Biden Apparently Thinks That There Are Trillionaires in America

Joe Biden has appropriated Bernie Sanders’ rhetoric of “millionaires and billionaires” with one slight modification, the addition of the non-existent trillionaire.

“I’m running to change the dynamic of how the economy grows,” Biden said. “I’m tired of trickle-down. Trillionaires and billionaires are doing very, very well. You all report it.”

Watch below:

This gaffe isn’t a new one either. During a 25-minute stump speech in Des Moines, Iowa during his presidential campaign last October, Biden claimed his tax plan that he wouldn’t be raising income on those making under $400k, and added “But I tell you what, it’s about time, the wealthiest people in America, the billionaires and trillionaires – um, the multi-billionaires” pay more.

Whenever Biden makes a statement like these it’s always amusing to ponder what Jen Psaki will inevitably come up with to defend it. Perhaps she’ll argue that we have plenty of trillionaires in this country, as long as you quote their wealth in pesos.

Remember this?:
Blinken Admits Most Afghans Were Not Vetted Before Boarding US Evacuation Planes


Assault on female US service member by male Afghan refugees at Fort Bliss under FBI investigation

An investigation is underway into an alleged attack of a female U.S. military service member by several male Afghan evacuees being housed at Fort Bliss.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has confirmed to Fox News it is investigating a referral from a Fort Bliss Afghan refugee housing complex in New Mexico alleging that a woman, whose name and age are unknown at this time, was assaulted on Sept. 19 by a “small group of male evacuees.”

“We received the referral from Fort Bliss and our office is investigating the allegation,” FBI Public Affairs Officer Special Agent Jeanette Harper told Fox News.

Officials at Fort Bliss confirmed the report of the assault to Fox News.

“We can confirm a female service member supporting Operation Allies Welcome reported being assaulted on Sept. 19 by a small group of male evacuees at the Doña Ana Complex in New Mexico,” the 1st Armored Division and Fort Bliss Public Affairs said in an emailed statement. “We take the allegation seriously and appropriately referred the matter to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The safety and well-being of our service members, as well as all of those on our installations, is paramount.”

The statement added that counseling and support has been provided to the service member.

“Task Force-Bliss is also implementing additional security measures to include increased health and safety patrols, additional lighting, and enforcement of the buddy system at the Dona Ana Complex,” the statement continued. “We will cooperate fully with the FBI and will continue to ensure the service member reporting this assault is fully supported.”

Rep. Yvette Herrell, a Republican congresswoman who represents New Mexico’s 2nd congressional district, called the news a “vetting failure.”

“My prayers are with the courageous soldier and her family. This is yet another tragic failure in the vetting process for Afghan nationals,” Herrell tweeted. “The American people deserve answers.”

The alleged attack comes on the heels of two Afghan refugees housed at Wisconsin’s Fort McCoy being indicted for federal crimes including sexual assault on a minor and domestic assault.

Bahrullah Noori, a 20-year-old Afghan evacuee, is being charged with attempting to engage in a sexual act with a minor using force against that person, along with three other counts of engaging in a sex act with a minor, according to a statement from the Department of Justice. Additionally, 32-year-old Mohammad Haroon Imaad is being charged with assaulting his wife by choking and suffocating her on September 17.

Republicans on Capitol Hill have reacted to the news of violence carried out by Afghan refugees being housed in the United States with demands for answers from the Biden administration.

On Thursday night, Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford and four other Republican senators sent a letter to the Biden administration seeking more details on the way Afghan refugees are being vetted.

“How many Afghan nationals are waiting on background checks at a transit site? How many Afghan nationals have been paroled into the United States?” the Republican senators asked. “What specific categories, classes, or criteria constitute the Administration’s definition of ‘vulnerable Afghans’? How many individuals who have been paroled into the United States fall under each category, class, or criteria?”

Earlier this month, an official with the Biden administration categorically denied anyone “of concern” had made it into the country, saying there is a “second layer” of screening once a refugee gets to a U.S. entry point.

