Category: Deceit O’ The Day

Deceit as a strategy by the Editors at Scientific American

The Science Is Clear: Gun Control Saves Lives

“The science is abundantly clear: More guns do not stop crime. Guns kill more children each year than auto accidents. More children die by gunfire in a year than on-duty police officers and active military members. Guns are a public health crisis, just like COVID, and in this, we are failing our children, over and over again.”

They have to lie to justify their beliefs and agenda. You only need to click on their own reference to discover the lie. Guns kill more children than auto accidents? Only if you consider 24 year old people as “children”

 

“For much of the past few decades motor vehicle crashes were the most common cause of death from injury—the leading cause of death in general—among children, teenagers and young adults in the U.S. But now a new analysis shows that, in recent years, guns have overtaken automotive crashes as the leading cause of injury-related death among people ages one through 24.”

They are intentionally lying in an effort to deprive an entire nation of a specific enumerated right.

Classic gaslighting

Morning Joe: It’s ‘Paranoid’ To Say Gov. Coming For Guns, But Praises Beto Who Said Just That!

Can Joe Scarborough and the Morning Joe crew really be this clueless? On Thursday’s show, Scarborough and Willie Geist repeatedly claimed that it was “paranoid” for people to think that the government could be coming for their guns. But there’s just one problem: in that same segment, Scarborough praised Beto O’Rourke, who said just that, for the political stunt he pulled yesterday, in which he interrupted Texas Gov. Greg Abbott during his press conference on the Uvalde school shooting.

Beto O’Rourke, Joe. Surely you remember that in a Democratic presidential debate in 2019 during his failed, short-lived run, O’Rourke said:

“Hell yes! We’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47.”

 

 

As you’ll see in the linked clip, that line drew huge cheers from the Democrat crowd in attendance.

Yes, O’Rourke subsequently backed away from that statement when it became politically untenable. But does anyone doubt that if he and his fellow Democrats could, they would take guns away from law-abiding Americans?

Responding to a person on the stage with Abbott who called O’Rourke a “sick son of a bitch” for his stunt, Scarborough claimed that the real sick sons of bitches were Abbott and others who won’t pass more gun-control legislation. For good measure, Scarborough twice called Abbott and those with him “freaks.”

So, is Joe Scarborough suffering from short-term memory loss? Or was he consciously covering up that Beto O’Rourke, the object of his praise, had boasted that “hell yes,” he would be taking guns away from lawful owners? Remind us again, Joe: who’s the SOB and the freak?

BLUF
At least half of this country knows why Biden did this:

First, to focus Americans’ attention on “white supremacy” rather than on the inflation, looming recession, food crisis and energy crisis he and his party have created with their policies.

Second, to keep black Americans voting Democrat by saying to them, in effect: “You need protection from your fellow hate-filled Americans; we Democrats are your protectors.”

Meanwhile, 9,941 black Americans were killed in 2020. Nearly all were killed by other black people. But to Joe Biden, his party, and the mainstream, i.e., left-wing, media, those black lives don’t matter. At all. Why not? Because they weren’t killed by white supremacists, and they therefore don’t serve the Democrats’ deliberately divisive narrative.

Joe Biden’s Buffalo Speech Was the Speech of an Indecent Man

If an American president has ever given as mendacious, anti-American and hate-filled a speech as President Joe Biden did in Buffalo, New York, last week, I am not familiar with it. Nor are you.

Biden used the terrible mass shooting of black people in a Buffalo grocery store to smear America, divide Americans and foment race-based hatred. A decent man would have given an entirely different speech.

A decent man would have gone to Buffalo and said something like this:

“My fellow Americans, what happened here in Buffalo was pure evil. Let there be no equivocating about this moral fact. If evil exists, what happened here was evil. But, my fellow Americans, this young man and his race-based homicidal hatred represents an infinitesimally small number of Americans, white or otherwise. The overwhelming majority of Americans of every race, ethnicity, and religion get along with each other beautifully. We work alongside each other, date each other, socialize with one another and marry one another. We are the most successful experiment in creating a multiracial, multi-ethnic, multi-religious country in world history. The actions of a deranged teenager do not change this fact.”

Instead, the hater-in-chief went to Buffalo and said:

“What happened here is simple and straightforward: terrorism. Terrorism. Domestic terrorism. Violence inflicted in the service of hate and the vicious thirst for power that defines one group of people being inherently inferior to any other group. A hate that, through the media and politics, the internet, has radicalized angry, alienated and lost individuals into falsely believing that they will be replaced. That’s the word. Replaced by ‘the other.’ By people who don’t look like them.

