Category: Goobermint

If they’re pushing such disconnected message, perhaps it’s because their brains (what they have of them) are disconnected from reality

If Biden Saved the Economy, Why Do We Need Price Controls?

Democrats are pushing a jarringly disconnected economic message.

Biden “recovered all those millions of jobs that [Donald] Trump watched slip away,” Sen. Dick Durbin (D–Ill.) declared. Biden “rebuilt the economy” after the pandemic put it “flat on its back,” intoned Sen. Chris Coons (D–Conn.), a longtime Biden stan.

Biden himself put the cherry on top. “We’ve had one of the most extraordinary four years of progress ever,” the president said. “We gone from economic crisis to the strongest economy in the entire world,” he claimed, pointing to job creation figures, economic growth, higher wages, and “inflation down, way down, and continuing to go down.”

If so, someone should probably tell Vice President Kamala Harris about all that.

Just four days ago, Harris outlined plans for gigantic government interventions in the economy, including price controls. In what was billed as the first major policy speech of her hastily assembled campaign, Harris promised to implement the “first-ever federal ban on price gouging on food and groceries” and to take other actions to empower the federal government to “bring down costs.”
(There’s been some debate in the days since her speech about whether it is fair to say Harris has called for price controls, but economist Brian Albretch has laid out clearly why she in fact did, writing that “any policy that gives the government the power to decide what price increases are ‘fair’ or ‘unfair’ is effectively a price control system. It doesn’t matter if you call it ‘anti-gouging,’ ‘fair pricing,’ or ‘consumer protection’—the effect is the same. When bureaucrats, not markets, determine acceptable prices, we’re dealing with price controls.”)

Continue reading “”

Uvalde Police Timid, Bungling During School Shooting, New Records Reveal
If you want something done right, do it yourself. That includes protecting family, friends, and neighbors.

Perhaps the greatest rebuttal to calls for confidence in police is the conduct of law enforcement officers at Robb Elementary School shooting in Uvalde, Texas. There, on May 24, 2022, almost 400 cops not only stood around while a lunatic murdered children and teachers, but they prevented parents from stepping in to do what those in uniform wouldn’t. Now, new reporting gives greater insight into the depths of the officers’ inaction that day, and just how unwise it is to rely on them for protection.
Documented Police Failures

The failures of police officers in Uvalde aren’t open to dispute.

“At Robb Elementary, law enforcement responders failed to adhere to their active shooter training, and they failed to prioritize saving the lives of innocent victims over their own safety,” concluded a report by the Texas House of Representatives Investigative Committee on the Robb Elementary Shooting.

A U.S. Justice Department review similarly found “failures in leadership, command, and coordination.”

Continue reading “”

Federal Appellate Court Rules in Favor of Takings Lawsuit Against the CDC’s Covid-Era Eviction Moratorium.

The 2-1 decision overrules a trial court decision that went the other way, and could set an important property rights precedent.

On Wednesday, in Darby Development Co. v. United States, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (which reviews takings claims against the federal government ruled that a takings lawsuit against the 2020-21 federal eviction moratorium can proceed. In so doing, it overruled a trial court decision by the Court of Claims, which I criticized here. The decision could well end up setting an important takings precedent.

In September 2020, during the Covid pandemic, the Trump Administration Centers for Disease Control (CDC) imposed a nationwide eviction moratorium, claiming that it would reduce the spread of the disease. The Biden Administration extended the moratorium multiple times.

In August 2021, the eviction moratorium was invalidated by the Supreme Court because the CDC lacked proper statutory authority to institute it. But, in the meantime, numerous landlords suffered financial losses, because they could not evict tenants who weren’t paying rent.

Some of the property owners filed a lawsuit arguing that the eviction moratorium violated the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, which requires the government to pay “just compensation” whenever it takes private property. As I explained at the time, their position was backed by the Supreme Court’s 2021 ruling in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, which held that even temporary physical occupations of property qualify as “per se” (automatic) takings requiring compensation.

In May 2022, the US Court of Claims dismissed the takings lawsuit against the CDC moratorium on the perverse ground that there was no taking because the CDC’s eviction moratorium was never properly “authorized.” In other words, the government could escape takings liability because its actions were illegal! The recent Federal Circuit decision reversed that ruling.

