In his interviews with One America News (OAN), NewsmaxTV, Fox News Channel and other news outlets, Rep. Devin Nunes R-California, who has had access to most of the evidence pertaining to the securing Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court warrants in order to spy on members of President Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, said he didn’t want to discuss anything about Comey’s alleged role in Spygate.
But, Nunes did intimate that if federal prosecutors and investigators assigned by Attorney General William Barr to thoroughly probe Spygate gave the investigation a serious unbiased criminal process, there’s an abundance of proof available to place Comey in the center of the plot to oust a duly elected U.S. President through impeachment.
“So this is a guy who is definitely not telling the truth, and the good thing about the [Justice Department Inspector General’s] report is he’s now made himself, the IG has now made him eligible for a larger conspiracy charge—a criminal conspiracy charge—which is what we really hope the attorney general [U.S. attorney] out of Connecticut is able to do,” Nunes said in an interview with Breitbart News.
“That’s the big thing that we need. We need real charges brought. And I think a lot of people are frustrated because they feel like Comey leaked classified information. But the question is would a panel of jurors in Washington, D.C., [convict]?” he asked rhetorically.
The Bahamas are getting hammered again.
DALLAS (CBSDFW.COM) – A suspect was shot in the chest while trying to rob a group of people at an apartment complex in Dallas late Wednesday evening, police say.
Police responded to the shooting at around 10 p.m. in the 1600 block of John West Road. When they arrived, they found the male suspect with a gunshot wound to his chest. He was taken to the hospital and is expected to survive.
According to police, the suspect was trying to rob a group of people and fired several shots in the air. Police say someone who wasn’t part of the group grabbed a shotgun and shot the suspect.
Police say they found a gun on the suspect when they got to the scene.
Police have not found the person who shot the suspect but say they are not expected to face charges.
The suspect was also involved in another robbery in South Dallas before he was shot, according to police. His identity has not yet been released.
HOUSTON, Texas (KTRK) — A man shot an attempted carjacker who allegedly tried to steal his girlfriend’s vehicle in northwest Houston.
Deputies say the attempted carjacking happened in a Walgreens parking lot near Antoine and Gulf Bank around 8:30 p.m.
The man told deputies he was sitting inside of his girlfriend’s vehicle when another man opened the driver’s side door, sat down and then told him to get out of the vehicle.
“They sit in a vehicle or they just walk through hiding, looking for somebody who is in a vehicle to carjack them, or they wait until they come out to carjack them. Be extremely aware of your surroundings,” Harris County Sheriff’s deputy K.W. Cote said.
Deputies say the attempted carjacker appeared to have a gun and pointed it at the man, telling him to get out of the vehicle.
While exiting the vehicle, the victim pulled out his own gun and shot the carjacker in the stomach.
“The bad thing is, this guy didn’t see the guy (carjacker) until he got into the car. You want to look around anytime you get out of a car. Look around you and see who else is around you, see who’s watching you because there’s always somebody watching you,” Cote said.
The suspect is expected to survive, and he will face criminal charges.
LAKE CHARLES, La. – One person is dead following a casino robbery in Lake Charles on Thursday. Police say it was self-defense.
The Lake Charles Police Department was assigned to EZ Aces Truck Stop located on the I-10 Service Road at 5:00 am in reference to a robbery.
Upon arrival, it was discovered that two people had been shot; one fatally, according to Lieutenant Jeffrey Keenum, spokesperson for the Lake Charles Police Dept.
Police say the two suspects were in the process of brutally attacking the victim within the casino when the victim was able to shoot them.
Kamala Harris Does Not Understand Why the Constitution Should Get in the Way of Her Gun Control Agenda
The presidential contender conspicuously fails to explain the legal basis for her plan to impose new restrictions by executive fiat.
She fantasizes about being the tyrant in chief, that’s why she can’t explain the legal basis, because there isn’t one.
It’s the old “We could have a utopia on Earth if only we could get some of these pesky laws, and people, out of the way.”
No matter which end of the political spectrum you’re on, this is the exact reason the 2nd amendment was demanded to be included in a Bill of Rights.