“Look, we’ve seen the mass shootings in Charleston, South Carolina; El Paso, Texas; in Pittsburgh. Last year, in Atlanta. This week, in Dallas, Texas, and now in Buffalo. In Buffalo, New York. White supremacy is a poison. It’s a poison. It really is. Running through our body politic. And it’s been allowed to fester and grow right in front of our eyes. No more. I mean, no more. We need to say as clearly and forcefully as we can that the ideology of white supremacy has no place in America. None …

“Look, the American experiment in democracy is in a danger like it hasn’t been in my lifetime. It’s in danger this hour. Hate and fear are being given too much oxygen by those who pretend to love America, but who don’t understand America. …

“Now is the time for the people of all races, from every background, to speak up as a majority in America and reject white supremacy …

“We have to refuse to live in a country where black people going about a weekly grocery shopping can be gunned down by weapons of war deployed in a racist cause …”

As noted earlier, this was not only a hate-filled speech; it was a speech of the Big Lie. The Big Lie of white supremacy as a major threat to America generally and to black America specifically.

Let’s examine each of the examples of white supremacist mass shootings he gave:

Continue reading “”

After Ignoring Waukesha, Biden to Visit Buffalo After Shooting.

Soon after the racially motivated mass shooting in Buffalo, N.Y. on Saturday, which left 10 people dead and several others injured, the White House announced that Joe Biden would be visiting Buffalo on Tuesday to meet with the families of the victims.

“A racially motivated hate crime is abhorrent to the very fabric of this nation. Any act of domestic terrorism, including an act perpetrated in the name of a repugnant white nationalist ideology, is antithetical to everything we stand for in America. Hate must have no safe harbor,” Biden said Saturday. “We must do everything in our power to end hate-fueled domestic terrorism.”

But Biden’s planned trip to Buffalo stands in stark contrast to his refusal to visit Waukesha, Wisc. after a black nationalist supporter of Black Lives Matter drove an SUV through a Christmas parade in a racially motivated attack that killed six people, including an 8-year-old boy. The driver, Darrell Brooks, had previously called for violence against white people and suggested “Hitler was right” for killing Jews in posts on social media.

Then-White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki claimed that Biden wouldn’t be visiting Waukesha because the trip “requires a lot of assets.”

“Well, I would say first: As you saw the president convey last week, our hearts go out to this community, to the people in Waukesha, that we’ve been in touch, obviously, with officials there, and we’re all watching as people are recovering,” Psaki claimed. “And this is such a difficult time of year for this to happen. It’s a difficult anytime. Obviously, any president going to visit a community requires a lot of assets, requires taking their resources, and it’s not something that I have a trip previewed at this plan— point in time, but we remain in touch with local officials. And certainly, our hearts are with the community as they’ve gone through such a difficult time.”

What assets were required to visit Waukesha that aren’t required to visit Buffalo?

Obviously, the issue of visiting Waukesha had nothing to do with assets and resources and everything to do with the fact that the massacre didn’t fit the preferred narrative of the media or the Biden administration.

In fact, the mainstream media has been desperately trying to get the Buffalo shooting to fit the preferred narrative of the left by insisting that the shooter is a radical right-winger when all evidence says that is not the case. For example, Rolling Stone magazine claimed the Buffalo shooter was a “mainstream Republican,” even though he allegedly referred to himself as “authoritarian left-wing” in his manifesto. Others have tried to claim he was radicalized by Fox News, but he attacked Fox News in his hate-filled manifesto as one of several networks he faults for hiring Jewish people.

Biden has still never visited Waukesha, nor has he visited Brooklyn after black nationalist Frank Robert James went on a shooting rampage in the subway last month. There is also no word as to whether Biden plans to visit Orange County, Calif., where a church shooting on Sunday left one dead and five wounded.

Question O’ The Day:
Having found out how weak, unprepared and frankly defenseless the Soviet Union was — i.e. driving trucks with long tubes around to pretend to have a lot more missiles — I’ve begun to wonder if anything — any story ever told by international media — was ever true?–Sarah Hoyt

Now the smoke is dissipating, and the mirrors are broken. What comes next?

Former Kremlin mercenary: Russian army was not prepared for a real war; Kremlin propaganda’s Janus face.

I’m traveling for work, with limited internet access. A couple things though:

(a) A former mercenary with the Kremlin-linked Wagner Group, quoted on the Telegraph’s live blog today:

Russian forces were “caught by surprise” by the fierce resistance of the Ukrainian army, according to a former mercenary who fought with the Kremlin-linked Wagner Group.

Marat Gabidullin took part in Wagner Group missions on the Kremlin’s behalf in Syria and in a previous conflict in Ukraine, before quitting the group in 2019.