Continue reading “”

Remember ‘Marooned‘ ?

Boeing Starliner astronauts might not return to Earth until next year

Aug. 7 (UPI) — Boeing Starliner astronauts, stranded at the International Space Station after a weeklong test flight turned into a two-month stay due to thruster problems, may be forced to fly home on SpaceX in 2025, NASA has admitted.

NASA updated reporters Wednesday at a news conference, which Boeing did not attend, on the timeline for crew members Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams. The astronauts have been in space for 63 days with no return date in sight.

Wilmore and Williams arrived at the ISS on June 6 on what was the first crewed test flight of Boeing’s Starliner capsule. The mission was supposed to be the final step before NASA certified Boeing to fly crews to and from the space station, before faulty thrusters stranded the pair in June.

“We’re in kind of a new situation here, in that we’ve got multiple options,” Ken Bowersox, associate administrator for NASA’s space operations mission directorate and a former agency astronaut, told reporters Wednesday.

“I would say that our chances of an uncrewed Starliner return have increased a little bit on where things have gone over the last week or two,” Bowersox said. “But again, new data coming in, new analysis, different discussion — we could find ourselves shift in another way.”

“We don’t just have to bring a crew back on Starliner, for example. We could bring them back on another vehicle,” Bowersox added. The space agency is expected to make a final decision as early as next week.

“Our prime option is to return Butch and Suni on Starliner,” Steve Stich, manager of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program said. “However, we have done the requisite planning to make sure we have other options open, and so we have been working with SpaceX to ensure that they’re ready to respond.”

NASA said it is now considering sending only two astronauts, instead of four, on September’s SpaceX Crew-9 mission to leave space for Wilmore and Williams to return to Earth on SpaceX Dragon in February 2025. SpaceX has been transporting astronauts to and from the ISS since 2020.

“We’re not ready to share specific crew names for the contingency plan,” ISS program manager Dana Weigel told Space.com. “We’ll go look at future manifests and just see what makes sense for the overall crew compliments going forward.”

On Tuesday, NASA announced SpaceX would delay the Aug. 18 launch of its Crew-9 mission, more than a month, to Sept. 24. The delay will give NASA and Boeing more time to repair Starliner’s five of 28 reaction control thrusters which misfired during docking at ISS on June 6.

While NASA said Starliner can safely undock from ISS, there is still uncertainty over how its thrusters would operate during the ride back to Earth.

“Starliner ground teams are taking their time to analyze the results of recent docked hot-fire testing, finalize flight rationale for the spacecraft’s integrated propulsion system and confirm system reliability ahead of Starliner’s return to Earth,” NASA said in a statement Tuesday.

Stich told reporters Wednesday that tests on the ground revealed that a small Teflon seal swells under high temperatures, which could be to blame for Starliner’s thruster problems.

“That gives us a lot of confidence in the thrusters, but we can’t totally prove with certainty what we’re seeing on orbit is exactly what’s been replicated on the ground,” Stich added.

Despite not attending Wednesday’s briefing, Boeing has maintained its confidence “in Starliner’s return with crew.”

“We still believe in Starliner’s capability and its flight rationale,” the company said in a statement Wednesday, as it also admitted the possibility that a different vehicle could bring the astronauts home.

“If NASA decides to change the mission, we will take the actions necessary to configure Starliner for an uncrewed return.”

Another ‘austere religious scholar’ makes headlines as he raises money for land along the US border for a Sharia domain, complete with jihad training camps

While journalists at The Washington Post might call Sheikh Yasser al-Habib an “austere religious scholar” (the descriptor so affectionately used to eulogize Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi after he detonated himself and his own children a tunnel to evade capture by U.S. forces), others night label the Muslim cleric a terrorist, or even just a devout Islamist, while a report at the Daily Mail describes al-Habib as a “vile Muslim extremist”; after the massacres in the kibbutzim on October 7th, al-Habib reportedly said he and his followers were “buoyed” by the slaughter, and rhetorically asked, “Who among us does not enjoy retaliation of the Zionist enemy?”