During last night’s Democratic presidential debate, former Vice President Joe Biden admonished Sen. Kamala Harris (D–Calif.) for promising to impose new gun controls by executive fiat if Congress fails to pass the laws she thinks it should. That gave Harris a perfect opportunity to explain how her 100-day plan for gun control can be reconciled with constitutional restrictions on presidential power. The former prosecutor not only conspicuously failed to do so but literally laughed at the question.
The senator’s campaign website promises that “if Congress fails to send comprehensive gun safety legislation to Harris’ desk within her first 100 days as president—including universal background checks, an assault weapons ban, and the repeal of the NRA’s corporate gun manufacturer and dealer immunity bill—she will take executive action to keep our kids and communities safe.” Biden interprets that pledge as a promise to ban “assault weapons” without new legislation, something the president clearly does not have the authority to do.
Harris’ plan for unilateral action on “assault weapons” is actually more modest than Biden implies. She says she would “ban AR-15-style assault weapons from being imported into the United States,” noting that the Gun Control Act “empowers the executive branch to prohibit the importation of guns not ‘suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes.'” As Harris points out, “both Democratic and Republican presidents,” including George H.W. Bush in 1989, have used that provision to block importation of “assault weapons.” But two other parts of Harris’ gun control plan do not seem to have any statutory basis.
Harris says she would “close the ‘boyfriend loophole’ to prevent dating partners convicted of domestic violence from purchasing guns.” Under current law, people convicted of misdemeanors involving “domestic violence” are barred from possessing firearms. But crimes against dating partners count as “domestic violence” only if the perpetrator has lived with the victim or produced a child with him or her. Harris seems to think she can eliminate those requirements without new congressional action, but it’s hard to see how. Congress has defined “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence,” and only Congress can change the definition.
Harris also thinks the president can “mandate near-universal background checks by requiring anyone who sells five or more guns per year to run a background check on all gun sales.” Since only federally licensed dealers are legally required to run background checks, such a rule would require dramatically expanding that category.
The problem is that federal law defines a gun dealer as someone who is “engaged in the business of selling firearms,” which in turn is defined as “devot[ing] time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms.” The statutory definition explicitly excludes “a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms.” Under Harris’ plan, a hobbyist or collector who sold more than four guns in a single year would be required to obtain a federal license and conduct background checks, which is plainly inconsistent with current law.
Instead of explaining the legal basis for the “executive action” she has in mind, Harris made a weak joke: “Hey, Joe, instead of saying, ‘No, we can’t,’ let’s say, ‘Yes, we can.'” Then she launched into a description of the casualties from mass shootings, adding, “The idea that we would wait for this Congress, which has just done nothing, to act, is just—it is overlooking the fact that every day in America, our babies are going to school to have drills, elementary, middle and high school students, where they are learning about how they have to hide in a closet or crouch in a corner if there is a mass shooter roaming the hallways of their school.”
That is not an argument in favor of any particular gun control policy, let alone an argument for the president’s authority to impose it unilaterally. “Let’s be constitutional,” Biden said. “We’ve got a Constitution.” To which Harris replied, in effect, “Constitution, schmonstitution. Why should that get in the way of my agenda?” Even voters who tend to agree with Harris about gun control should be troubled by her blithe dismissal of the legal limits on the powers she would exercise as president.
A Gallup poll released September 11, shows that 83 percent of American adults blame a “failure in our mental health system” as a reason for mass shootings.
According to Gallup, Americans believe the second-highest factor deserving blame is “the spread of extremist viewpoints on the internet.”
The Americans blame “easy access to guns” thirdly, but only ranked access to firearms four percentage points above the blame they placed on “drug use.”
Twofer, in the same county even.
AHLEQUAH, Oklahoma – The Cherokee County Sheriff’s Office is investigating two homicides that happened in three days. Deputies said they are not connected.
The undersheriff said they received a call about a death in the 14600 block of West Clyde Maher Road just before 9 p.m. Tuesday. That is in the Woodall area, southwest of Tahlequah.
A homeowner told deputies that she shot a burglary suspect who was beating on the doors and windows of the residence. The suspect was reportedly yelling, “If you don’t come outside I’m gonna burn your house down.”