“They were caught completely by surprise that the Ukrainian army resisted so fiercely and that they faced the actual army,” Mr Gabidullin said about Russia’s setbacks in Ukraine.

He said people he spoke to on the Russian side had told him they expected to face rag-tag militias when they invaded Ukraine, not well-drilled regular troops.

“I told them: ‘Guys, that’s a mistake’,” said Mr Gabidullin, who refused a call from a recruiter inviting him to go back to fighting as a mercenary in Ukraine several months before Russia launched its invasion.

(b) The head of GCHQ, the British equivalent of the NSA (and the successor organization to the GCCS which cracked Enigma) says out loud what has been obvious for weeks: Western SIGINT [signals intelligence .ed] agencies like GCHQ are passing tactically relevant info to Ukraine in real time.

(c) Russian vlogger Roman, who has fled to Georgia, calls himself a “Bernie Bro” in US political terms (most unlike this blogger here — OK, he has the excuse he’s young enough to be my son ;)), and used to think Russian propaganda abroad only panders to “the right-wingers”. Then he discovered that Russian propaganda efforts actually are Janus-faced: different propaganda trolls pander to left-wing and right-wing audiences. The former carp on again Western imperialism, “Palestine”, social “justice”, a… and sandwich their Russian propaganda ham between slices of that; the latter instead put the ham between slices of anti-woke, anti-CRT, pro-nationalism,… bread.

How the government covers for anti-gun media

I tend to be pretty critical of media bias. After all, I used to actually believe that media bias wasn’t really a huge thing, that those who saw it were really just upset that the news wasn’t biased in their direction.

Then I grew up. I saw all the examples of bias as supposed journalists went out of their way to push slanted reporting as hard fact.

Yet over at Ammoland, they’re looking at someone else’s bias, a bias that helps the media get away with stuff you or I never would.

A broadcast journalist using a hidden camera enters a gun show, purchases two “80-percent” gun kits, then goes to the state attorney general’s office where two agents help complete and assemble the guns before firing them on a range—allegedly violating state and federal gun laws in the process—while the camera records it all.

During a Sunday morning interview with a network news anchor, a nationally-known gun rights leader is challenged to discuss a 30-round magazine held by the anchor, on a show broadcast from the nation’s capital, where such magazines are known to be illegal.

A nationally-known broadcast journalist produces a special about gun control during which the video is edited to make it appear several gun rights activists are speechless when asked how felons or terrorists might be prevented from purchasing guns without background checks.…

A look back over the years suggests a pattern of “gotcha” journalism that seems to invariably get a pass, and gun rights activists are calling foul, as there is the perception that news agencies are using the First Amendment to undermine the Second Amendment. Grassroots activists contend that if private citizens did the same things depicted on screen, they would almost certainly face prosecution.

In other words, it seems government officials are heavily biased as well and are benefiting the media when they conduct actions that would destroy anyone else.

Time and time again, some in the media have outright broken laws, broadcast it, and gotten away with it because they’re advancing the narrative that certain parties in the government actually agree with.

For example, Katie Couric got away with deceptively editing a “documentary” so it appeared gun rights activists had no answer for a question because the judge argued it “demonstrated the sophistry” of the plaintiffs. Yet to call the actual response–the one Couric removed and pretended didn’t exist–sophistry is to take a position on the validity of those arguments.

That’s an act of bias that has no place in a courtroom.

Yet time and time again, government officials–either law enforcement or in the courts–have taken a side.

That means it’s imperative that such officials be targeted for removal from office. Lawsuits, campaigns, petitions, whatever it takes, we need to hold these people accountable for their blatantly biased actions in favor of a blatantly anti-gun media.

It’s also called ‘gas lighting’

Obama: Hey, I warned you that Putin “was always ruthless”

One of the advantages that clairvoyants and eminences grises have is the ability to remind us of the accuracy of their forecasts. Barack Obama took advantage of that Wednesday at the University of Chicago, discussing his prescient alarms over the threat that Vladimir Putin posed to world order. It’s a couple of days old but worth watching to recall his brilliance at the time:

Oh, wait — sorry, that wasn’t the correct clip, was it? My bad. I seem to have had a mix-up in my Official Barack Obama Brilliance Media Catalog. That was from 2012, when Obama lectured Mitt Romney on the dangers of al-Qaeda shortly after bailing out of Iraq and allowing the AQ affiliate there to turn into ISIS and necessitating a return of our military in 2014.