“No one has gotten into the United States or entered that is of concern,” the official said. “The administration is working with urgency and with care to enhance the screening and vetting operations to make them more efficient without compromising U.S. national security.”

Biden Promises Border Patrol Agents ‘Will Pay’ for Doing Something They Didn’t Do

Speaking to reporters at the White House Friday, President Joe Biden vowed to punished Border Patrol agents in Del Rio who used horses to stop illegal immigrants from entering the country earlier this week.

“It’s outrageous. I promise you, those people will pay,” he said.

President Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki have all continued to lie about Border Patrol agents “whipping” illegal Haitians. It never happened and yet, they’re tripling down.

The photojournalist who took the photos of Border Patrol agents earlier this week, which cynical political operatives and media have used to smear them, has debunked the narrative illegal immigrants were whipped. 

The photographer behind images depicting Border Patrol agents on horseback told KTSM things are not exactly what they seem when it comes to the photos.

The photographs, which were taken Sunday, appear to show agents on horses with a whip in hand. The photos caused outrage because from certain angles, it appears to show Border Patrol whipping migrants, but photographer Paul Ratje said he and his colleagues never saw agents whipping anyone.

“Some of the Haitian men started running, trying to go around the horses,” Ratje said.

Ratje is a photographer based in Las Cruces and has been in Del Rio since Friday. He said took the photographs from the Mexican side.

“I’ve never seen them whip anyone,” Ratje said.

Continue reading “”

Just 3 Percent of Afghan Evacuees in U.S. Are Special Immigrant Visa Holders.

During contentious testimony before the Senate Homeland Security Committee Tuesday, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas claimed that only “approximately three percent” of the 60,000 Afghan evacuees already brought to the United States are individuals who possess special immigrant visas (SIVs).

The majority of Afghans who qualified for SIVs are people who worked with our military as interpreters and therefore placed themselves in grave danger if and when the Taliban returned to power.

As additional background, the U.S. military recruited Afghans to assist U.S. forces, and “part of that pitch when asking Afghans to trust us and put their lives on the line for us was that if this day ever came, we would do right by them and bring them out,” Rep. Peter Meijer (R-Mich.), a combat veteran, explained earlier this month. “That was part of that promise — that we will not leave you behind. That was implicit in the legislation establishing Special Immigrant Visas for Afghan allies, and that was conveyed by folks on the ground to those who chose to work with us.”

As of May, 90 percent of the 20,000 Afghans who worked with U.S. troops and diplomats had applied for SIVs, according to government figures reported by NBC.

“When their family members are included, the pool of Afghans in the SIV program was at least 70,000 and probably higher, according to refugee advocacy groups,” NBC added.

Mayorkas’s full statement yesterday about these appallingly low numbers reads:

Of the over 60,000 individuals who have been brought into the United States [from Afghanistan]—and I will give you approximate figures and I will verify them, approximately 7 percent have been United States citizens. Approximately 6 percent have been lawful permanent residents. Approximately 3 percent have been individuals who are in receipt of the special immigrant visas. The balance of that population are individuals whose applications have not yet been processed for approval who may qualify as SIVs and have not yet applied, who qualify or would qualify—I should say—as P-1 or P-2 refugees who have been employed by the united states government in Afghanistan and are otherwise vulnerable afghan nationals, such as journalists, human rights advocates, et cetera.

Between incoherent, haphazard border policies, and this dereliction of duty, Mayorkas seems more inept each day.

I’ve written multiple times on this troubling situation. It is yet another betrayal of America’s allies by the Biden administration.

BLUF:
The First and Second Amendments peacefully co-exist as equal rights in the vast majority of states, which is as it should be. The ACLU’s insistence that the Second Amendment take a back seat to our freedom of speech and our right to peaceably assemble flies in the face of the Constitution, and it’s truly shameful than an organization ostensibly created to protect our civil rights would argue for the demise of one of them, to the point of giving the thumbs up to mandatory prison sentences and felony convictions for those New Yorkers caught carrying a gun without a state-issued permission slip.

