This interview with Dr. Hanson is just too long to post and even excerpts wouldn’t do it justice. Just ‘Read The Whole Thing™‘ at your convenience about the corruption, hypocrisy, mendacity and sheer idiocy that’s endemic in our current government, bureaucracy and higher ‘education’.
Weissmann is the one who also did the work to get General Flynn indicted for perjury. Seems to be his usual tactic is to use a perjury charge because doing real investigative work is just too hard for him.
Just the kind of “Law Enforcement Officer” that you need when you want a tyrannical police state.
Andrew Weissmann, one of the most prominent members of special counsel Robert Mueller’s team investigating Russia, let slip on Thursday that they were “trying to get rid of” President Trump, in part by laying a perjury trap to get him on record under oath.
Known as Mueller’s “pitbull,” Weissmann was heavily involved in the criminal case against Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort. He stepped down before Mueller released his final report and struck a deal with a publisher for a book about his experiences on the special counsel.
He would also sign with NBC and MSNBC as a legal analyst, and appeared Thursday afternoon on MSNBC to comment on President Trump’s remarks earlier in the day on his acquittal by the U.S. Senate, where the president denounced the effort by political enemies to take him out.
Republican National Committee spokeswoman shared a video clip of the segment on Twitter, saying that “Weissmann just admitted what we always knew.”
Taking a shot at Trump for “mouthing off” earlier in the day, Weissmann said, “He never submitted to an interview, he never testified under oath — it’s true, the same happened in the Mueller case.”
“Why do you think that is?” MSNBC anchor Nicolle Wallace asked.
“There’s a classic reason,” Weissman replied. “There is legal jeopardy that attaches if you sit for an interview or if you say something under oath to federal prosecutors, to federal prosecutors, to the House, to the Senate — so if you notice, the president is happy to talk today about ‘oh, this is evil and these people are corrupt,’ but when it came time for him to put up or shut up, which is are you willing to actually say this under oath or even in an interview, he’s completely silent.”
This being, of course, Trump’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
Speaking from the East Room on Thursday, the president said the Russian collusion probe was “all bullshit,” insisting that he was “treated unbelievably unfairly.”
Trump called former FBI director James Comey a “sleazebag,” and slammed the “top scum” at the bureau, to include disgraced former bureau agent Peter Strzok.
“We’ve been going through this now for three years. It was evil, it was corrupt, it was dirty cops, it was leakers. It was a disgrace. Had I not fired James Comey, who was a disaster, by the way, it’s possible I wouldn’t even be standing here right now,” he said. “We caught him in the act. Dirty cops. Bad people.”
“These are the crookedest, most dishonest, dirtiest people I’ve ever seen,” he added.
Weissmann was the epitome of the “13 angry Democrats” Trump often referred to when speaking of the special counsel……
As for bias, while there are many signs, the fact Weissmann attended Clinton’s 2016 election night party in New York City, according to The Wall Street Journal, may say all that needs to be said.
HB1617, authored by Republican Del. Jason Miyares, a former prosecutor, would have provided grant money to cities in order to implement two programs; Project Ceasefire and Project Exile.
The two programs work in conjunction with each other, both targeting the cities most violent and prolific offenders. Those individuals are given a choice. They can stop shooting, in which case they can work with the Ceasefire folks to help put their life on the right path, whether it’s through a GED program, job training, an apprenticeship, and the like. Or, if they keep shooting, they’ll be dealing with the men and women in Project Exile, and their cases are going to be referred to federal court where they’ll be facing long prison sentences without the possibility of early release.
“You’re going to stop shooting. We’ll help you if you let us, but we’ll make you if we have to.” That’s the message and the strategy behind these programs and it works, as has been detailed by researchers like David Kennedy, who has helped implement the strategy in many cities over the past twenty years. It works because it targets the people who are actually committing violent crimes. In many cases, these most likely to offend are also the most likely to be victimized. They’re responsible for a disproportionate amount of crime and tragedy in the communities they live and prey upon. But many of them are not beyond redemption, and lives have not only been saved but changed by these efforts.
This is the bill that Democrats killed, while passing bills to ration handgun purchases, limit firearms training, establish red flag laws, and even allow localities to pass their own gun control laws. They want cities across the state to be able to put useless, ineffective, and unconstitutional laws on the books, while preventing them from putting proven and effective programs in place that don’t require any new legislation beyond establishing a funding mechanism.
This is shameful. I’m not being hyperbolic when I say that I believe this bill, had it been enacted into law, would have saved more lives than all of Gov. Northam’s gun bills put together, and Democrats killed it in committee. This is not common sense. In fact, it makes no sense, given the fact that the Project Ceasefire model has support from a lot of liberal politicians.
