and Co.


Does the name "HOLDER" ring any bells?

Obama and Holder knew what would happen to VOTES if either of them Obeyed, and Followed the Law. So, as expected, and predicted by many. This is nothing we didn't expect to hear, or learn.

I did find it kind of interesting how GABBY admitted someone offered 50 bucks to throw a stone at a cop. But Gabby NEVER thought about reporting it. That would be seen as being a SNITCH. And everyone knows. Liberals would never snitch on anyone. Not Obama, Holder, or any other Law Breaking American if it defeated their purpose of Tolerance by Special agreement.

[Little-Acorn]

What is the alternative?

Ummm, "Justice"?

[Little-Acorn]

BTW, "Social Justice" is defined as: What you get when real justice (the equal application of the law to all) is denied.

[gabosaurus]

BTW, "Social Justice" is defined as: What you get when real justice (the equal application of the law to all) is denied.

It is unfortunate that "justice" often depends om how much money you have to spend on an attorney. Which is why the wealthy have a different idea of "justice" than the non-wealthy.

[aboutime]

It is unfortunate that "justice" often depends om how much money you have to spend on an attorney. Which is why the wealthy have a different idea of "justice" than the non-wealthy.


Gotta agree with you to a point on that one gabby. Perhaps you were thinking about the Power of the Unions, who spend millions each year to get the BEST CORRUPT government, Money can buy. Which includes Lawyers that defend members of the teaching profession, who are inept, and unqualified to perform as teachers...but they get Union guaranteed Tenure...even for being rotten.

[avatar4321]

It is unfortunate that "justice" often depends om how much money you have to spend on an attorney. Which is why the wealthy have a different idea of "justice" than the non-wealthy.

The attorneys I associate with give their poor clients as much support as their rich ones. I hope it's not different in Cali.

[Shadow]

Look you know I'm No Obama fan or an much of an OWS guy But I say GOOD ON HIM this time.
A partisan move on his part 4 sure, but GOOD ON HIM anyway. It's a shame he felt/knew he needed to ask cops to treat folks easy.

This the 1st time in awhile -that i know of- where an official acknowledges peaceable protesters proper right of way and police are asked to back off or take it easy on the people.

the freedom inherent to all of us can't be reserved to JUST people we Agree with.
And I'd like to Imagine that ANY president, Gov or mayor would tell the cops to treat people with respect and decency while they exercise their right to protest peaceably.

It used to be people didn't Get permits for protest. do you think the original tea party folks got a stinking permit?

But we are a loooong way down the road for those days.

I agree with this up to a point. I draw the line at not breaking up the crowds when they started being a danger to others though (assault,rape etc) and when they started destroying the property of others and putting people's livelyhood/businesses at risk.

[revelarts]

I agree with this up to a point. I draw the line at not breaking up the crowds when they started being a danger to others though (assault,rape etc) and when they started destroying the property of others and putting people's livelyhood/businesses at risk.

I agree with that if it seems the Whole crowd is involved yes it needs to be shut down probably. but if it's a few people then let those few be delt with just like if a few police in crowd control start beating people we don't repramand or fire the whole riot squads just the trouble makers.

may seem a fine line to draw and more work for the cops, but who said the job was suppose to be easy.