Let me look again. I think this is the one where Obama explains how tough he was on Putin:

Doggone it — I clearly need an intern to go back through my indices and reorganize. I’m pretty sure that this is the one that demonstrates Obama’s firm resolve to deal with Putin and his allies, especially when committing atrocities:

Ahem. Sorry, dear readers, I’m just having one hell of a time finding where Barack Obama ever took Putin seriously as a threat … at least while in office. The New York Post finally helps out with this clip of Obama lecturing Jeffrey Goldberg about his leadership in dealing with the Russian tyrant. Ironically, one of the themes of this event was — wait for it — “disinformation”:

Continue reading “”

I’m sorry, when something is pushed this hard (now a 5th shot?) with so much goobermintbux being made off it, and the CEO of one of the companies making the money makes such statements, it pegs both my Horse and Bull $#!+ meters. Excuse my French.

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla Describes Vaccine Skeptics as ‘Criminals’

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla described people who question his company’s experimental vaccine as “criminals” during an interview earlier this week. The Pfizer CEO recently lobbied the FDA to approve a fifth shot in the fall, which is expected to be approved.

An interviewer first drew attention to the “challenges” being faced by big tech companies in combatting “vaccine information” during a sit-down with Bourla. “Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe I’ve heard you talk about those who would deliberately peddle misinformation as ‘criminals.’ Is that something that you stand by?” Bourla was asked.

“Yes, I do,” replied the Pfizer CEO. “Because they are literally [costing] lives. They know what they are saying is a lie, but they do it despite that.” Bourla then referenced a vaccine injury story and characterized all vaccine injuries as “lies.”………….

My whole utility bill isn’t even close to $500. SloJoe’s senility strikes again

Another Day, Another Clean-up on Aisle 46: Biden Drops a Whopper on Renewable Energy

As sure as the sun rises in the east every day, two things are certain: First, Joe Biden — whose relationship with the truth is arm’s length at best — is going to say something that makes no sense at all, make up something really stupid, exaggerate or minimize the hell out of something, or purposely lie his ass off.

Bank it.

Second, there will be another clean-up in aisle 46. A White House staffer or a senior member of the administration is going to “correct” or explain what Joe meant to say, or didn’t mean to say, while the lapdog media flies wingman.

Bank that, too.

In today’s case in point, as reported by the New York Post, the White House was forced to correct the claim Biden made during his remarks announcing the planned release of 180 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve over the next six months: Americans who use renewable energy to power their homes could save “about $500 a month on average.”

If your home is powered by safer, cheaper, cleaner electricity, like solar or heat pumps, you can save about $500 a month on average.

Just one problem. Not even close to the truth. Biden overstated the estimated savings by $5,500.

Within hours — why hours? — the administration was forced to make a correction: it sent out a transcript of the bumbling Biden’s remarks with the word “month” crossed out and the word “year” added in brackets. According to the Post, the fact sheet sent to reporters prior to the speech contained the correct numbers.

If I were a cynic, I’d suggest Lyin’ Biden does this crap on purpose, knowing full well that more people will see him say “it” than will see a corrected transcript. Nah, that’s giving Corn Pop’s pal far too much credit.

Continue reading “”

SloJoe lies through his teeth and ‘walks back’ what he said previously even as he denies doing so.
Which likely means he got his chocolate ice cream ration threatened for going off script and was told what to say when the question came up.

17 Inconvenient Facts For the Gun-Control Movement

Imagine if you only read The Washington Post and only watched MSNBC and like-minded media outlets. If you did that, you might be deceived into thinking America is a regular Wild West Show of daily mass shootings. You might think guns themselves are evil and that crime is the fault of people who legally own firearms. You might even believe that an American citizen could simply go online and buy a machine gun, as former President Barack Obama (D) once told us. You might also think that suppressors are the tools of assassins, and that semi-automatic rifles with pistol grips are commonly used by criminals. Perhaps you’d even surmise that President Joe Biden (D) was making a good point when he suggested a ban on pistols chambered in 9 mm.

At best, many of these gun-control narratives are simply based on ignorance of firearms. At their worst, a considerable percentage of the mainstream media’s storylines regarding the Second Amendment are outright falsehoods meant to convince people to vote away their freedom.

Every issue of America’s 1st Freedom is filled with sourced facts and honest perspectives designed to arm citizens with the truth, but sometimes these kinds of list articles are needed to refute the shotgun patterns of anti-Second Amendment propaganda coming from the mainstream media and gun-control groups.

Continue reading “”

The lies the media refuses to call out

The media isn’t exactly friendly towards gun ownership. We all know this, so I’m not exactly breaking news here.

However, they will still occasionally take issue with outright lies, even if they ultimately agree with the position.

There are some lies they won’t bother to call out, and this is one of them:

What is known about the links among gun prevalence, gun purchasing trends and gun violence?

We’ve known for a long time that the more access there is to firearms in a society, the more firearm violence there is likely to be. It’s been shown in comparisons of societies and U.S. states with different levels of firearm ownership.