No, I believe the reason Democrats killed this bill are simply because it was authored by a Republican and it didn’t do anything to restrict the rights of legal gun owners. Those two things made it unsupportable for the majority of the General Laws committee, and Virginians in high-crime neighborhoods are going to pay the price for the Democrats’ partisanship.
The Bernie Sanders campaign spent just under $1.2 million on private jet travel last quarter, outpacing the entire 2020 Democratic presidential primary field.
The most recent filing from Sanders reveals $1,199,579 in spending during the final three months of 2019 to Apollo Jets, LLC, a “luxury private jet charter service.”
The campaign spent an additional $23,941 for transportation to Virginia-based Advanced Aviation Team.
The candidate who comes closest to matching Sanders in private jet spending was former vice president Joe Biden, whose campaign spent $1,040,698 to Advanced Aviation Team last quarter.
When consequences become personal, clotheads usually start backing up.
This is a primary principle of asymmetrical, 4th generation warfare.
A word to the wise should be sufficient for political and other purposes.
Professor Andrew Parker of St John’s College at Oxford University is my new favorite person. The Times of London reports that a group of students wrote to Professor Parker to discuss demands being made by student protesters about fossil fuel divestment. His response wasn’t what they were expecting:
Two students at St John’s College wrote to Andrew Parker, the principal bursar, this week requesting a meeting to discuss the protesters’ demands, which are that the college “declares a climate emergency and immediately divests from fossil fuels”. They say that the college, the richest in Oxford, has £8 million of its £551 million endowment fund invested in BP and Shell.
Professor Parker responded with a provocative offer. “I am not able to arrange any divestment at short notice,” he wrote. “But I can arrange for the gas central heating in college to be switched off with immediate effect. Please let me know if you support this proposal.”
One of the students wrote back and said he would present the proposal but he didn’t think Parker was being appropriately serious. Professor Parker responded to that note saying, “You are right that I am being provocative but I am provoking some clear thinking, I hope. It is all too easy to request others to do things that carry no personal cost to yourself. The question is whether you and others are prepared to make personal sacrifices to achieve the goals of environmental improvement (which I support as a goal).” The best part of the story is the response from the organizer of the protest:
Fergus Green, the organiser of the wider protest, who is studying for a master’s degree in physics and philosophy at Balliol College, said: “This is an inappropriate and flippant response by the bursar to what we were hoping would be a mature discussion. It’s January and it would be borderline dangerous to switch off the central heating.”
Yes, it would be rash and “borderline dangerous” to do something like that.
Now step back and take notice how closely this small debate at one college is a microcosm of the larger debate taking place around the globe. The teenage face of the anti-fossil fuel movement, Greta Thunberg, recently demanded “real zero” emissions starting right now. Following her advice would be the equivalent of cutting off the gas that heats the campus in the middle of winter. It wouldn’t just be “borderline dangerous” it would almost certainly be catastrophic for millions of people. Despite this, I bet protest organizer Fergus Green thinks she’s part of a “mature discussion.” In any case, a lot of people like him seem to think so.
Professor Parker’s response focuses the mind on the fact that this isn’t a game. There are significant costs to real people associated with eliminating fossil fuels. Natural gas, for instance, isn’t something we can simply cease using overnight or even in ten years. If we’re not careful about how we proceed, a lot of people could get hurt. So a fair response to people demanding an end to the use of fossil fuels is the one the professor put to these protesters: You first.
U.S.A. –-(Ammoland.com)- I listened to Billionaire Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s remarks after the attack at the West Freeway Church of Christ in Texas. I paraphrase, but you can check the video of his remarks for yourself.
‘It is the job of law enforcement to have guns and to decide when to shoot. You don’t want average citizens to have guns in public. That is the job of the police.’
This was a prepared speech so we have to assume Mayor Bloomberg meant what he said. One mistake is an accident, two mistakes are carelessness, and three or more falsehoods are propaganda. I had hope for Mayor Bloomberg, but, sadly, this qualifies as propaganda. To his credit, Mayor Bloomberg is probably telling us what he knows, but you know things that the Mayor doesn’t.
You know how to defend yourself and your family. I’ve taught beginners to handle firearms. My students have been properly intimidated by the moral weight of the gun. My student’s questions change with time in a consistent pattern.
They often evolve through this chain of thought:
- How do I shoot?
- When can I shoot?
- When must I defend myself and those I love?
The law says you have may use lethal force when you face a certain level of threat under certain circumstances. With time, most people who carry concealed fall back to the situation where they must shoot. They are beautifully reluctant to harm others. They plan to use a gun to prevent a greater harm, and to do so only when they have no other choice. I’ve seen those decisions fall into place. That is my experience, but we know far more.