ACLU: Restrict The Second Amendment To Protect The First

The American Civil Liberties Union has always had a blind spot in defense of Americans’ individual rights; our right to keep and bear arms. The group has defended the First Amendment rights of even the most controversial of groups and individuals, including neo-Nazis and the Ku Kluk Klan, but they won’t support the right of the average citizen to bear arms in self-defense. The organization has long viewed the Second Amendment as a collective right instead of an individual right, and I don’t know why the ACLU website states that they are reviewing their position in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Heller case, given the fact that they’ve had 13 years to change their mind and have yet to do so.

It would be one thing if the ACLU simply remained neutral and silent on the issue, but instead the groups is actively pushing to keep New York’s restrictive carry permitting laws in place. In a brief filed with the Supreme Court on Tuesday, the group argues that the laws preventing the average citizen from lawfully bearing arms in defense of themselves and others “reasonably furthers the peace and safety conducive to robust civic engagement, and therefore does not contravene the Second Amendment.” In other words, restricting the Second Amendment rights of New Yorkers somehow protects their First Amendment rights to speak their mind and to publicly assemble.

Continue reading “”

As Biden’s Presidency Crumbles, Democrats in Congress Lose Hope

In 2009, Barack Obama came into office with a filibuster-proof Senate supermajority—255 Democrats in the House to just 179 Republicans. Obama ended up frittering away his time those first two years trying to pass Obamacare — an ill-advised move that ended up quickly costing him his majority.

For Joe Biden and the Democrats in 2021, there is no margin for error. A 50-50 Senate and a margin of just three House seats has required a nearly unprecedented level of partisan cohesion. To get anything passed in a Congress with a united Republican Party in opposition means that virtual unanimity of opinion is necessary to achieve the party’s lofty — and ruinously expensive — goals.

Perhaps a more energetic president would have made a difference. Perhaps a smarter president would have been able to pass something from the party’s wishlist.

Alas for the Democrats, Joe Biden isn’t energetic or smart. As a result, his presidency is failing.

It’s beginning to dawn on Democrats in Congress that Joe Biden is not the sort of leader who can wrangle a $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill through both chambers.

Continue reading “”

Her mannerisms as she speaks her word salad BS only impresses on me the idea that she knows she’s uttering BS and believes she can cover it by appearances.


Nancy Pelosi: Partnering with China on Climate Overrides ‘Genocide’ of Uyghurs

During an event in Cambridge, England on Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said that despite communist China’s long list of human rights abuses, the United States must partner with them to fight climate change.

“The situation with China is tightening, it’s getting worse,” Pelosi acknowledged.

She continued:

With their military aggression in the South China Sea, with their continuation of genocide with the Uyghurs in Xinjiang province, with their violation of the cultural… religious priority of Tibet, with their suppression of democracy in Hong Kong and other parts of China as well – they’re just getting worse in terms of suppression and freedom of speech……

Having said all of that… we have to work together on climate. Climate is an overriding issue and China is a leading emitter in the world – U.S. too, developed world too – but we must work together. We have to have a level of communication – whether it’s COVID, whether it’s terrorism or whether it’s climate.

 

Continue reading “”

Question O’ The Day.
So was Milley lying to Trump, or was he actually that clueless?


General Milley told Trump the George Floyd protests were no big deal.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley dismissed the George Floyd riots as “penny packet protests” — insisting they weren’t an insurrection because the mobs only “used spray paint,” according to a new book.

The under-fire general — accused of going behind President Donald Trump’s back to contact his Chinese counterpart — wildly downplayed the riots when Trump raised fears they were “burning America down,” according to Fox News excerpts from the new book, “Peril.”

“Mr. President, they are not burning it down,” he told the alarmed commander-in-chief, according to authors Bob Woodward and Robert Costa.

“They used spray paint, Mr. President, that’s not an insurrection,” he told Trump.

It was not immediately clear when the conversation happened, but violent, fiery protests broke out in cities across the US soon after Floyd’s death at the hands of Minneapolis police in May 2020.