During the pandemic, as purchasing picked up across the country, we learned there was – at least early on – a relationship between an increase in gun purchases above expected levels and a later increase in violence above expected levels.

As 2020 went on, that signal was lost, except for domestic violence, because many other things were contributing to increases in violence.

We’ve known no such thing about access to firearms.

We’ve been told that such a link exists, but when you look at the studies that claim this, you can see serious problems with every single one of them.

For example, when comparing societies or even different states, it’s impossible to truly control for other variables that may somehow impact violent crime. While the prevalence of guns may exist, so do numerous other factors that can easily contribute to the problem.

Issues like jobs, education, population density, and a host of other factors all have been argued to contribute to crime. So why wouldn’t they also be a factor where guns are easily accessible?

That’s a question the media never answers.

Nor do they seem to consider why this knowledge is so unquestionable despite crime skyrocketing someplace like Los Angeles, which doesn’t have easy access to firearms?

It’s because the media simply doesn’t care about the truth.

They’ve pushed the gun control narrative with every fiber of their being. They’ll have a gun-control advocate on the primetime talk shows to calmly discuss their point of view, but gun rights advocates are often paired with another gun-control activist so they can debate the issue, tilting the balance so people are really getting inundated with one side.

Media personalities have to know what they’re doing, just like they have to know that this idea that we know definitively that increased access to guns somehow makes violent crime higher is bogus.

They know and they don’t care.

They like these kinds of lies because they can hold up those flawed studies and say they’re only spitting facts, trusting that most people wouldn’t understand why those studies are complete and utter BS. They’re hoping you’re too stupid to learn how to read a study, learn to find the flaws in a given study, then criticize it for being what it is, an attempt to push a narrative.

Frankly, I’m kind of sick of seeing this nonsense from our media. The thing is, I don’t expect to ever see them do better, either.

The Road to Serfdom—We’re Almost There

We are learning March 18 something that apparently slipped under the radar for a few days.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) “quietly” made some changes to its data tracker website on March 15, removing tens of thousands of deaths from COVID-19, nearly a quarter of which were those for young people under 18.

They tell us this occurred because of a “coding logic error.”

I wonder how many they would have had to remove if they included those who were registered by hospitals—for profit or otherwise—as having died from the virus when they had multiple other of what we have learned to call co-morbidities. (If there’s one thing we can say for the pandemic, it built our vocabularies.)

In other words, they didn’t necessarily die of COVID-19, but the hospitals said they did, a different kind of coding error, I guess.

The number would likely be staggering.

This supposed “coding logic error”—whatever that may be; the CDC doesn’t precisely tell us—could indeed be symbolic of, or even actually encompass, the entire pandemic.

From this we can make the assumption, if we haven’t already, the pandemic was, and is, extraordinarily overblown, an event that figuratively and literally threw us back to the Middle Ages with people locked down, masked, force vaccinated, businesses shut, schools closed, and science turned inside out, leaving the entire globe in chaos.

And yet, to adopt the title of Neil Sheehan’s book about the Vietnam War, the whole thing was “A Bright Shining Lie.”

Of course, people died, but they do for myriad reasons under varying circumstances. That’s been the condition on planet Earth from time immemorial. More died in this instance because simple and immediate treatments were abjured in favor of far more expensive ones dangerous in themselves.

But that is only one of the reasons the pandemic became as pervasive as it did, taking over all our lives. How did it come to pass that what could have been an unpleasant, even severe, but containable health problem evolved into a civilization-destroying pandemic?

Even now, at this early stage, we must ask the age-old question, cui bono—who benefits? The answer lies in a statement with which we have recently become all too familiar:

“You will own nothing, and you will be happy.”

Happy that COVID is over? Oh, no. Not really. They didn’t mean that.

Many now recognize that sentence for what it is—the marching mantra of the “Great Reset.”

Continue reading “”

DON’T BELIEVE THE HYPE. SMART GUN TECH STILL NOT READY FOR PRIMETIME

By Larry Keane

There is a media blitz afoot, pitched by developers of authorized user recognition technology equipped firearms; what the media refers to as so-called, “smart guns.” Several of these companies herald that this is the year when they will finally bring their product to market. It might be a little premature to start popping corks, though.

Despite reports praising companies preparing to launch options for consumers, and polling showing Americans may be open to considering this concept, one critical question remains: Are buyers willing to risk their life on authorized user recognition technology?

So long as the answer from firearm purchasers remains “No,” retailers will not sacrifice shelf space for an unreliable product consumers don’t want to buy.
Prove It
Morning Consult released polling of Americans’ relative “acceptance” of “smart guns” and pitches a rather optimistic outlook.