The woman told investigators she has no idea who the man is. She fired warning shots then shot the man twice, according to CCSO.
“I just know it was him or her. And I thank God it wasn’t her. She had angels on her shoulders,” Johnny Shine said. Shine said he is the woman’s boyfriend.
Undersheriff Jason Chennault said the woman’s neighbors confirmed her story, and she was not taken into custody. The district attorney will be reviewing what happened.
The man who was killed has been identified as 40-year-old Josh Montgomery.
The other homicide was about two miles south of Todd Access on the Illinois River, the undersheriff said. It took place around 2:20 a.m. Sunday.
People were having a party, and a man and woman got into a fight. Chennault said the two were dating.
The boyfriend beat the woman in the head with a stick, and another man intervened, the undersheriff said. The two men fought, then the man who intervened got a shotgun and shot the boyfriend.
The boyfriend, identified as Tim Ragsdale, died at the scene. The shooter was identified as James Mounce. Mounce was arrested.
“He was a convicted felon who had possession of a firearm, which is against the law. So that’s what we arrested him for,” Chennault said.
The district attorney is reviewing both homicides. Chennault said typically the sheriff’s office investigates two or three homicides a year. So far, this year, there have been five.
Strange. I really never considered that the area around Fayetteville had that many stupid burglars.
FAYETTEVILLE, N.C. — A Cumberland County homeowner shot and killed a suspected burglar Wednesday night, authorities said.
Deputies went to 507 Snow Hill Road at about 8:30 p.m. in response to a reported burglary. The homeowner, 46-year-old Tony Libson, told deputies two masked individuals broke into his home and shot him, but he was able to return fire.
Deputies found Henry Miller, 23, dead outside the home. The second intruder is believed to have fled after the shooting, possibly in a white sedan, authorities said.
No charges have been filed in the case.
SAN ANTONIO — Police say two men who were found with gunshot wounds at a shopping center in the Alamo Ranch area may have been shot by a person they were trying to rob.
According to a police report, the injured men asked a security guard for help at the shopping center at the corner of Loop 1604 and Culebra Road at about 9 p.m. on Wednesday.
The men were suffering from gunshot wounds and told officers they were shot near Loop 1604 and Babcock.
When investigators went to the crime scene, they found a man who said the suspects came to his door, pointed a gun at him and demanded property. He ran inside and grabbed a gun.
By the time he returned to confront the suspects, they were driving away. The victim fired several shots, hitting the car. Police believe the two suspects were shot while they were in the car.
The case remains under investigation. The injured men are expected to recover. They face potential charges of aggravated robbery.
“Hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47,” he said, on television, on the Democratic Party debate stage, for all to hear and see. “We’re not going to allow them to be used against fellow Americans anymore.”
And with that, all the Democrats who’ve tried for years to deny the gun confiscation motives behind their gun control pushes went — nooooooo.
It doesn’t get any clearer than that, does it?
“Hell yes,” we’re going to take your guns.
“Hell yes,” we’re going to confiscate your firearms.
“Hell yes,” we’re going to one day, make it so the Second Amendment is a Second Amendment In Name Only — and that whole God-given right to self-defend is a thing of the past.
Democrats have been trying for years to convince Americans that registrations and limits on assault weapons and universal background checks and other so-called common sense gun control proposals were harmless steps to curb gun-related violence that even hard-core Second Amendment activists should embrace. That the evil National Rifle Association and all those evil gun rights groups were trying to drum up fears of confiscations that just weren’t true.
That Democrats had no intention of taking away firearms from the legal gun owners. That if you like your gun, you can keep your gun.
And for some, the left’s talking points have been convincing. Particularly, as school shootings and tragic, heartbreaking stories of gun-related violence dominate far too many media cycles.
Then comes Beto, charging to clarify.
“Hell yes,” we’re going to confiscate.
It doesn’t get more honest than that.
There’s the golden ticket the NRA, the Republican Party, the patriotic Second Amendment supporters of this country needed to prove their argument, to prove their points, to showcase the truths about the Democrats’ ultimate gun controlling end game.
Democrats want to confiscate guns, pure and simple. Beto O’Rourke himself admitted it.