New York City saw mass looting and fires in the street, including torched police vehicles, while other cities saw deadly shootings within days, and thousands of National Guard members were ultimately deployed in at least 15 states, Fox News also noted.

Milley, however, gestured to a portrait of President Abraham Lincoln as he tried to dismiss Trump’s clear fears over the violence.

“We’re a country of 330 million people. You’ve got these penny packet protests,” he said, using a term for something insignificant, according to the book being published Sept. 21.

Milley insisted it was not an issue for the US military — and instead said the protests were understandable given systemic racism, according to the Fox excerpts.

“That’s pent up in communities that have been experiencing what they perceive to be police brutality,” Milley reportedly told Trump.

But when the Jan. 6 Capitol riot happened, Milley believed it “was indeed a coup attempt and nothing less than ‘treason,’” the book said.

He feared that Trump might be looking for a “Reichstag moment” and believed the attack “so unimagined and savage, [it] could be a dress rehearsal for something larger,” the authors wrote.

Milley’s spokesperson told Fox News that his office was not commenting on the book.

I’m not going to ‘fisk ‘ this in too much detail. It’s clear that this college student is just another over educated indoctrinated proggie.
What I will do is this:
I remember somewhere years ago reading an article about placing too much reliance on centuries old English goobermint declarations and documents, their 1689 Bill of Rights in particular.
The point being made was that, although our nation was formed from English colonies, and our Bill of Rights was based on the concepts found in the earlier English one, ours is not bound or restricted by it.
We The People‘ , citizens of the U.S., secured rights to ourselves and restricted goobermint, as specified in our Bill of Rights own preamble.
The subjects of England have their rights granted and restricted by their goobermint.

This child can ‘observe’ all he wants. What I see is another elitist who likely finds all those icky guns in the hands of all those icky people almost too much to bear.


Observations Regarding the Interpretation and Legacy of the Statute of Northampton in Anglo-American Legal History

The Statute of Northampton of 1328 remains central to the current debate surrounding the limits and protections the Second Amendment provides to carry arms in public.[1] The Statute provided that “no man great nor small, of what condition soever he be, except the king’s servants in his presence…come before the King’s justices, or other of the King’s ministers doing their office, with force and arms, nor bring no force in affray of the peace, nor to go nor ride armed by night nor by day, in fairs, markets, nor in the presence of the justices or other ministers” (2 Edw. 3, c.3). Certain Second Amendment scholars hold that the Statute was “not interpreted literally” and was only enforced when weapons were carried with the intent to terrify or threaten or when dangerous and unusual weapons were carried.[2] While the Statute has been much studied, some key sources remain neglected, namely the reliance of Sir. Edward Coke on 13th Century English legal scholar Henry de Bracton in Coke’s interpretation of the Statute. Coke’s quotations from de Bracton, which have usually been ignored because they are written almost entirely in Latin, offer additional evidence that the Statute of Northampton was understood to be a broad-based prohibition on the carrying of arms.

Continue reading “”

Biden Urges Action on Climate Change: ‘We Don’t Have Much More Than 10 Years, For Real’

After decades of failed climate predictions, one would think the president of the United States would steer clear of making one. But this week, President Biden did just that when discussing what he claims is a global climate crisis.

While out West touring wildfire-ravaged areas, Biden tried to sell some of the climate change measures tucked into spending packages but which “appear increasingly at risk,” according to The New York Times.

“A drought or a fire doesn’t see a property line,” he said during at a stop at a federal renewable energy laboratory. “It doesn’t give a damn for which party you belong to. Disasters aren’t going to stop. That’s the nature of the climate threat. But we know what we have to do. We just need to summon the courage and the creativity to do it.”

He spoke of goals like investing in a modernized electric grid, electric busses, charging stations, and more.

“When I rejoined the Paris Climate Accord after we had been pulled out of it, the goal set when our last administration, the Obama-Biden administration, when that was set, they were set that we had more time. We don’t have the time now. The goals are different because the necessity is there. We don’t have a lot of time. We don’t have much more than 10 years for real,” he said.