Contrary to what Mayor Bloomberg implied, people with a concealed carry permit are more law abiding and less violent than the police. That makes sense when you consider their very different situations. Police and civilians are figuratively headed in opposite directions. Police have to close with a criminal and make an arrest. The ordinary citizen wants to get away from the bad guy. I think police have a much tougher job, but more citizens have contact with criminals every day than do the police. In fact, thousands of honest citizens defend themselves from criminal attack by using a firearm in self-defense every day. Mayor Bloomberg chose to ignore those facts.
You know something else that Mayor Bloomberg doesn’t know. You know how you live. You know who belongs in your home and at work. You know your neighbors, your co-workers, and your customers. You know many of the people you meet routinely on the street. That knowledge gives you an incredible advantage when things go wrong. Because of what you know and who you know, you know the good guys from the bad guys. That helps explain why armed civilians are so much less likely than the police to shoot the wrong person. You saw the problem unfold while the police arrive later and have to figure it out in a hurry.
Again, Mayor Bloomberg chose to ignore those facts.
Time is critical when you defend yourself from a violent attack. When we look at the attack at the West Freeway Church of Christ, the defenders had only a few seconds to respond. (The video of the attack is here.) We have an advantage that the police don’t have. We are there when the problem unfolds. The police arrive some 11.1 minutes later, on average. In mass murder attacks, that delay costs about a dozen lives. Mayor Bloomberg chose to ignore the lives we save.
Perhaps I’m being too hard on the Mayor. You have the knowledge and experience that the Mayor doesn’t have. Tens of millions of us bear arms every day. In contrast, it has been years, if not decades, since Mayor Bloomberg lived without a paid security detail. Maybe he is telling the truth as he knows it since most of his security detail are former law enforcement officers. In that sense, the former Mayor still lives with police protection. The rest of us can’t afford that, so we do it ourselves.
Mayor Bloomberg hired New York cops to defend him, so of course, he wants you disarmed.
I understand that politicians want to give us simple answers, but the world is a complex place. We’ve seen gun prohibition fail time after time. Can we afford a political leader who gets something as simple as self-defense so consistently wrong? I won’t trust Mayor Bloomberg with the safety of my family.
Standard operational demoncrap hypocrisy.
The Democrat Party and their colleagues in the liberal mainstream media want to impeach President Trump for not sending lethal aid to the Ukraine quick enough.
President Trump waited 55 days before releasing taxpayer-funded US aid to the Ukrainian government in 2019.
Democrats want you to believe this was a “crime or misdemeanor”.
BUT NOW THERE’S THIS…
Those same Democrats on the House Impeachment Team VOTED AGAINST the aid package to the Ukraine last year!
Three of the House Impeachment Managers voted AGAINST Aid to Ukraine.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) all voted against the bill that included the aid to Ukraine.
And Jerrold Nadler voted against the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 that included aid to Ukraine.
Sen. Whitehouse on impeachment trial: Repetition is key to building a case
Jan. 24, 2020 – 1:50 – Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., pushed back Friday against defenders of President Trump who have argued that Democrats are making a repetitive impeachment case.
“If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself.”—-Joseph Goebbels
Need I say more?
Virginia Gov. Northam Smears Gun Control Opponents to Frighten His Base
If politicians are going to paint their opponents as illegitimate, they should be prepared to receive the same treatment in return.
Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam is misusing a regularly scheduled political rally to frighten his base and gin up support for his troubled administration. Flinging scare-mongering language, the Democratic governor has portrayed a grassroots lobbying effort against gun restrictions as a potential source of “violent extremism” and declared a state of emergency.
It’s a cheap attempt to build support by delegitimizing opposition to his policies. On the way to declaring a state of emergency, Northam breathlessly warned:
Credible intelligence gathered by Virginia’s law enforcement agencies indicates that tens of thousands of advocates plan to converge on Capitol Square for events culminating on January 20, 2020. Available information suggests that a substantial number of these demonstrators are expected to come from outside the Commonwealth, may be armed, and have as their purpose not peaceful assembly but violence, rioting, and insurrection.
The “events culminating on January 20, 2020” consist of the Virginia Civil Defense League’s (VCDL) annual lobby day, in which it gathers at Capitol Square, like many other organizations (the Virginia Nurses Association has four lobby days planned for the end of January and beginning of February) do. In the case, the organization is advocating for self-defense rights and against restrictions on the same.
Images of the VCDL’s peaceful 2017 rally are on display at the organization’s website. This is a normal, regularly scheduled gathering intended to influence public policy.
But the governor warns that this year’s event features “white nationalist rhetoric and plans by out-of-state militia groups to attend.” He links the gathering to “events that occurred in Charlottesville,” as if a gathering by opponents of his policies must inevitably descend into violence launched by fringe-dwellers.