“After decades of delays and controversy over smart guns, 2022 could be the year that the new weaponry is brought to market.”

The article reports Americans are “interested” in “smart” gun technology and “support the development” of the firearms. Less than half, 43 percent, of those surveyed say they are “very interested” or “somewhat interested” in personalized guns equipped with authorized-user technology, while more than half, 54 percent, aren’t. NSSF’s polling in 2019 showed that just five percent said they were inclined to purchase a so-called “smart gun” with 70 percent saying they still had concerns about reliability.

Firearms equipped with authorized-user technology involves adding electronics that in theory only allows a gun to be fired by a verified, authorized user after unlocked by using either a fingerprint, a pin code or through embedded field communication (RFID) connected to a smartphone or other Bluetooth device. Firearm owners know that guns must work as designed each and every time. There’s no room for failure. Adding in electronics to guns adds points of failure and could have horrific consequences for those who rely on them for self-defense.

LodeStar Works Inc., is one developer working to hit the market this year. President and CEO Gareth Glaser is hopeful. Glaser said, “It’s been around a long time now. Everybody uses one form or another of authentication technology on their smartphone.”

The problem for developers lies in the fact that support for “technology development” does not equate to, “I will buy a smart gun.” Not to mention a firearm is incomparable to an iPhone or Bluetooth speaker. Phones and guns are completely different products and equivocating them is beyond tone-deaf to the firearm market that has seen elevated sales largely driven by concerns for personal safety. If the facial or fingerprint recognition on your iPhone doesn’t recognize you, you’re inconvenienced. If your firearm doesn’t unlock in a time of need, you could be dead.

Failing Track Record

The hype for “The Year of the Smart Gun” began early. Leading up to SHOT Show® 2022 in Las Vegas, these new companies were pitching their products as the “hot” new thing.

“Exclusive: Smart guns finally arriving in U.S., seeking to shake up firearms market,” read a Reuters headline. “‘Smart Gun’ Companies Aim For 2022 Commercial Release,” said another. “Are ‘smart guns’ finally arriving in the U.S.? Here is what we know,” was the headline from The Deseret News. The article began, stating as fact, that “Smart guns…will finally become available to American consumers after decades of questions regarding reliability.”

The Reload was the most measured and accurate. “‘Smart Guns’ Come to the Industry’s Trade Show Amid Hype and Skepticism.”

The history of this technology is not one of success, including hacked and failing test runs. A demonstration by LodeStar prior to SHOT Show® 2022 failed too. A demonstration to show off the technology to shareholders shows an individual loading, chambering and clicking the fingerprint keypad on the side of the 9 mm handgun equipped with the authorized-user technology.

“Alright, ready? Everybody got ears? Alright. Two rounds coming,” he says before firing. Only one round successfully fired while the demonstrator is visibly seen and heard pulling the trigger multiple times for the remaining round before the video abruptly ends. That’s during a controlled test under ideal conditions and in front of the media.

Continue reading “”

When Demand for Racism Exceeds Supply, Fake It! Guess Who Scribbled an ‘N’ Bomb on a High School Wall This Time.

These stories have become as ubiquitous and annoying as that 1-877-Kars 4 Kids jingle.

A “white supremacist” writes something racist on a school wall. The students are SHOCKED! How could a drooling, white nationalist goober infiltrate their scholastic utopia? (Was it the janitor???) The angry students skip class to protest the hatred! White students tearfully rally around their black friends and vow to protect them from the tiki-torch-wielding bushwhackers who are likely patrolling the streets at night, nooses in hand, looking for a minority to lynch.

The school’s principal or dean valiantly vows to oust the seething bigots and restore the racial equilibrium that has so violently been shattered.

Finally, there’s a break in the case! A black kid did it. Again.

There has been yet another Jussie Smollett copycat caper of racial hatred that doesn’t exist, this time at Our Lady of Mercy School for Young Women in Rochester, N.Y.

The following message was scribbled on a restroom wall: This school is filled with a bunch of [plural of N-bomb]. Get out or else!

It was not immediately clear who was expected to “get out or else!”

Form the battle lines! True racism has come to Lady of Mercy! Cue up the virtue signaling! Take to the streets and protest before looking into the situation! We need tears, LOTS of tears!

“I cried a lot,” Janna Smith, a senior at the school, stated. “I felt ‘what am I doing if things like this keep happening every day?’ I talked to my mom and she said this happened for a reason, use this to make change.”

Quick, get a BLM flag from your Aunt Tifa!

Apparently, Lady of Mercy is a hotbed of bigotry!

