Category: Enemies Foreign and Domestic

Providing confirmation, and self identification (it’s nice when they do intelligence gathering work for you, isn’t it?) that universities are domestic enemy institutions that must eventually be eliminated in self defense.

Top digital journalism professor at Columbia calls for censorship of conservative media.

The top digital journalism professor at Columbia University recently called for some center-right news outlets to be censored in the name of cracking down on misinformation.

Professor Emily Bell, director of the Tow Center for Digital Media, said it is not an infringement of the First Amendment to audit and vet some news outlets to promote a “truthful news environment.”

She made the comments in response to concerns among U.S. Reps. Jerry McNerney and Anna Eshoo, who sent letters to a multitude of streaming companies, including AT&T, Verizon, Roku, Amazon, Apple, Comcast, Charter, Dish, Cox and Hulu, asking them about censoring “misinformation” in the conservative media.

The Democratic senior members expressed that “right-wing media ecosystem[s]” like “Newsmax, One America News Network (OANN), and Fox News” must be held accountable for supposed fallacies on their networks and suggested they be booted from these venues.

Continue reading “”

General Recommends “Quick Reaction Troops” In DC to Protect the Ruling Class From the Slaves

A United States military general, who was appointed by the ruling class, is recommending “quick reaction troop” in Washinton D.C. to protect against the slave uprising.  It sure appears that the powers that believe they own everyone are starting to worry that people no longer need them and are no longer willing to be slaves.

The retired Army general appointed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to lead a security study after the January 6 Capitol riot has called for setting up a quick-reaction force to permanently stand ready for threats against the government, according to a report from RT. Meaning any uprising from the “governed” or “the controlled” or the slave lass will not be tolerated by the masters.

Now, are we beginning to understand that government is slavery? It literally doesn’t matter if it’s a republic or a democracy or a socialist dictatorship. None of us should ever be owned by anyone else. The government knows it, and enough of the public must be figuring it out if retired US Army Lt. General Russel Honore says those who desire their freedom are the problem to be dealt with.

Continue reading “”

yeah, Mostly peaceful protest™
They do understand one point we should also keep in mind:
“An asymmetrical and decentralized insurgency is nearly impossible to defend against”
That’s one of the basic tenets of 4th Generation Asymmetrical Warfare

He just doesn’t want us to know what he thinks about it.
And because of that, we do know.

Garland Doesn’t Seem To Know Much About Anything During Questioning

When the Senate confirmation hearings for Merrick Garland to be Joe Biden’s pick for Attorney General kicked off, we quickly learned that there were a number of public policy topics that he’s “never given much thought to,” and didn’t have any opinions to share. Those included issues of illegal immigration and whether or not transgender athletes should be able to compete in girls’ and women’s sports. As the hearings continued, there emerged even more topics that Garland professes to not know very much about. This time the questions dealt with the Second Amendment and the limits of the President’s power to infringe on those rights via the pen and the phone. When Ted Cruz pressed him on some specifics, Garland claimed to be “unfamiliar” with the subject and said that he “cannot offer an opinion.” (Free Beacon)

President Joe Biden’s pick for the top law enforcement post in America told the Senate that he is uninformed about important gun issues, as he faces what could be a close confirmation vote.

Merrick Garland told Sen. Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) he was unfamiliar with key gun policy areas in written answers made public Wednesday night. He said he did not know enough about the topic to say whether Biden could unilaterally deny gun sales by permanently delaying background checks. He used the same explanation when asked if Biden could ban the sale of popular rifles like the AR-15—something Biden promised to make law during his campaign.

“I am unfamiliar with this issue and cannot offer an opinion on that question,” Garland said of the unilateral AR-15 ban.

These answers conflict with statements Garland made in February, suggesting that there were changes to gun control policy that Biden could make unilaterally without the need for new legislation from Congress. But now he’s saying that he really doesn’t know what, if any limits there are to the President’s powers in that regard. Just as a reminder, this guy has been on the bench on one of the most influential appeals courts in the country for decades and he came very close to making it onto the Supreme Court. And he hasn’t given any thought to the Second Amendment?