Will fringe racists and right-wing radicals attend today’s rally? Almost certainly. Back when anti-war protests were a thing (remember them?) an even more predictable feature than Susan Sarandon on the stage were clusters of far-left types wandering through the crowd trying to convince attendees that a desire for peace implies a workers’ revolution and liquidating the bourgeoisie. Radicals frequently court recruits by piggybacking their causes on mainstream ones. In and of itself, that doesn’t reflect on the mainstream cause.
In fact, one of the groups joining the rally is Antifascists of the Seven Hills, an anti-capitalist group which opposes gun restrictions because “gun control serves to weaken our defense positions.” They don’t want to leave any racist presence at the rally unopposed by other pro-gun voices.
“In considering how to deter their recruitment and nullify their ability to harm folks lobbying or otherwise going about their business, we recognized that the VCDL was drawing lines in the sand on optics, and trying to distance themselves from other issues and symbols like the Confederate battle flag,” the group notes on its Facebook page.
Whatever your opinion of antifa (I’ve been a critic), it’s clear that this isn’t the unalloyed white nationalist gathering that Northam describes.
No, whether you agree or disagree with it, the rally’s message is certainly mainstream. Even as VCDL warns that “proposed bills will turn many semi-automatic firearm owners into felons,” 86 of Virginia’s 95 counties had passed measures declaring themselves sanctuaries for self-defense rights, as of the end of December.
“They suggest that the counties might not enforce new state laws limiting gun rights,” the Wall Street Journal reports of the sanctuary jurisdictions.
To a large extent, that’s a reflection of the state’s version of the national urban-rural divide, which has too many politicians favoring one side while vilifying and punishing the other. In Virginia, support for Northam and the Democratic legislative majority is concentrated in the state’s urban crescent, while the sanctuary counties are in rural and exurban areas that even a Democratic county chairman accused his party of treating with “malevolent neglect.”
With an immediate post-election victory push for gun restrictions, state Democrats play to the prejudices of their urban-to-suburban base with legislation that sticks it to the rural areas where such laws are largely unpopular.
Playing the same game a year after news reports that, years ago, he dressed in blackface, Northam seeks revived credibility among urban, progressive voters by pushing his party’s gun control proposals. And then he doubles down by smearing his opponents as bent on “violence, rioting, and insurrection.”
But what about that “credible intelligence” Northam claims was gathered by law enforcement agencies? Maybe it exists, but governments have a long history of feeding the public’s fears to delegitimize opponents and justify extraordinary actions.
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary,” H. L. Mencken mused decades ago.
“If the elite had conspired to destroy the middle class, it seems they would have:
1, desired to corrupt middle class morals
2, convince middle class women to have fewer children or have a career instead of a family
3, convince middle class women they don’t need men but can do it all
4, take the middle class’s money by both promoting the need for a college education while driving the price of said education through the roof by subsidizing the education of the poor
5, send housing costs soaring by restricting supply
6, create a situation where good paying middle class jobs get outsourced while cheap labor is imported to keep wages down
7, promote a diet that tends to make anyone who follows it fat and sickly compared to those who eat roughly what people ate a century ago.
People in 1950 might have called the above a dystopian horror fiction.
The elites in 2020 call it good public policy.”..Cyrus in New York
A new study by Brad Wilcox and Wendy Wang at the Institute for Family Studies lays out the real picture.
“When it comes to their own families,” the authors discovered, “California elites with kids overwhelmingly ‘live right’ in private, giving their children the benefit of growing up in a two-parent family.”
Wilcox and Wang reveal granular data showing “that some of the most elite neighborhoods in the state — including several in Hollywood and San Francisco — have virtually no single parents.”
This is a far bigger story than Hollywood’s message vs. Hollywood’s lifestyle, of course. Across the country, Americans in the upper class are much more likely to profess liberalized teachings on family and marriage while personally practicing conservative family values. Wilcox and Wang just happened to get the data for California.
Among Californians aged 18-50, the college-educated were far more likely than those with no college degree (85% to 69%) to agree that we should celebrate the diversity of family structures, including single parenthood, unmarried parents, and other alternative family structures. The college-educated were specifically far more cheerful toward single motherhood.
That’s how they feel about others. How do the elites feel about their own lives? “It’s very important for me, personally to be married before having children,” 68% of the college-educated sample agreed. That number was only 59% for those who never went to college.
So the elites are more “tolerant” than the working class ideologically, but they are much more conservative about how they plan to live.
It’s Wednesday and Michael Bloomberg is on a farm in Minnesota. Nobody, including him, knows why.
Minnesota in the winter is a long way from Bloomberg’s Bermuda estate where he spent much of his time as mayor of New York City, and, if he were to win in 2020, would spend his presidential term. While fighting a war on coal, the billionaire environmentalist crusader liked to jet over on Fridays to his waterfront estate in Bermuda to escape the New York City winters and then jet back again on Sundays.