Anyway, al-Habib has a substantial following, complete with his own “army” of jihadis, and he’s apparently eyeing small islands across the West—some even along the U.S. border—for purchase, in order to establish Sharia law domains, and he’s just about succeeded in buying a small uninhabited Scottish island called Torsa. As you can expect, the Western governments are radio silent on al-Habib’s ambitions.

Here are the details, from the Daily Mail item:

Vile Muslim extremist with his own ‘ARMY’ plans to create an Islamic homeland under Sharia law on island near US border – and reveals why he saw Canada as a good ‘base’

A firebrand Muslim clerk eyed up an island on the border of the United States and Canada to purchase and turn into an Islamic state.

In a video to his followers, Sheikh Yasser al-Habib, 45, an extremist scholar who already runs military-style training camps, revealed he is in advanced talks to buy an island off the west coast of Scotland.

His group plans to build its own school, hospital and mosque on the island, where it intends to practice sharia law.

Al-Habib – who claimed asylum in Britain 20 years ago after fleeing his native Kuwait – told his followers during their property search they considered an ‘island located on the border between the United States and Canada.’

Sarah Zaaimi, a deputy director for communications at the American think tank Atlantic Council, who has researched al-Habib, said: ‘They will have their own army, their own justice system, they will manage their own schools and hospitals, and people from around the world will be able to migrate to this homeland…

Encouraging supporters to donate, al-Habib said Torsa will become an Islamic ‘homeland’ which they will create to prepare for the coming of their messiah, known as Mahdi.

Al-Habib has already raised more than $3 million of their $3.5 million goal to purchase the land.

Fear not though, we’ve got border czar Kamala on the job—all I can say is deport, deport, deport, and don’t stop deporting until the West is the West again.

Because…tick, tock, tick, tock:

Biden Didn’t Tell Us Why He Withdrew From Presidential Race
It was a short State of the Union, I guess.

President Joe Biden didn’t tell us why he withdrew from the presidential race in his speech he said he would explain why he withdrew.

It was a 10-minute State of the Union.

Look, I would truly believe nothing happened behind closed doors, and no “soft coup” would have happened if Biden had stuck to his word that he would be a “transitional” president and only served one term.

But Biden didn’t! It’s insane. Biden even sounded mean at times when he asserted he would stay in the race.

The speech left us with even more questions. We end every single day with more questions than answers.

The left will point to this part to prove Biden explained why he dropped out:

BIDEN: “A cause of American democracy itself. We must unite to protect it. You know, in recent weeks it’s become clear to me that I need to unite my party in this critical endeavor.

I believe, my record as president, my leadership in the world, my vision for America’s future, all merited a second term, but nothing, nothing can come in the way of saving our democracy. That includes personal ambition.

So I’ve decided the best way forward is to pass the torch to a new generation. It’s the best way to unite our nation.”

So, Biden has to drop out because his record is so good? His record is so good that the only way to unite everyone is for him to drop out.

The most popular, noble, and spectacular president ever just has to pass the torch to a new generation.

Um, what? That makes no sense. That does not explain why he had to drop out.

Again, we have more questions.

Speech

So how about the speech? So many lies.

The biggest lie? America is not involved in any war across the world.

Except..we are. We don’t have boots on the ground in Ukraine, but Biden has sent so much money and weapons to Ukraine.

We are in a proxy war with Russia due to the support we’ve given Ukraine.

Secured the border? Biden’s administration has not done that at all.

House Oversight Chairman Investigating White House Collusion in Chicago’s GLOCK Balk

The head of the U.S. House of Representatives Oversight Committee isn’t playing games when it comes to The White House avoiding answers to questions about potential collusion with antigun groups to target GLOCK, Inc., with a frivolous lawsuit.

Last week, Chairman of the House Oversight Committee James Comer (R-Ky.) fired off a letter in response to The White House’s political gamesmanship. In short, Chairman Comer demanded that Stefanie Feldman, the Director of The White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, quit stalling and provide answers over “potential collaboration” between Biden administration officials and Everytown for Gun Safety.