No matter how urgent Biden believes the “climate crisis” is, that doesn’t change the fact that such predictions and warnings have been notoriously wrong over the years.

In a 2019 column, the late Walter Williams recalled just some of them.

As reported in The New York Times (Aug. 1969) Stanford University biologist Dr. Paul Erhlich warned: “The trouble with almost all environmental problems is that by the time we have enough evidence to convince people, you’re dead. We must realize that unless we’re extremely lucky, everybody will disappear in a cloud of blue steam in 20 years.”

In 2000, Dr. David Viner, a senior research scientist at University of East Anglia’s climate research unit, predicted that in a few years winter snowfall would become “a very rare and exciting event. Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.” In 2004, the U.S. Pentagon warned President George W. Bush that major European cities would be beneath rising seas. Britain will be plunged into a Siberian climate by 2020. In 2008, Al Gore predicted that the polar ice cap would be gone in a mere 10 years. A U.S. Department of Energy study led by the U.S. Navy predicted the Arctic Ocean would experience an ice-free summer by 2016.

In May 2014, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius declared during a joint appearance with Secretary of State John Kerry that “we have 500 days to avoid climate chaos.”

Peter Gunter, professor at North Texas State University, predicted in the spring 1970 issue of The Living Wilderness: “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable […] By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions. … By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.”

Ecologist Kenneth Watt’s 1970 prediction was, “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000.” He added, “This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” (Townhall)

The major difference between predictions made in the past and those of today is how much more gullible Americans are now, Williams argued, meaning we’ll spend into oblivion to combat climate change. “The only result is that we’ll be much poorer and less free,” he said.

David Hogg: Second Amendment Is Collective Right

If you want a hot take on guns and gun rights that probably has no resemblance to reality, you should follow David Hogg’s Twitter feed sometime. Of course, it’s also a place with a lot of stupid that’ll probably cause you to give yourself a concussion with the constant overwhelming need to smack your forehead.

The failed state-college applicant turned Harvard man–if that phrase doesn’t tell you all you need to know about Harvard, I don’t know what will–has said some pretty dumb things, including recently claiming he thinks he’s the target of Russian bots.

But on Wednesday, he went down a rabbit hole of stupid with just one single tweet. Pretty impressive, until you see the tweet.

Now, Hogg isn’t a thought originator. He’s a parrot, repeating what others have told him and making himself sound important so the media will keep fawning all over him.

This ain’t original either.

A lot of people claim that the Second Amendment was never meant to be an individual right. Yet people like Hogg can never answer one simple question in response. If it’s wasn’t intended to be an individual right, then why did the writers use the phrase “the right of the people” in the first place?

In the First Amendment, it makes reference to “the right of the people” to assemble peacefully and to petition the government.

The Fourth Amendment highlight “the right of the people” to be secure in their homes and their property from unreasonable search and seizure.

The Ninth and Tenth Amendment both also reference “the people’s” rights.

How is it, in 50 percent of the amendments in the Bill of Rights, the writers refer to “the people” but it was only in the Second Amendment that they really meant the people collectively and not an individual right?

In truth, any deflection from this fact is nothing more than an attempt to muddy the waters, to make it seem less clear that our right to keep and bear arms wasn’t so the state could have guns or formally recognized militias could, but for you and me to have them.

This bizarre claim that the Second Amendment isn’t an individual right keeps cropping up, and a number of people share it. It’s almost a litmus test for where someone stands on gun control.

Regardless, though, it’s a tired argument that’s been trotted out over and over again.

I find it amusing that people who think Roe v. Wade is definitive and should be the final say on a topic like abortion are so ready to completely dismiss Heller which specifically found that the Second Amendment was an individual right and not a collective one.

The question was answered, and it’s highly unlikely to be overturned on the merits of anything. If it is, it’ll be an activist court pushing a leftist agenda. It won’t be because of anything else, as I’ve clearly shown.

But people like David Hogg will persist, no doubt, to try and insist it’s a collective right, as if that term has any actual meaning in the first place, and consider themselves smart because they believe that.