“We should understand how big America is,” Michael Bloomberg told a reporter. “I’m here to learn about another part of the country.”
Any part of the country that isn’t New York City is a whole other world to the big city titan. That might be why he stumbled into Martin County which Trump had won by 67.5%. Even by primary standards, there aren’t many Democrats here. Hillary only got 2,733 votes. Campaigning for Somali votes in Hennepin County would have made more sense. But as far as Bloomberg is concerned, any place outside Manhattan is farm country. And that goes double for Minnesota.
So here he was riding a tractor on a farm in the greatest presidential campaign vehicular moment since a tank ended the Dukakis dream.
“We eat and live based on what you do,” he told a soybean farm family. “And I think it’s easy for us living in big cities to forget about the rest of the world.”
Bloomberg didn’t need to travel all the way to Minnesota to meet farmers. There are plenty of them in upstate New York. But the billionaire, having just recently discovered the existence of both Minnesota and farmers, was eager to impress the media with his common touch. And be photographed in the general vicinity of farm equipment while remaining completely clueless about farm country.
Later in Akron, he would tell an audience, “I just came from a farm, a soybean farm, in the coldest place — you have no idea how cold it is out there.” It was 9 degrees. In other words, winter.
His pitch to farm country was more unions, a $15 minimum wage, and community college. It’s the same as his New York City pitch. And he’s already spent almost $2 million on ads selling himself to Minnesotans. That’s been followed by awkward campaign stops in which he tries to relate to people who don’t work for him. It’s a skill that Bloomberg, who is better at buying elections than winning them, has yet to master.The politicians who endorse him walk behind him, deferentially trailing the billionaire munchkin as he strides toward the photographers or his private jets, like the hired help that they are.
And the private jets are there waiting to take him away from the scary world outside New York.
His mid Western campaign stops begin and end in New York City. Bloomberg may occasionally jet to the “rest of the world”, but then he gets back into his private jet and returns home to New York for bedtime.
The planet, according to him, may be on the verge of an environmental catastrophe, but the end of all life on earth is no reason to have to spend a night on a lumpy mattress in a Minnesota Marriot.
The “Get It Done Express” bus with the Bloomberg 2020 logo is misleading. The only thing that bus is getting done is diverting attention from how many polar bears each Bloomberg plane trip kills.
The death of the planet is a small price to pay for being able to sleep in his Gilded Age townhouse on 79th Street. Coal miners may be driven out of work and into the streets, but Bloomberg must be able to recline on his $1 million Georgian Chippendale couch, play with his antique snooker table, and enjoy his foyer paved with rare Egyptian marble even if the oceans rise, the seas sink, and all the polar bears perish.
“Too much wealth is in too few hands, and it’s concentrated in too few places,” Bloomberg told farm country, seemingly deaf to the fact that some $58 billion of it is concentrated in his hands.
The billionaire says things like this because someone told him it was a good idea. Just like somebody told him that he should ride a tractor. Or get Judge Judy to campaign for him. Or visit Akron.
In Akron, he told an audience of a few hundred people that they needed more immigrants.
“We want to build on things. We want to build on things that already exist,” he said robotically, like a space alien trying to communicate with earthmen.
Then he vowed to take away everyone’s guns.
Bloomberg’s nationwide campaign is built on blowing a fortune on ads accompanied by inept pandering. A black marching band introduced him in Atlanta. He had dinner with Katy Perry at a Beverly Hills restaurant. In Illinois, he brought in disgraced Secretary of Education Arne Duncan to tout job training for all the people who would be put out of work by his radical environmentalist agenda.
Bringing in an Obama hack widely despised on both sides of the political aisle, whose most recent political activism consisted of urging parents to keep kids out of school until gun control laws are passed, was another brilliant move by a campaign that was thrown together on a billionaire’s last-minute whim.
Bloomberg showed up in Texas vowing to bring in more immigrants and refugees. “America is not New York, I understand that,” he told Texans. And then laid out a plan for making Texas into New York.
Just to make himself feel more at home, he brought along grating New York City television personality, Judge Judy. The reality television star has six homes from which she has been known to commute by private jet, but none of them are in Texas.Why Judge Judy? All the other celebrities were already taken.
Behind the awkward photo ops in places he’s never been to before, like farms, diners, and the state of Minnesota, is the same old campaign he ran in New York City with the same old nanny state tics.
“You just do not want the average citizen carrying a gun in a crowded place,” he told Alabamans.
It doesn’t occur to him that people in Alabama might be less likely to agree with that than New Yorkers.
