Four racists arrested in Denver for plot to assassinate Obama.

Posted by Les on Tuesday, August 26, 2008 at 09:42 AM. Read 814 times. Tags: , , ,
{name} pic

As exciting as the prospect of the first black man to be elected President is, it would be a mistake to think it’s a sign that violent racism is dead. Proof of that comes in a news report about four bigots who were arrested in Denver. They’re being investigated under suspicion of planning to shoot Obama:

Maass reported earlier Monday that one of the suspects told authorities they were “going to shoot Obama from a high vantage point using a ... rifle ... sighted at 750 yards.“

Law enforcement sources told Maass that one of the suspects “was directly asked if they had come to Denver to kill Obama. He responded in the affirmative.“

The story began emerging Sunday morning when Aurora police arrested Tharin Gartrell, 28. He was driving a rented pickup truck in an erratic manner, according to sources.

Sources told CBS4 police found two high-powered, scoped rifles in the car along with camouflage clothing, walkie-talkies, wigs, a bulletproof vest, a spotting scope, licenses in the names of other people and 44 grams of methamphetamine. One of the rifles is listed as stolen from Kansas.

[...] Nathan Johnson, 32, an associate of Gartrell and Adolph, was also arrested Sunday morning. He told authorities that the two men had “planned to kill Barack Obama at his acceptance speech.“

“He don’t belong in political office. Blacks don’t belong in political office. He ought to be shot,“ Johnson told Maass.

“Do you think they were really plotting to kill Obama?“ Maass asked.

“I don’t want to say yes. I don’t want to say no,“ he said.

The mugshots of two of the suspects (above left) don’t do anything to dispel the “redneck idiot bigot” stereotype at all. Nathan Johnson in particular, on the right in that pic, looks like the result of too much inbreeding. The good news is these yahoos are off the street and any threat they may have posed appears to be over and done.

The next question is: Is there anyone else out there with similar goals?

Comments:

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >

Chris United States Posted on 08/26/2008 at 11:23 AM

Chris pic

Holy shit, the Aurora police did something right for once!  It’s still good to see two less racists on the streets.

Julian India Posted on 08/26/2008 at 11:42 AM

Julian pic

These guys loook too goofy to actually accomplish anything. I presume Obama already has some private or government security?

Don’t they realise that killing Obama would hand the election to the Dems?

 Signature 

“I know you, Kingslayer, I have been here all the time, waiting for you to come to me. “

decrepitoldfool United States Posted on 08/26/2008 at 12:34 PM

decrepitoldfool pic

Yeah, but it’d be a white Democrat.

Goofy-looking does not reassure me that they wouldn’t carry out their crime.

MisterMook United States Posted on 08/26/2008 at 12:57 PM

MisterMook pic

Don’t they realise that killing Obama would hand the election to the Dems?

How so? Then it would be a race between Hillary and McCain, and whatever slim lead Obama has had would vanish because having the Clintons to criticize would clarify the McCain campaign by allowing them to pull out two decades worth of attack ads and just polish and dust them off.

I don’t really think there are THAT many moderates out there who’d go “Well! Now that the nigger is dead I guess I can vote Democrat with a clear conscience.“ Those are the same people who hate Hillary’s vagina and are jealous of her husbands mad skills in scoring with skanks.

Dom United States Posted on 08/26/2008 at 01:45 PM

Dom pic

The fist thing that came to mind when I saw these two morons was “inbred hicks”. People really are getting desperate around election time what with that puma group or whatever you call it still trying to get Hillary elected and then these two (four?) douche bags. “Hey Lee I gots an idea, lets kill the nagger then the white guy will be president” yep hicks sure are smart.

Moloch United States Posted on 08/26/2008 at 07:50 PM

Moloch pic

Damn, too bad they were caught. That would be awesome if he is shot BEFORE being elected!

Biden and Clinton are people I might actually WANT to vote for.

 Signature 

Gimbatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.

tim gueguen Canada Posted on 08/26/2008 at 09:29 PM

tim gueguen pic

All Presidential candidates have Secret Service protection if I’m not mistaken. 

I wonder how long it will take some of the nuttier people on the far right to decide this was part of a plot to raise sympathy for Obama.

MisterMook United States Posted on 08/26/2008 at 11:40 PM

MisterMook pic

O’Reilly is probably working on his script right now.

ingolfson New Zealand (Aotearoa) Posted on 08/27/2008 at 04:57 AM

ingolfson pic

All Presidential candidates have Secret Service protection if I’m not mistaken. 

They don’t. At some point when a canidate looks “promising” (i.e. popular enough) and when the threat level looks high enough, they can get it.

Not sure who makes the decision, though.

Quotes below from Wikipedia (that section lacking references, so take with a bit of care):

In 1968, as a result of presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy’s assassination, Congress authorized protection of major presidential and vice presidential candidates and nominees (Public Law 90-331). Congress also authorized protection of the spouses of deceased presidents unless they remarry and of the children of former presidents until age 16.

Interestingly enough, the article also states:

The Service also investigates forgery of government checks, forgery of currency equivalents (such as travelers’ or cashiers’ checks), and certain instances of wire fraud (such as the so called Nigerian scam) and credit card fraud

Scope creep, anyone?

ingolfson New Zealand (Aotearoa) Posted on 08/27/2008 at 05:01 AM

ingolfson pic

Ah, okay, they only became a protection agency later on. So the bodyguard bit is the scope creep, not the other way around.