However, if David Hogg is the caliber of person who can get into Harvard and manage to stay, then we as a nation need to seriously rethink how much gravitas we give Ivy League graduates.

Sheriff Arnott’s example is bogus. Missouri Law (as well as Federal) makes  firearm possession by convicted felons a felony. Of course – knowing him since he was a patrol deputy – his intellect never did impress me.


Springfield law enforcement weighs in on impact of ‘Second Amendment Preservation Act’

SPRINGFIELD, Mo. (KY3) – Greene County Sheriff Jim Arnott has been vocal throughout his 20 years with the department. He is pro-Second Amendment rights. It’s why when the Second Amendment Preservation Act was first introduced he thought it was a good thing.

“Basically the way the bill was designed or the intent of it. I totally agree with,” he says.

The intent is to protect Second Amendment rights for gun owners by stopping local law enforcement from enforcing federal gun laws.

Some local agencies say this law will prevent them from doing their jobs. Sheriff Arnott doesn’t see it quite that way, but he does see it has changed the way they work.

He gives the example:

“We stop somebody on a vehicle stop,” said Sheriff Arnott. “They have a hunting rifle in the back, you run the numbers and it’s not stolen. But that’s because [the person] just burglarized a house and they’re a convicted felon but the case hasn’t been reported yet. Nine times out of ten we would seize the weapon in the past. If things don’t add up like he doesn’t know where he got the gun, we [usually] would want to seize that gun but now we’ll send it down the road. Now we’ve probably let a stolen gun go down the road.”

And he says that can mean consequences.

“We may not recover as many stolen guns,” said Sheriff Arnott. “Somebody may get killed because, again, it was used in crime that night that we would have had on a car stop earlier. But that’s how the new statue that’s how we’ll operate.”

Republican Senator Eric Burlison sponsored the bill. He says it is designed for law-abiding citizens and has a loud and clear message to the Biden Administration.

“This is a way of reminding the president, that this is the proper role of government, is that these laws are to be handled by the state and not by the federal government,” State Senator Burlison says.

And he says the federal government will of course be able to enforce its own rules and regulations.

“The people that we pay, and that we tax, our tax dollars are going towards, we want to make sure that they’re following the laws that we are passing in this state,” he adds.

Springfield Police Chief Paul Williams says day to day, this won’t have an impact on the way officers work.

“I don’t think the street officer worries or cares about this whatsoever,” Chief Williams says. “And I’ve tried to make that clear that this is a very limited potential where it would affect them.”

But he says he has seen the criticism.

“Legislators I’ve talked to say this is preemptive. What if something happens? What if the federal government says start registering and tracking firearms? What if the federal government says we want you to go out and confiscate guns from people? We’re not going to do that,” Chief Williams says. “This helps provide that protection. I’ll say I’ve seen some comments from even some of my peers across the state, who I know haven’t read it completely and totally, to see how it’s gonna affect us and how it’s not,” he adds.

Both Sheriff Arnott and Chief Williams agree there are parts that will likely see change. Some they call “grey areas”

“There’s a couple of things in that law that is probably going to have to go to court for the court to decide what is constitutional and what is not,” Sheriff Arnott says.

Chief Williams can see some tweaks.

“I’m anticipating the legislature will hopefully come back this next session and clear some of that ambiguity up, clarify some things, and make some adjustments to any negative consequences to the public or the police.”

But both say, for now, they will follow the rules, enforce the law, and their focus remains the same keeping citizens safe in our community.

Trump acting Defense Secretary Miller says he ‘did not’ authorize Milley China calls, says he should resign
Christopher Miller called the reported calls an ‘unprecedented act of insubordination’

EXCLUSIVE: Former acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller, who led the Pentagon from the period after the 2020 election through Inauguration Day, said that he “did not and would not ever authorize” Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley to have “secret” calls with his Chinese counterpart, describing the allegations as a “disgraceful and unprecedented act of insubordination,” and calling on him to resign “immediately.”

In a statement to Fox News, Miller said that the United States Armed Forces, from its inception, has “operated under the inviolable principle of civilian control of the military.”