Bloomberg is ready to blow $1 billion on a nationwide campaign in places he’s never been to and making a play for the hearts and minds of voters that he’s unable to understand or relate to. While his campaign spends a fortune on ads and staff, its message is the same one that he ran on in New York City. It’s a sales pitch of free stuff, more unions, a war on coal, gun bans, and nanny state politics.
And for voters who like that sort of thing, there are better 2020 candidates serving it up.
Riding a tractor and spending a billion won’t change that.
Even Bloomberg doesn’t seem especially convinced by his own candidacy despite all the cash he’s spending to finance it.
In Chicago, a woman told him, “We need somebody like you.”
“If you say so,” he answered.
Worse, Democrats blocked even allowing a vote on the measure because they are too cowardly to actually go on record on the issue.
Somebody needs to look into his relations with the Iranians since 2016.
John Kerry gets completely flustered when he is shown a 2016 clip of him saying that he knew that the money Obama administration gave Iran would be used to fund the IRGC.
Notice the lip smacking thing he does when he tries to come up with an explanation.
— Rising serpent (@rising_serpent) January 13, 2020
After a chaotic morning at the state capitol in Richmond, and despite huge turnout from thousands of gun owners, Virginia Democrats approved a number of gun control bills in a key committee hearing Monday.
The Senate Judiciary Committee meeting was supposed to begin at 8 a.m., but was delayed more than an hour thanks to the long lines to get in the doors of the capitol. New rules banning the lawful carrying of firearms in the capitol and office buildings led to new security measures, which in turn led to lengthy delays and annoyed staffers and citizens. Meanwhile, some Democrat staffers were apparently able to bypass the required security.
Outrageous. General Assembly staff can’t get to work but Administration officials blithely bypass Dem gun screening. https://t.co/QICJjD0cHD
— Mark Obenshain (@MarkObenshain) January 13, 2020
After folks cleared the long security line, they were then told that Democrats were requiring an equal number of supporters and opponents of the gun bills to be seated in the committee room, despite the fact that those opposed to the bills far outnumbered gun control supporters…………
Meanwhile SB 16, Sen. Dick Saslaw’s sweeping gun, magazine, and suppressor ban, was struck from the record, which means there will be no further action on the bill. Instead, Democrats will focus their efforts on HB 961, a slightly modified version of Saslaw’s legislation that “allows” gun owners to maintain possession of their banned firearms if they register them with the Virginia State Police. The ban on magazines that can accept more than 10 rounds, as well as lawfully purchased suppressors, remains in the House version of the so-called “assault firearms” bill.
And he never worked with Nazis to confiscate Jewish property
In the latest issue of New York Magazine, former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani said he was more of a Jew than George Soros. While it is true that Soros is a Jew by birth and the former may is Catholic, there is truth to what he is saying. After all, Rudy is a good friend of the Jews, and Soros is what is commonly called a self-hating Jew (I call him a Jew-hating Jew because he doesn’t hate himself).
“Don’t tell me I’m anti-Semitic if I oppose him,” he said. “Soros is hardly a Jew. I’m more of a Jew than Soros is. I probably know more about — he doesn’t go to church, he doesn’t go to religion — synagogue. He doesn’t belong to a synagogue, he doesn’t support Israel, he’s an enemy of Israel. He’s elected eight anarchist DA’s in the United States. He’s a horrible human being.”
When CNN reported about Giuliani’s statement, it emphasized that Soros was a holocaust survivor–true. They were trying to infer that because he was a Holocaust survivor doesn’t mean he is pro-Jewish and Jewish caused today. They also reported the ADL’s Jonathan Greenblatt said Giuliani’s attack on Soros was anti-Semitic. However, despite its mission for the past decade, or so, the ADL’s first priority has been progressivism and the Democratic Party. That is why I recommend that donors to the ADL give to StopAntisemitism.org instead, or if they wish to give to the Democratic Party, send the money directly and cut out the middleman.
The Virginia Defense League and Gun Owners of America, the gun rights group that is spearheading the Second Amendment sanctuary movement in the commonwealth, responded to Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring’s statement that called the sanctuary resolution as having “no legal effect.”
The VDL and GOA sent a letter to their supporters and urged them to resist any unconstitutional gun control law the General Assembly passes in the new session next year.
“It is apparent that AG Herring and Governor Ralph Northam believe that Virginia localities have a duty to actively assist the Commonwealth in the enforcement of any law enacted by the General Assembly. These officials appear to believe that such blind obedience is required irrespective of whether a law violates the U.S. Constitution, the Virginia Constitution, or is manifestly destructive of the preexisting rights of the People of Virginia,” the groups wrote. “This radical view is demonstrably false, and ignores the significance of the fact that local officials are required by law to take an oath to support the federal and state constitutions above the laws enacted by the General Assembly.”