Guido Switzerland Posted on 08/27/2008 at 06:20 AM

Guido pic

The guy on the right reminds me of that Simpsons redneck guy…

Ragman United States Posted on 08/27/2008 at 07:41 AM

Ragman pic

“He don’t belong in political office. Blacks don’t belong in political office. He ought to be shot,” Johnson told Maass.

You’d think that would be a dumbass thing to say before you go to trial, but it likely guarantees him admission into one of the white prison gangs without being somebody’s bitch. 

Sadly, racism ain’t dead.  Still too many homes with lead paint on the walls. 

44 grams of methamphetamine

Doesn’t help either.

 Signature 

No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously.

elwedriddsche United States Posted on 08/27/2008 at 07:54 AM

elwedriddsche pic

Goofy-looking does not reassure me that they wouldn’t carry out their crime.

What DOF said. Come to think of it, not looking capable is probably an asset in the assassination biz.

 Signature 

Science is answers that must always be questioned.
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered.
Religion is answers that must never be questioned.
Politics is answers that lobbyists pay for.

Les United States Posted on 08/27/2008 at 08:23 AM

Les pic

Ragman, it’s not the lead paint that’s the problem. It’s the parents. Hate is often a learned response.

 Signature 

Agnostics are just atheists without balls. - Stephen Colbert

Ragman United States Posted on 08/27/2008 at 09:36 AM

Ragman pic

Hate is often a learned response.

True, but learning disabilities can keep you from getting past that.  I grew up hearing racism, and had I not the brains to figure it out for myself, I likely would have ended up racist myself. 

Not to make an issue out of the lead paint, I wrote it more in humor than seriousness. 

I really blame the meth - not for the racism, but for the attempt.  That shit really screws people up.

 Signature 

No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously.

Les United States Posted on 08/27/2008 at 10:13 AM

Les pic

Crystal Meth is one of the drugs that make me doubt my conviction that drugs should be legalized. I still think they should be, but damn that one is a nasty problem.

 Signature 

Agnostics are just atheists without balls. - Stephen Colbert

decrepitoldfool United States Posted on 08/27/2008 at 10:16 AM

decrepitoldfool pic

Not a difficult problem at all, Les.  Make the severely dangerous drugs illegal (especially selling) and the less dangerous ones legal.  A simple test: anyone ever die of a marijuana overdose?  Now how about Crystal meth?

zilch Sweden Posted on 08/27/2008 at 10:33 AM

zilch pic

A simple test: anyone ever die of a marijuana overdose?

No.  Anyone ever die of an alcohol overdose?  Happens every day.  So should alcohol be outlawed?

There are no easy answers.

 Signature 

You were born.  And so you’re free.  So happy birthday.
- Laurie Anderson

decrepitoldfool United States Posted on 08/27/2008 at 10:39 AM

decrepitoldfool pic

The SimpleTest™ is a rubrick for legalizing certain drugs right away.  The others will require a bit of analysis.  For instance, what is the ratio of overdose deaths alcohol/CM?  Which is socially acceptable or politically untenable?  We have that discussion after legalizing the far less-dangerous drug.

MisterMook United States Posted on 08/27/2008 at 10:41 AM

MisterMook pic

Meth is one of the main reasons I’m for legalization, since on of the best things about legalizing meth would be pushing meth production into factories as regulated industrial processes rather than any old junkie cooking up the crap in the closet of their single wide trailer.

If that happened I’d cheerfully call much of legalization a success no matter how many more junkies there were.

Last_Hussar Great Britain (UK) Posted on 08/27/2008 at 11:56 AM

Last_Hussar pic

A simple test: anyone ever die of a marijuana overdose?

Yes

Just not the person who overdosed, but the innocent sap they murdered.

My office.  I draw your attention to the last line- I have access to those files.

 Signature 

To be human is to look at the vast, cold, uncaring universe, and to say “We stand alone, together.“

decrepitoldfool United States Posted on 08/27/2008 at 12:14 PM

decrepitoldfool pic

Marijuana is certainly not harmless - an impossible standard not even met by hot dogs (choking deaths).  The point is a dispassionate weighing of the consequences of different options is needed.  We don’t do that - our legislation runs toward reactive rather than analytical.

zilch Austria Posted on 08/27/2008 at 03:20 PM

zilch pic

Dof, I’m in favor of legalizing marijuana too: that’s one of the easy ones.  Sometimes I think the best solution would be to legalize everything, and put the money saved, and the tax collected, into education.  But it’s hard to predict what would happen with harder drugs, such as crystal meth, if they were legalized.  Would there be more abuse?  If so, would the amount of misery caused balance out the amount of misery avoided?  Impossible to say.

LH- for me, that link just goes to Aylesbury gaol.  And yes, I was guilty of hyperbole: marijuana can certainly be implicated in death.  So can water.  The fact remains that marijuana is a great deal less dangerous than alcohol.

 Signature 

You were born.  And so you’re free.  So happy birthday.
- Laurie Anderson

Last_Hussar Great Britain (UK) Posted on 08/27/2008 at 04:47 PM

Last_Hussar pic

that link just goes to Aylesbury gaol.

Yes. And none of the inmates files say they committed the murder under the influence of water.

 Signature 

To be human is to look at the vast, cold, uncaring universe, and to say “We stand alone, together.“

decrepitoldfool United States Posted on 08/27/2008 at 05:23 PM

decrepitoldfool pic

none of the inmates files say they committed the murder under the influence of water.

A likely story, what with the ready availability of di-hydrogen monoxide even in restaurants and homes.  raspberry

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys


Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:


<< Back to main