“The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is the highest-ranking military officer whose sole role is providing military-specific advice to the president, and by law is prohibited from exercising executive authority to command forces,” Miller said. “The chain of command runs from the President to the Secretary of Defense, not through the Chairman.”

Continue reading “”

1,500 people per year are murdered by bladed weapons in the US.
Almost 3 TIMES MORE than by rifles.
The morons are clueless hypocrites.


Pop Star Grimes Brings Sword ‘Crafted from a Colt AR-15′ to Met Gala

Grimes, the experimental musical artist and mother to Elon Musk’s youngest child, brought a sword “crafted from a Colt AR-15” to the Met Gala on September 13, 2021, as a fashion accessory.

USA Today explained that Grimes, née Claire Elise Boucher, carried “a sword accessory made of melted guns.”

The singer-producer said, “It’s from these people who are getting people’s [guns] who don’t want to have their automatic rifles anymore, and are melting them down and making them perfect replicas of medieval swords, which I think is just so cool—I think it’s a beautiful thing.”

Photos of Grimes’ outfit show an inscription on the blade of the sword, which reads: “Crafted from a Colt-AR-15A3.”

Grimes attends The 2021 Met Gala Celebrating In America: A Lexicon Of Fashion at Metropolitan Museum of Art on September 13, 2021 in New York City. (Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images for The Met Museum/Vogue )

Detail of previous photo.

The blade also bears the logo of MSCHF, an art collective, and its Guns2Swords project. The Guns2Swords homepage explains, “We’re destroying your guns and forging them into swords.”

The site instructs potential customers to either send the artists a description of a gun that they would like to be reshaped — or pay $5,000 for a sword that the group has already made from a gun.

The Met Gala is an annual gathering known for its over-the-top fashion from Hollywood celebrities and other elites. The 2021 event featured similarly clownish political statements, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) in a Chick-fil-A-evoking “Tax the Rich” dress and soccer activist Megan Rapinoe flaunting a clutch reading “In Gay We Trust.”

Further hypocrisy was on display during the evening, as the celebrity guests were allowed to disregard New York City’s indoor mask mandate — yet the commoners staffing the gala still had to wear masks.

Woke Florida College Students Chime in on How 9/11 Should Be Taught

Here’s yet another story demonstrating how concerned we should be for future generations. Campus Reform’s Ophelie Jacobson recently conducted a series of short interviews with students at the University of Florida, in which she asked how they believed 9/11 should be taught in the classrooms. The answers were predictable but still disturbing.

Students suggested that 9/11 lesson plans should keep “gruesome” facts out of the teaching, while also avoiding conversations about who was responsible for carrying out the attacks. One student said the curriculum should “avoid placing blame.”

Some of the students argued that professors should not discuss American exceptionalism while teaching about the terrorist attacks. One student insisted that “we don’t need more nationalism in this country…we need more healthcare.” She continued:

“I think they should focus on America’s faults, not how amazing we are and how we need to be superior because we’re not.”

One has to wonder how this particular person would enjoy living in Afghanistan or Somalia.

Another student chimed in, echoing the point that America should not be portrayed as the greatest nation. They said:

“In terms of propagating this idea that our nation is the best no matter what…I would agree that that should be avoided.”

American exceptionalism seemed to be a significant point of contention for these individuals. One of them claimed it is “rooted in a lot of colonist and imperialist notions of how we should treat other people.”

Another asserted that “it’s a dangerous mindset to teach young people that because I think that’s the reason why a lot of people grow up to be extremists and really nationalistic.”

This is the type of tripe that is being taught to students at many American universities. It is part and parcel of a mindset that insists we should focus almost exclusively on America’s faults instead of also acknowledging its strengths.

To these people, acknowledging the evil that led to the 9/11 terrorist attacks is not as important as people who engaged in bigotry against Muslim Americans after it occurred. It is also more politically expedient to focus on bigotry, because it allows them to promote their agenda, which involves demonizing America as much as possible. In the end, this is more about politics than anything else.