The VDL and GOA said Governor Ralph Northam and Herring are wrong in their assessment counties must always implement laws passed since they “have taken exactly the opposite legal position” when it came to sanctuary status for illegal immigrants.
Northam vetoed two bills in March that would have banned localities from becoming sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants and would have required law enforcement agency to notify federal authorities if they had illegal immigrants in their custody.
“The safety of our communities requires that all people, whether they are documented or not, feel comfortable, supported and protected by our public safety agencies,” Northam said at the time.
“Thus, three times in three consecutive years (2017, 2018, and 2019), Governor Northam used his office to support the right of Virginia’s localities to declare themselves sanctuary cities and counties, refusing to help with the enforcement of federal immigration laws, based on mere policy differences with those federal laws,” the gun rights group said.
The VDL and GOA stated there is nothing new with people not obeying illegal and unauthorized government acts, adding, “If necessary, the lower authority may even actively resist the superior authority, since the higher authority is acting illegitimately and unconstitutionally, and without legal authority.”
An overwhelming number of counties in Virginia have declared themselves as Second Amendment sanctuaries, promising to not enforce any gun law deemed as unconstitutional.
A few Virginia sheriffs voiced their support for counties becoming gun sanctuaries to Townhall, giving the movement critical backing.
“I am in favor of the Second Amendment Sanctuary. I believe we need to send a message to Richmond that our citizens will take a stance. My deputies and I take an oath to uphold the Constitution and that’s what we will do,” said Rappahannock County Sheriff Connie Compton.
Gun control activists in politicians are doing everything they can to try to tamp down the Second Amendment Sanctuaries spreading like wildfire across the state of Virginia. On Friday morning, the Bloomberg-funded Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action called on law enforcement groups to denounce the more than 100 counties, cities, and towns in the state that have declared (in varying fashion) their opposition to any new gun control laws coming out of Richmond.
Everytown’s Managing Director of Litigation and National Enforcement Policy, Eric Tirschwell, told Virginia television station WHSV that the movement is dangerous.
“If these folks actually follow through on what at this point is really just a threat to not enforce laws, that’s where I think the real danger will reveal itself,” he said.
Tirschwell argues the resolutions are problematic for a number of reasons; most importantly, he says, because they put lives at risk.
“These resolutions could have, and threaten to have, a chilling effect on people who might otherwise use, or take advantage of gun safety laws to try to prevent harm, like a suicide, a homicide or even a mass shooting,” he said.
What’s really amusing about Tirschwell’s argument is that in his position at Everytown for Gun Safety, he’s helping to provide legal support to cities around the country that are passing local gun control ordinances in violation of state firearms preemption laws. From Pittsburgh to Coral Gables to Missoula, Montana, Tirschwell has been working to defend cities that face court challenges after ignoring state law. Everytown for Gun Safety is all in favor of localities having more control over their gun laws, but only if it means more gun control laws.
As for Tirschwell’s argument itself, it only sounds good if you don’t know the facts. The fact is violent crime increased by 25% after Colorado put expanded the state’s gun control laws in 2013, while violent crime nationally has declined without any new gun laws being put in place. The fact is if you want to prevent harm, you have to target the individual who’s at risk of harming someone. The fact is that infringing on the rights of 100 innocent people in the hopes of stopping one dangerous person isn’t commonsense. It’s tyranny, and there are more effective and constitutionally sound ways to address those individuals than sweeping gun control laws that impact otherwise legal gun owners.
So that was Friday morning’s freakout. Friday afternoon saw the release of Attorney General Mark Herring’s advisory opinion declaring that Second Amendment Sanctuaries have no legal force of law, and once again stating that any new gun laws will be followed in Second Amendment Sanctuaries.
Herring can say what he wants, but he can’t compel sheriffs and commonwealth’s attorneys (not to mention street cops and deputies) to strictly enforce any law. Herring’s also exhibiting a glaring double standard, given his own refusal to enforce and defend a state law he unilaterally decided was unconstitutional. Herring, a proponent of legalizing marijuana (a position I share with him, for the record), also remained silent when prosecutors across the state decided not to prosecute most marijuana cases, even though he now says prosecutors and police can’t pick and choose which laws to enforce.
As I said on Friday:
In other words, when Herring doesn’t like a law, he doesn’t object to law enforcement using their discretion to not enforce it. If, on the other hand, Herring is in favor of the law, he’ll demand that the law be followed.
Herring spouted off about the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement being driven by “the gun lobby,” but the truth is the Left has provided the playbook for Second Amendment supporters across the state. The national gun groups have had virtually nothing to do with the movement, and even Philip Van Cleave of the Virginia Citizens Defense League says his group isn’t leading the movement, and in fact is having a hard time keeping up with the explosive growth in the state.