This letter was submitted to the New York Times
Dear Letters Editor:
There’s a serious flaw in John Donohue and Theodora Boulouta’s claims about the 1994 assault weapons ban (“That Assault Weapon Ban? It Really Did Work,” September 4). There are few actual “assault weapons” of any type in their dataset, either pre- or post-ban.
According to data by Mother Jones magazine, there were 3 mass public shootings with assault weapons in the ten years before the assault weapons ban, 2 during the 10-year ban, and 4 in the ten years after. Shootings had to have six or more fatalities to be included. As the authors note, these changes constitute large percentage variations, but are not statistically significant.
If Donohue and Boulouta are right that the ban had an impact, it should have reduced the number of shootings with assault weapons relative to shootings with other guns. While the share of mass public shootings with assault weapons did indeed fall from 30% in the pre-ban period to 25% during the ban, it fell to just 14.8% in the post-ban period. If the ban was really the driving force behind the change, it makes little sense that the sharpest drop would occur after the ban expired.
John R Lott, Jr., President of the Crime Prevention Research Center
Professor Carl Moody, Department of Economics, College of William & Mary
Alyssa also has self-admitted mental illness and owns two guns herself
As Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot points out— “Serious question. How does @Alyssa_Milano have two weapons for self-defense when she has self-admitted mental illness?”
Here’s a good part of the meeting between Alyssa Milano & Senator Cruz. You’ll notice, Milano had to bring along two (2) ‘assistants’ for the emotive effect.
And here’s the whole thing
Last year, when Christine Blasey Ford emerged after then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings to accuse him of attempted rape at a house party when both were teenagers, there were many unanswered questions both about her story and her credibility.
She offered no proof that she and Kavanaugh had ever even met. She couldn’t remember where it happened, when it happened, or how she arrived at or departed from the party. None of the four alleged witnesses she eventually named, including one of her closest lifelong friends, corroborated her accusations. Prior to airing her allegations with the media, she scrubbed her entire social media history that indicated she was a liberal activist.
To this day, there is zero evidence beyond her claims that the alleged assault ever happened. One detail, however, remains particularly intriguing. The Blasey family stayed conspicuously silent about the veracity of her allegations. A public letter of support for Ford that began “As members of Christine Blasey Ford’s family . . .” wasn’t signed by a single blood relative. Reached for comment by the Washington Post, her father simply said, “I think all of the Blasey family would support her. I think her record stands for itself. Her schooling, her jobs and so on,” before hanging up…………………
So what was the point of the cavalcade of unsubstantiated allegations? Ford’s attorney Debra Katz offered not so much a hint as a confession. Ford testified that she had no political motivation. But in remarks captured on video, Katz admitted that Ford’s allegations against Kavanaugh were at least in part driven by fear he might not sufficiently support unregulated abortion on the court.
“We were going to have a conservative” justice, she said, “but he will always have an asterisk next to his name” that will discredit any decision he makes regarding abortion. What’s more, she added, “that is part of what motivated Christine.”
Even before attorney Debra Katz took on Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s primary accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, as a client, she was someone the abusive and unscrupulous should have feared. At least, that’s how she was portrayed in the press.
“Those who know and have worked with Katz describe her as a meticulous and battle-tested attorney, as someone who vets her clients carefully and doesn’t take on cases merely because she sympathizes with victims of exploitation and abuse,” the Washington Post glowed. The Washingtonian described Katz as the capital’s “top attorney for women who want to fight back.” And that’s not a burden she took lightly. Litigating sexual harassment cases “hurts people in such a deep way,” she confessed. “We need to be fighting harder, and more strategically and more vocally.”
Katz was a serious person, and congressional Republicans took her seriously. Blasey Ford’s attorney made a variety of demands on the Judiciary Committee staffers who were slated to question her client, some of which were absurd but others—like her request for Blasey Ford to testify without Kavanaugh present and to be questioned by outside counsel and not lawmakers—were granted. These were small concessions in service to what Katz insisted was the effort to get to the truth. “Intention matters,” the lawyer told CBS News, “if we’re trying to really engage in an inquiry to get at the truth, a highly politicized environment such as the one were in is not designed to do that.”