Chairman Comer announced an investigation into potential collusion between the Biden administration, gun control groups and the City of Chicago to bring a lawsuit against GLOCK, Inc., alleging the company is responsible for the criminal misuse of firearms when criminals unlawfully attach an illegal “switch” to handguns. The Oversight Committee learned that White House officials met privately with GLOCK representatives to demand a design alteration to their handguns.

Special-Interest Backed Lawfare

“On the very day the suit was filed, Everytown for Gun Safety President John Feinblatt posted on X, ‘Federal officials recently contacted Glock to discuss implementing new ways to modify Glock pistols to make it harder for Glock switches to be installed. Rather than help, Glock falsely insisted there is nothing they can do.’”

Chairman Comer said this indicates that Everytown had inside access to White House meetings. The White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention is staffed by a former Everytown lobbyist, Rob Wilcox. Letters demanding more information were sent to Steven Dettelbach, Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), and White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention Director Stefanie Feldman.

Chairman Comer sent these letters demanding answers on June 14. Instead of answering those questions, White House Deputy Counsel Rachel Cotton responded by making counteraccusations that Chairman Comer was shilling for the gun lobby. Cotton provided no answers, only listing off the Biden administration’s gun control efforts and goals, adding Congress “should open a real investigation into an actual danger to our communities: the proliferation of illegal devices that convert handguns into machineguns in a matter of seconds.”

That’s a purposefully misleading attack on not just the House Oversight Committee but also GLOCK. The illegal devices are “autosears,” which are illegal to possess, illegal to attach to a firearm and illegal to use without compliance with the 1934 National Firearms Act (NFA). Cotton, as an attorney, should know that these aren’t produced by GLOCK or any other firearm manufacturer. In fact, they are largely illegally imported from China or illegally manufactured by individuals.

Continue reading “”

So That’s Why Chicago Dropped Its Lawsuit Against Glock

Earlier today we reported on the city of Chicago’s odd decision to quietly drop its joint lawsuit with Everytown Law against gunmaker Glock, which came with no fanfare or press releases… unlike the announcement of the lawsuit earlier this year.

Shortly after our story was published, the gun control outfit did issue a press release; this one touting its new and expanded lawsuit against the gun maker. I’m not going to give them the traffic by linking directly to the press release, but you can find it at Everytown Law’s website if you want to take a look. Here’s the most pertinent piece of their statement, however:

The City of Chicago, alongside Everytown Law and Motley Rice LLC, announced the expansion of the City’s first-of-its-kind lawsuit against Glock, the manufacturer of the most popular handguns in the United States. Three additional defendants were named in the complaint submitted yesterday in Cook County Circuit Court – Glock Ges.m.b.H, the Austrian Glock entity and part owner of the U.S. Glock subsidiary, and two Chicago-area gun stores on Glock’s roster of preferred dealers, Eagle Sports Range in Oak Forest, Illinois and Midwest Sporting Goods in Lyons, Illinois.

… The City seeks a court order requiring Defendants to cease sales and marketing of easily converted Glock pistols to Chicago civilians and an order requiring Eagle Sports Range to stop marketing Glocks modified with an auto sear at its location and online. The City also seeks penalties for these actions. The City first filed its lawsuit against Glock in March of this year, and Glock removed the case to federal district court. The City is now filing its expanded lawsuit after voluntarily dismissing the federal court action.

In their latest complaint, Chicago and Everytown Law claim that Eagle Sports Range is actually “marketing a Modified Glock to its customers”. Reading further, however, it sounds like the range is merely offering customers the opportunity to rent and shoot full-auto firearms on-site.

From the beginning, a major component of Eagle Sports Range’s business plan has been promoting its “full auto experience,” which allows customers to rent machine guns and fire them at its indoor range (a range which it has allowed convicted felons to use).

As part of its “full auto experience,” Eagle Sports Range markets the use of a Modified Glock at its range. Eagle Sports Range customers can thus “demo” a Modified Glock at the store’s range, purchase a semi-automatic Glock from the store’s inventory, and then easily and illegally modify their new Glock pistol at home with an auto sear purchased off the internet.