“It’s mostly grassroots,” he said. “Localities have passed this that weren’t even on our radar. It’s like a grass fire that the grassroots had started and then we went in and threw some more gasoline and a match on it to make it burn even brighter.”
I really don’t think Virginia’s Democrats and gun control groups were expecting this reaction, and I absolutely believe they are scrambling to figure out how best to respond. The tactic so far has been to talk tough and stay vague, as in Herring’s “The law will be enforced (just don’t ask me how)” comment. I suspect that will be the tone they’ll take right up until any of these laws actually take effect.
What happens then is anyone’s guess, but Ralph Northam, Mark Herring, anti-gun legislators, and gun control activists are making a devastating mistake by underestimating the resolve of Virginia’s gun owners and many of their elected officials to stand in defense of the free exercise of a constitutionally protected right.
As we all know, the “war on Christmas” that the left allegedly wages every December is just a myth.
Why? Because the left tells us so.
Here’s “Rachel” in Ravishly:
Oh, December. That time of year when your Facebook feed is filled with obnoxious memes about “The War on Christmas” (spoiler: it doesn’t exist), and how Christians are oppressed because they can’t say “Merry Christmas” (spoiler: that’s just a lie)….
It’s the Christians who take personal offense to every greeting except “Merry Christmas.”…
Here’s Jessica Estepa in USA Today:
President Trump may want you to say “Merry Christmas” instead of “Happy Holidays,” but a new survey released Tuesday shows a growing number of Americans say they don’t mind how they’re greeted during the holiday season.
The Pew Research Center found that 52% of U.S. adults who said it didn’t matter to them how they were greeted in stores over the holidays, up from 46% in 2012….
The center noted that the “War on Christmas” has been a conservative talking point for more than a decade.
Here’s Liam Stack at the New York Times:
It’s that time of year again, folks. It’s time for the War on Christmas.
What is that, you may ask? The short answer: a sometimes histrionic yuletide debate over whether the United States is a country that respects Christianity….
[T]he idea of a plot against Christmas gained wide publicity when Fox News promoted a 2005 book by a radio host, John Gibson, that alleged liberal antagonism toward the holiday, according to Dan Cassino, a professor at Fairleigh Dickinson University….
That argument became a sweeping shorthand for conservative anxieties, Mr. Cassino said.
“They say the next step after saying ‘Happy Holidays’ is abortion on demand and euthanasia,” he said….
But here’s what happened when Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch forgot to say “Happy Holidays” to Fox & Friends hostess Ainsley Earhardt a couple days ago:
Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch just appeared on Fox and Friends this morning, making a point to parrot the “Merry Christmas” talking point of the GOP. If he’s willing to go on Fox and throw a shout out to Republican narratives, what ele[sic] is he willing to do?
Gorusch appeared to dive into the narrative about an alleged “War on Christmas” when he pointedly smiled and wished Earhardt a “Merry Christmas” at the top of the segment on the president’s favorite morning show….
As Salon’s Chauncey DeVega wrote last year, “There is another dimension to the ‘War on Christmas’ and the broader right-wing obsession with the culture wars. Both are examples of white identity politics and a deep desire (and effort) to maintain the cultural and political power of white right-wing Christians over all other groups. In many ways, the ‘War on Christmas’ is actually a proxy war for white supremacy.”
There is also an anti-Semitic undercurrent in the “War on Christmas” mythology. Henry Ford first pioneered the idea of a “War on Christmas” in his 1920s article series “The International Jew,” which promoted the anti-Semitic claim that Jews were conspiring to destroy the Christmas season in order to advance their own covert agenda. Though the notion that politically correct liberals war against Christmas has replaced this idea in recent years, the idea of a “War on Christmas” can still be viewed as an anti-Semitic dogwhistle….
On Fox News, Neil Gorsuch made a point to say “Merry Christmas” like he just gained the freedom to say it under Trump. This guy is such a worst case scenario of a stolen Supreme Court seat.
Unh-uh, no war on Christmas at all.
When all these econuts act like their prophesies of climate doom are real and actually begin behaving like there is a crisis, I might begin to believe them.
The anti-meat messaging at the U.N. Climate Change Conference apparently hasn’t deterred attendees from grabbing a bite at one of the world’s most popular burger joints.
Climate Depot’s Marc Morano caught on video long lines at the Madrid climate confab onsite Burger King, even though the outlet wasn’t serving the Impossible Burger, the chain’s recently unveiled vegan offering.
“Burger King only offered real cow meat at the summit location,” Mr. Morano said in his Thursday report. “No fake meat burger available is even more ironic, given that the U.N. just gave its ‘Planetary Health’ award to the company responsible for Burger King’s fake meat ‘Impossible Meat’ burgers on December 10.”