“I’ve seen my fair share of racist acts, microaggressions, things like that that happen at Mercy,” said former student Morgan Reese. “I have never seen anything to the level of what I saw today and it scares me that my two younger sisters have to go to school somewhere where they don’t necessarily feel welcome.”

Has Morgan learned nothing in the last four years? Fake hate crimes are all the rage. Surely the school staff smells the oldest hoax in history, right?

Wrong! The faculty, not to be out-duped by a bunch of young girls, fell hard for the fake hate bait as well and sent this email to parents of the defiantly not racist students:

Dear Mercy Parents and Guardians,

This morning, just before Advisement, we interrupted classes with an overhead announcement. We informed the students of graffiti that was found in one of the students’ bathrooms. This was our message to the students:

“Please pardon this interruption for this important announcement. This morning, we found graffiti in a high school bathroom that wrote out the n-word and said, ‘Get out or else.’ We are investigating this and will hold those responsible, whether they are Mercy people or not.

Let us be clear, anyone who uses this language and is disparaging to our Mercy girls and Mercy community is not welcome at Mercy. We are unequivocally a school that embraces diversity and inclusion. We are a Catholic school, committed to gospel values of faith, hope, and love. The world is full of hate and violence. We want all of you to reflect on how Mercy can be a place of love and peace. What role do you play in creating such an environment?

Counselors, administrators, and Mrs. Dickey will be available in the Wellness and Counseling Center during Advisement and throughout the day to support anyone who feels unsafe. We will convene assemblies on this topic this week and will be notifying your parents of this. Thank you; that is all.”

Tears, flags, and protests: the mostly white students did their jobs. The faculty vowed swift justice and volunteered the soft shoulders of counselors, administrators, and even Mrs. Dickey, in case frightened students needed reassurance of diversity, equity, and inclusion at Lady of Mercy. Not to mention, there would be programming, meetings, and even more diversity training.

Police response was swift and the investigation went quickly. A black kid did it.

Imagine going to a school so free of racism, you feel the need to invent some. Poor lambs. The struggle is NOT real.

Hey, wait a minute! The school stated the following: “Let us be clear, anyone who uses this language and is disparaging to our Mercy girls and Mercy community is not welcome at Mercy.”Does this mean the hoaxer will get booted out of the school? HAHAHAHAH! I’m guessing not.

If only there was a way for the school administrators to have seen this coming! Wait, I know: fakehatecrimes.org lists over 460 incidents, and a ton of these hate hoaxes took place in schools and colleges.

Below The Radar: Stopping the Fraudulent Sales of Firearms Act

Second Amendment supporters often have to make difficult decisions. Not in the sense of Glock vs. Colt vs. Springfield Armory, but more along the lines of how to address a given piece of anti-Second Amendment legislation.

Take for instance the Stopping the Fraudulent Sales of Firearms Act, known as S 3776 and HR 6997. The legislation purports to prohibit the importation, sale, or manufacture of firearms “by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises.”

On the face of it, this seems unobjectionable. Nobody wants to be sold a firearm on the basis of misrepresentation or a false promise, right? But there are red flags when Second Amendment supporters think things through some more.

For starters, the Senate bill is sponsored by Dianne Feinstein, a long-standing enemy of our Second Amendment rights. So that is a red flag right there. Her co-sponsors include Cory Booker and Richard Blumenthal, also committed opponents of the Second Amendment.

Aside from who sponsors it, there is one other question: Who decides what constitutes “false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises?”

This is a big deal on multiple fronts. Remember how the CDC is getting back into the gun-control business? They worry that it will be used to justify censorship by Silicon Valley is big, but this legislation could add another threat.

Suppose some anti-Second Amendment extremist decides that those who advertise firearms for self-defense are making ““false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises?” That now becomes a new way to hit someone with a five-year jail term and a felony conviction.

This also is a way to “legalize” suits like the one brought against Remington over Sandy Hook. Never mind that the rifle used was stolen (after the shooter killed the rightful owner), the claim from the suit was centered around the advertising. In other words, prove there was “false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises” in the advertising, and all of the sudden, it becomes easier to sue gun manufacturers.

This is a dangerous end run around the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. Again, we need to remember what Feinstein said so long ago on 60 Minutes. She wants an Australia-style ban, but if she can’t have it, she’ll figure out what she can get legislatively (see the Age 21 Act). Or she’ll enable other attacks outside the legislative process.

What makes it doubly hard is that this bill seems very reasonable, so Second Amendment supporters have to be very careful about the optics while opposing it. After all, nobody wants to support those who sell anything (including firearms) with “false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises.”

Second Amendment supporters need to contact their Representative and Senators and politely urge them to oppose the Stopping the Fraudulent Sales of Firearms Act. Then. They need to work to defeat anti-Second Amendment extremists via the ballot box this November.