I doubt very much that Eagle Sports Range is offering an illegally modified Glock for use at its range, though if the company has a Type VII FFL it could legally modify a pistol to fire full-auto without running afoul of the law. But as even the city of Chicago reluctantly admits, it would be against the law for any customer to modify a Glock of their own to shoot full-auto. In fact, it’s a crime punishable under federal law by up to ten years in prison.

The only traces of Eagle Sports Range’s “full auto experience” that I’ve been able to find online are a YouTube video from 2017 that’s wracked up a grand total of less than 4,000 views in the seven years it’s been online, and a press release from that same year announcing that the range had a “Glock 18, a Short Barrel M4, AK47, or a 9MM Carbine” available to rent and use at the range itself. The Glock 18 isn’t a “modified Glock”, however. It’s produced as a full-auto pistol; one not available for sale to average consumers.

Chicago and their partners at Everytown Law are trying to stop city residents from being able to purchase some of the most common and popular handguns in the country, so it shouldn’t be a surprise that they’re playing fast and loose with the facts.

I’m looking forward to seeing Glock’s response to the latest iteration of the litigation, as well as what Eagle Sports Range and Midwest Sporting Goods have to say about the legal attacks on their businesses, but keep in mind that this lawsuit could be just the first round of a broader strategy to ban semi-automatic handguns.

As we’ve previously reported, about a dozen blue-state AGs have sent what amounts to a pre-litigation demand letter to Glock, and the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention has reportedly been pressing the ATF to issue a rule classifying Glocks as machine guns as well. The Supreme Court may have nixed a handgun ban as a violation of the Second Amendment, but the gun control lobby is clearly searching for a way to enact a sweeping gun ban regardless of what the Court has to say about it.

The Elephant in the Room: Female Secret Service Agents

It was clear today during the House Oversight Committee hearing on the Secret Service’s failure on July 13 that Director Kimberly Cheatle is either a shameless liar or completely incompetent—probably both. Her refusal to answer the most basic questions about the shooting, which nearly killed Donald Trump, has disqualified her for the job—full stop. She needs to be fired, along with other incompetent Secret Service bureaucrats in the agency.

Among other things, she revealed that she didn’t sign off on Trump’s protective plan that day. In fact, she doesn’t sign off on any of the plans. She also admitted that even though she’s deeply involved in the supposed investigation of her agency’s failures (wherein she is investigating herself), she hasn’t bothered to visit the shooting site.

One issue that repeatedly came up during the hearing was DEI hires in the agency and whether the female agents assigned to Trump were qualified for the job. Last year, Cheatle announced a goal of 30% female recruits, along with a whole host of diversity measures.

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) called Cheatle a “DEI horror story.”

Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) accused Republicans of racism and misogyny because that’s all she knows how to do.

Republicans have exploited this moment to continue to attack programs for racial justice and gender equity in America. Disappointing, but not surprising. I hesitate to repeat their racist and sexist tropes. But in summary, Republicans have wrongfully and shamefully stated that hiring women and people of color hindered the response to the shooting.

Now, this is part and parcel of Republican strategy to constantly attack necessary diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts to undermine the contributions that women, people of color, the disability community, and others each and every day, and it is disgraceful in the wake of gun violence and tragic loss of life.

Asked about diversity hires at the agency, Cheatle replied that she’s focused on hiring the “best and brightest” and “best-qualified candidates.”

But is that true?

I wrote this on our liveblog the day of the shooting:

It’s time to have an adult conversation about the elephant in the room — women in the Secret Service. The question must be asked: Was Trump’s security detail compromised by diversity hires (women, gays, trans people, etc.)? In the case of women, it’s indisputable that men are stronger and faster than women. No one but the hopelessly deluded DEI enforcer believes otherwise. Someone going by the moniker @eyeslashoposted this chart on X today:


(click on image for a larger one)

It shows how the physical fitness standards are lower for female Secret Service trainees—in this case, pushups, with men’s scores on the left. For a man to be considered “Excellent” in the 20s age group, he must complete 55 pushups; for a woman, it’s only 40. Women can get away with only 26 pushups and still be considered “Good.” (Note: a man in his 20s should be able to do WAY more than 55 pushups.)