As it turns out, Katz wasn’t as opposed to a “highly politicized environment” as she maintained. “In the aftermath of these hearings, I believe that Christine’s testimony brought about more good than the harm misogynist Republicans caused by allowing Kavanaugh on the court,” Katz told attendees at the University of Baltimore’s Feminist Legal Theory Conference this past April. “He will always have an asterisk next to his name. When he takes a scalpel to Roe v. Wade, we will know who he is, we know his character, and we know what motivates him. And that is important; it is important that we know, and that is part of what motivated Christine.”
Only someone with a lawyer’s gift for prevarication could fail to comprehend Katz’s meaning. In this textbook definition of the Kinsley gaffe, Katz has revealed that not only was she motivated to litigate the claims against Kavanaugh for the advantageous political effect they would have but that her client was, too. And what was that desired effect? Affixing an “asterisk” to Kavanaugh’s record so that his judgments and decisions would be regarded as animated by biases and prejudices and would be, therefore, suspect if not entirely illegitimate.
This is an admission entirely against interest, in part, because you do not have to announce the presence of an asterisk if it truly exists. The Democratic partisans who insist Justice Clarence Thomas has been similarly undermined are screaming into a void. His concurrences and dissents still carry as much moral and intellectual weight as any other justice. He still influences the evolution of legal thought as much as or more than his colleagues on the bench. His clerks still get confirmed to federal judicial appointments in striking numbers. The notion that Kavanaugh’s reputation had been irreparably tarred in some way by his confirmation hearings isn’t an observation. It’s a self-affirmation.”
A Wichita Falls man and his wife closed the liquor store they have owned 25 years like they normally do at 9 p.m. and drove home, only to immediately be faced with armed gang members invading their home through the garage, according to court documents.
The husband exchanged gunfire with two masked men, and his wife was shot in the leg, according to court records. The ensuing police investigation involved DNA from a shoe one suspect lost in the garage.
A Wichita County grand jury handed down an indictment against Dequavious Eugene Sanderson last week in connection with the home invasion, court records showed.
The 23-year-old Wichita Falls man was indicted on one count of burglary of a habitation with the intent to commit aggravated assault and/or attempted aggravated robbery, according to court documents filed Sept. 5.
If convicted of the first degree felony, Sanderson faces up to life in prison.
‘Red flag’ gun laws have caused backlash
Many counties in Colorado refuse to enforce law
GREELEY, Colo. – In the wake of recent mass shootings, President Donald Trump has called for “red flag” laws, which would temporarily prevent individuals in crisis from accessing firearms through a court order.
That has some wondering whether Congress could enact national red flag legislation in a rare instance of Democrats and Republicans coming together to pass a gun law.
But in Colorado, the state’s passage of a red flag law has sparked a backlash.
The state’s red flag law won’t take effect until next year, but opponents have already filed a lawsuit attempting to overturn it. A number of the state’s counties have declared themselves Second Amendment “sanctuaries” in an effort to fight back and some sheriffs, including Weld County Sheriff Steve Reams, have said they would rather go to jail than enforce the law.
Reams believes Colorado’s red flag law is unconstitutional and is afraid of what will happen when it takes effect.
“My biggest fear for the law is violating someone’s constitutional rights and the potential for placing my deputies in a situation for an encounter with an armed individual,” Reams told CNN.
Tulare County, California Sheriff Mike Boudreaux is encouraging all concealed carry weapon (CCW) permit holders in his community to exercise their rights to defend themselves and others against active shooters.
Reacting to mass shootings in the U.S., Sheriff Boudreaux posted a message on Twitter August 6, calling for those who legally own firearms and CCW permits to “protect life” against active shooters:
“I encourage all CCW holders in Tulare County to exercise your rights. Do so legally and only with a valid permit. Secure our communities and protect life by being able to defend ourselves against active shooters, threats to life and those who use guns for criminal behavior.”
“We need to level the playing field,” Sheriff Boudreaux said in a follow-up statement to “America’s 1st Freedom.”
Law-abiding gun owners don’t commit mass shootings, Boudreaux said, responding to critics:
“I have more than 10,000 gun permits issued in my county. In the thousands that we’ve issued, we’ve had zero issues with law abiding citizens who are carrying concealed weapons.”