How do you know the numbers of Hispanic voters are increasingly seen as going Republican?
The lieberal media hauls out the broadest smear brush they can find.

The rise of white nationalist Hispanics.

Nick Fuentes, identified as a “white supremacist” in Justice Department filings, made headlines last week for hosting a white nationalist conference in Florida. His father is also half Mexican American.

Driving the news: Cuban American Enrique Tarrio, the former leader of the Proud Boys, a group the Anti-Defamation League calls an extremist group with a violent agenda, was arrested Tuesday and charged with conspiracy in connection to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

What they’re saying: Experts tell Axios far-right extremism within the Latino community stems from three sources: Hispanic Americans who identify as white; the spread of online misinformation; and lingering anti-Black, antisemitic views among U.S. Latinos that are rarely openly discussed.

Blah, blah, blah, blah…………

Yes, they know. They’ve always known. They just approve.

Project Veritas Torches the New York Times and Explodes the January 6 Narrative
Serious journalists know that our oligarchs used Jan. 6 as a Reichstag fire, to target political dissidents.

A Pulitzer prize-winning New York Times reporter has been caught in a video by the conservative group Project Veritas admitting his colleagues vastly exaggerated the danger of the election integrity protest on Jan. 6.

The reporter, Matthew Rosenberg, also called his colleagues names that questioned their courage and manliness.

January 6 Was in Fact “No Big Deal”

Rosenberg, the national security correspondent for the New York Times, said the media’s coverage of the Capitol riot was “overblown” and that the events of Jan. 6, 2021 were “no big deal,” according to undercover video released Tuesday by Project Veritas.

In print, Rosenberg and his colleagues have described the claim that there were FBI plants instigating the protestors outside of the U.S. Capitol a year earlier as a “reimagining” of the “attack.” But in the Project Veritas video, which appears to have been recorded without his knowledge, Rosenberg paints a different picture. Here he admits that “there were a ton of FBI informants amongst the people who attacked the Capitol.”

warning, some foul language

BLUF:
The problem, in an age of political polarization, is that about 40% of the population will automatically believe anything a Democrat tells them, even if it contradicts the most basic principles of economics, and there is a vast media establishment which won’t even question Biden’s bizarre counterfactual claims about inflation, energy policy, etc. All that matters to them is the cynical question, “Cui bono?” Who benefits from a particular belief — Democrats or Republicans?……..

Thus does “truth” become a partisan prize, over which one party claims a monopoly. By selling their souls to advance this belief system, the media destroy their own credibility. Then they wonder why we don’t trust them.

‘Simply Not True.

Joe Biden believes he is honest, and that anyone who disagrees with him is lying, or is ignorant, or has been deceived by liars.

So deeply convinced is Joe Biden of his own honesty that he thinks his very name is synonymous with truth-telling:

“I give you my word as a Biden: I will never stoop to President Trump’s level.”
— Nov. 20, 2019

“I give you my word as a Biden: If I am elected president I will do everything in my power to protect our children from gun violence.”
— March 10, 2020

“I give you my word as a Biden: When I’m president, I will lead with science, listen to the experts and heed their advice, and always tell you the truth.”
— March 18, 2020

When I first noticed him using this “my word as a Biden” phrase during the 2020 campaign, I was puzzled. Has the Biden family been so prominently associated with honesty that when Joe says this, most Americans say, “Well, that settles it”? Of course not. In fact, Biden’s first presidential campaign, in 1988, collapsed in disgrace specifically because of Joe’s dishonesty, when he was caught plagiarizing others — most notably British Labour leader Ne0l Kinnock — in his speeches:

Democratic presidential candidate Joseph R. Biden Jr., a U.S. senator from Delaware, was driven from the nomination battle after delivering, without attribution, passages from a speech by British Labor party leader Neil Kinnock. A barrage of subsidiary revelations by the press also contributed to Biden’s withdrawal: a serious plagiarism incident involving Biden during his law school years; the senator’s boastful exaggerations of his academic record at a New Hampshire campaign event; and the discovery of other quotations in Biden’s speeches pilfered from past Democratic politicians.

Joe Biden lies about a lot of things, including his own biography. It is fair to say he is notoriously dishonest, and yet he seems to believe that nobody knows this, and that he enjoys a reputation as a truth-teller.

[Well, that ‘he seems to believe’ goes along with the delusions of senile dementia and SloJoe believing his own propaganda. Sucks for us to have a Commander In Chief who for the time, is no more than a meat puppet, It makes you wonder what might happen if one day Joe decides that his handlers are wrong and he’s going to do something other than what they want him to, and Jill – and the secret service – decide to back him up.]

Continue reading “”