Eyeslasho added, “Shockingly, a total of only 6 points is required to pass the four-element test,” which includes pushups, sit-ups, chin-ups, and a 1.5 mile run. “And even if you don’t score 6 points, you can still be admitted upon further ‘review and recommendation.'”

“Overall, I’m not impressed by what is physically required of those who enter the Secret Service,” he concluded.

Neither am I.

We’ve all seen the pictures of a bloodied Trump surrounded by his protective detail. The men on the team were tall enough to place their heads between Trump’s head and the shooter; the female agent was significantly shorter, exposing Trump’s head.

Make no mistake: The agent in the picture above was incredibly brave. She placed her body between Trump and the shooter without hesitation and deserves to be praised for her effort. It’s not her fault that she is shorter than the male agents or that someone at the Secret Service placed her in that position.

Diversity, for its own sake, is ridiculous; diversity in jobs where someone’s life is on the line could be deadly.

I work out with some female law enforcement officers, and they are absolute beasts in the gym. But the strongest women in the gym can’t compete with the men when it comes to strength tests.

If I place my life in the hands of the Secret Service, I want the strongest, fastest, and best-trained agent possible. Women can be incredibly strong and fit and can certainly be well-trained. But if I had to choose between a man and a woman of similar age and training, I’d go with the man every time. If someone’s going to have to carry my lifeless body off a dais, I want the guy with huge biceps and legs like tree trunks. “Yasss girl power!” is not going to cut it.

Yes, I know it’s not politically correct to speak about gender in a way that suggests women ≠ to men, but as the managing editor of PJ Media, I don’t demand political correctness. I don’t force writers to use “preferred genders,” unlike other sites (one of which rhymes with “box”). That decision has gotten us demonetized, throttled, and censored, but we refuse to back down. You should demand no less of the websites you frequent.

A Major Lie From the Secret Service About the Trump Assassination Attempt Just Got Busted

The Secret Service is hiding in the bunker. They haven’t held a press conference on the July 13 assassination attempt against former President Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania. There’s been a code of silence on his harrowing and historic event, and we know why: they got busted for peddling a lie. Shocker—but we have another Biden-era scandal emerging, one where the agency appears to have hidden from the public because there was no spinning what was inevitably going to be asked by the media: the allegation that the Biden Department of Homeland Security denied requests for more resources. After initially denying it, the agency finally had to admit this was true.

The Washington Post and New York Times confirmed it. However, it was The Federalist’s Sean Davis who first reported that a source told him this was the case in the initial aftermath of the assassination attempt against the former president. It only adds to the incompetence of this administration, along with dousing the fires of a cover-up. At this point, there are too many coincidences, security failures, and now lies to dismiss this narrative outright (via NYT):

The Secret Service acknowledged on Saturday that it had turned down requests for additional federal resources sought by former President Donald J. Trump’s security detail in the two years leading up to his attempted assassination last week, a reversal from earlier statements by the agency denying that such requests had been rebuffed.

Almost immediately after a gunman shot at Mr. Trump from a nearby warehouse roof while he spoke at a rally in Butler, Pa., last weekend, the Secret Service faced accusations from Republicans and anonymous law enforcement officials that it had turned down requests for additional agents to secure Mr. Trump’s rallies.

“There’s an untrue assertion that a member of the former president’s team requested additional resources and that those were rebuffed,” Anthony Guglielmi, a spokesman for the Secret Service, said last Sunday, the day after the shooting.[
]

On Saturday, Mr. Guglielmi acknowledged that the Secret Service had turned down some requests for additional federal security assets for Mr. Trump’s detail. Two people briefed on the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly, confirmed that the Trump campaign had been seeking additional resources for the better part of the time that Mr. Trump had been out of office. The denied requests for additional resources were not specifically for the rally in Butler, Mr. Guglielmi said.

U.S. officials previously said the Secret Service had enhanced security for the former president before the Butler rally because it had received information from U.S. intelligence agencies about a potential Iranian assassination plot against Mr. Trump.[
]

The service never held or took part in a public briefing the night of the shooting, while other law enforcement officials held a news conference a few hours after the fact. The service did not hold a public briefing to answer questions in the week after the assassination attempt.

Continue reading “”