“If something like those horrific active shooter incidents was to happen here, I want the people of my county to be able to defend themselves,” Sheriff Boudreaux told “America’s 1st Freedom.”
When even the NY Times publishes it…………..
WASHINGTON — As Democrats make an aggressive push for new gun control legislation, they have made a calculated decision to stop short of pursuing their most ambitious goal: an assault weapons ban.
The overwhelming majority of House Democrats — 211, seven shy of the 218 needed for passage — are co-sponsoring legislation to ban military-style semiautomatic weapons, similar to the ban in effect from 1994 to 2004. But some centrist Democrats remain skittish about any proposal that keeps firearms from law-abiding citizens — a frequent charge against Democrats by Republicans and gun rights groups — making any such ban politically risky for moderates in Trump-friendly districts. In the Senate, it draws less support.
The split reveals just how complicated gun politics remain inside the Democratic Party, even as mass shootings are terrorizing the nation and the Twitter hashtag #DoSomething has captured the mounting public demands for Congress to act.
Despite of what the left-wing media wants you to believe, there is not an epidemic of mass shootings, or an epidemic of gun violence in general, in the United States. The data make this clear.
In fact — and again, in spite of what many in the media would have us believe — by many accounts, mass shootings are not even on the rise. Definitions of what constitutes a “mass shooting” vary, but using “standard definitions,” a recent piece in The Conversation — an academic and research journal — declares that “Mass shootings aren’t growing more common.”
In support of this conclusion, The Conversation article references data presented in USA Today:
Northeastern University criminologist James Alan Fox, a leading expert with decades of experience on such matters, has long held that “There is no evidence that we are in the midst of an epidemic of mass shootings.” This was true five years ago, as the graphic below, using Professor Fox’s data, reveals:
And it’s true today, as Fox recently revealed in a lengthy interview with Reason’s Nick Gillespie: “There is no evidence that we are in the midst of an epidemic of mass shootings.” Even the liberals at Politico agree. There, Grant Duwe, a research director for the Minnesota Department of Corrections and author of Mass Murder in the United States: A History, concludes that mass shootings are “roughly as common now as they were in the 1980s and ’90s.”……….
In his new book, Bleeding Out, criminal justice scholar Thomas Abt reveals that, “Since October 2001, 410 people have died in domestic terrorist attacks & 520 have died in mass shootings. During that same period, at least 100,000 lost their lives to urban violence.” This should come as little surprise to those who are aware of the weekly events in Baltimore, Chicago, Ferguson, St. Louis, and the like.
In other words, the real problem with gun violence in the U.S. is the murder and mayhem that often plague Democratic enclaves in urban America. Where are the cries of “Do something!” when it comes to the weekly gun violence in America’s cities? The silence is deafening.
HENDERSON, N.C. — A man trying to break into a Henderson home was shot and killed early Monday, police said.
Police responded to a reported shooting at 232 Crozier St. at about 2 a.m. and found a man dead outside a window to the home. A preliminary investigation determined that the dead man, whose name hasn’t been released, was trying to break in when someone inside the home shot him, police said.
The shooting remains under investigation, but no charges have been filed.
Neighbors said they weren’t sure what could have made the home a target for a burglary other an empty television box sitting outside.
“I was just shocked,” said one woman who asked not to be identified. “I came out when I saw all the police. That’s when I realized someone was lying on the ground dead.”
A woman tells Warren police that she shot at a man that tried to rob her outside of her home.
Police responded to an attempted robbery in the 700 block of Willard Ave on September 9 just before noon.
The victim told police that as she pulled her car into the driveway and exited the vehicle, a tall man wearing a red shirt and tan pants approached her from behind.
According to the report, the victim then pulled out a gun but was punched in the face by the suspect.
The suspect then fled down the victim’s driveway.
The victim then called the police to make a report.
According to authorities, while the victim was sitting on the front porch waiting for police to arrive, she walked into her backyard.
While she was in the backyard, the suspect returned, but this time the victim warned him and said that he would shoot at him if he didn’t run away.
The suspect moved closer to the victim, and she shot at him. The suspect then ran away.
Warren officers checked the surrounding area, but they could not find the suspect.