Democrats Sink Into Delusion After Joe Manchin Crushes Their Hopes and Dreams

As RedState reported yesterday, Sen. Joe Manchin finally put a number on his proposed “pause” regarding the Democrat reconciliation bill. Far from being on board with $3.5 trillion in inflation-inducing spending, the West Virginia senator only wants to support as little as $1 trillion.

The next question would be how Democrats respond, and as per our usual agreement, the answer is not well.

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced that he and his party are moving “full speed ahead.” And over in the House, the Bernie Sanders wing, partly led by Rep. Rashida Tlaib, let it be known that $3.5 trillion is the “floor” for spending. That’s an insane contention, but that’s where we are.

What’s not discussed in either of those responses is how exactly Democrats can move forward without 50 votes? No amount of internet tough-guying will change the actual dynamics in the Senate. Further, while less discussed, there’s a margin-busting group of Democrats in the House as well who need to show themselves as moderates prior to 2022 to have any shot at re-election. These are representatives who won House seats in districts Trump won.

Continue reading “”

Giffords claims SBRs are as concealable as a pistol

Mark Milley, Jen Griffin Interview Goes Pear-shaped

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, granted an interview to Jennifer Griffin of Fox News Channel. Maybe he thought he would find a sympathetic ear. Maybe Griffin just let Milley talk and he hung himself with his words. Milley confirmed in the interview that he doesn’t give a spent shell about our military personnel, our national reputation, or his honor.

On his chest, Mark Milley wears an enormous amount of “fruit salad”. Fruit salad is military slang for the amount of ribbons, medals and devices on the dress uniform. With that many colorful ribbons, the public would be led to believe that Milley is possessed of intestinal fortitude. Maybe when faced with bullets on foreign soil, he is. He has proven time and again that against the vipers in the swamp that is Washington, D.C., he sinks like a leaky canoe.

He walked across Lafayette Square, with President Trump, to the Church damaged by BLM and Antifa and apologized for it, unnecessarily. Milley also talked about a “Reichstag moment”, according to a book by two Washington Post staffers:

“This is a Reichstag moment,” Milley told aides, according to the book. “The gospel of the Führer.” …
If someone wanted to seize control, Milley thought, they would need to gain sway over the FBI, the CIA and the Defense Department, where Trump had already installed staunch allies. “They may try, but they’re not going to f—ing succeed,” he told some of his closest deputies, the book says.

Worse than that, Mark Milley denigrated all of our military personnel with his “white rage” testimony. Since Joe Biden became the Oval Office resident, Milley has gone along with every thing President Asterisk wanted. No push backs. No leaks. No plotting. No throwing his rank on the desk and saying, “Not on my watch.”

In the last couple days, our Victory Girls Blog writers have told you about child brides being imported into the United States, Americans held hostage in Afghanistan, and the brave Afghan Special Forces still fighting after our Pentagon abandoned them.

Apparently, nowhere in Milley’s military education did they cover the First Law of Holes. Mark Milley just keeps digging and digging. And, Jennifer Griffin handed him the shovel in her interview. Griffin interviewed Milley at Ramstein Air Base where the Afghan refugees are being vetted in a tent city built by the U.S..

Continue reading “”

The spoiled brat left gets a comeuppance in Texas.

Scott Dworkin, who helped organize the resistance and a couple of impeachments, tweeted, “Lt. Col. Vindman is a patriot. Anyone saying differently is a traitor.”

Disagreement is now treason in the eyes of the American left. Of course, anything they dislike is treason or fascist or white supremacist. Actual treason — say surrendering a country after we’ve won a war– does not meet their definition of treason.

It is the finality of his statement that smacks of Veruca Salt.

Veruca Salt is a greedy, demanding, spoiled brat in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (aka Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory). She did not care how, she wanted it now.

So it goes with the left.

Their “The Argument Is Over” argument is an attempt to win without every having to defend themselves. They are the team that scores at the top of the first inning and demands to be awarded the game because they are ahead.

They demand instant gratification. The problem with most liberals is they never are satisfied.

Continue reading “”