Garland similarly dodged a question about the death penalty. He said he had “developed concerns” over the procedure in recent years, but that was about it. We already know where Joe Biden stands on the subject and Garland will go along with whatever Biden says, so it seemed rather pointless to wiggle out of that one.

What Garland is doing here seems obvious. He doesn’t want to wade into any hot-button topics for fear of antagonizing the Senators from either party and giving some of them an excuse to not vote for him. He’s hardly the first cabinet nominee to play these games and he won’t be the last. But the guy is asking to be approved to be the chief law enforcement official in the country. If he’s really “never thought about” any of these questions and “doesn’t have an opinion” on them, how is he claiming to be qualified to do the job he’s asking for? That’s an awful lot of studying to have to do on day one to get up to speed.

Senator Tom Cotton (R – AR) has already begun pumping the brakes on Garland’s confirmation, insisting that more and better answers are needed. But it still doesn’t seem like he’ll be able to derail the confirmation entirely. Mitch McConnell has already said he plans to vote to confirm him and Chuck Grassley voted for him in committee. That’s really all he would need to avoid the optics of sending Kamala Harris down to break a tie to put him in at the Justice Department. But if these non-answers were to somehow convince both of them to vote no, we’d be back to waiting for Joe Manchin to make up his mind. This fight may not be quite over yet.

The California Model: Soft On Violent Firearm Crimes, Hard On Law-Abiding Gun Owners

A frustrating aspect of the modern gun control movement is its seeming abandonment of reason. The same anti-gun politicians that attack the rights of law-abiding gun owners will advocate for more lenient treatment of those who misuse firearms to commit violent crime.

Consider California’s Assembly Bill 1509, which would alter the state’s scheme of sentence enhancements for serious crimes committed with firearms. The legislative counsel’s digest summarized the changes as follows:
Existing law imposes a sentence enhancement in the state prison of 10 years for personally using a firearm in the commission of specified felonies, 20 years for personally and intentionally discharging a firearm in the commission of those felonies, and 25 years to life for personally and intentionally discharging a firearm and causing great bodily injury or death to any other person during the commission of those felonies.

This bill would reduce those enhancements to 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively. 

Existing law imposes a sentence enhancement of 5, 6, or 10 years in the state prison for, with intent to inflict great bodily injury or death, discharging a firearm from a motor vehicle in the commission of a felony and inflicting great bodily injury or death in the commission of a felony.

This bill would reduce that enhancement to 1, 2, or 3 years in the state prison.

AB1509 was authored by Assembly member Alex Lee (D-25). The bill was coauthored by Assembly members Wendy Carrillo (D-51), Ash Kalra (D-27), Mark Stone (D-29), and Senator Scott Wiener (D-11).

Assemblywoman Carrillo has been a vocal proponent of further restricting the rights of law-abiding gun owners. On May 17, 2018, Carrillo spoke at a gun control rally in Sacramento, put on, in part, by the Brady Campaign. The lawmaker took to Twitter on February 5, 2019 to boast of meeting Gabrielle Giffords of the eponymous Giffords gun control organization, adding, “California has enacted strict gun laws that can lead the way to a national conversation. We need action. #GunReformNow.”

Similarly, Assemblymember Kalra has pushed for gun control. As a San Jose City councilmember, Kalra proposed an ordinance that would have required gun owners to comply with onerous storage requirements, ammunition sellers to register transactions, and re-victimized gun owners whose firearms were stolen by requiring them to report the theft within 48 hours.

In 2019, Senator Wiener advanced legislation to permanently ban gun shows at Daly City, Calif.’s Cow Palace. On August 31, 2019, the state senator took to Twitter to advocate for gun confiscation and other extreme gun controls, stating,

No more talk on guns

Action only

And they’re right to be scared.

BLUF:
“They worry that someday there will be a backlash against the people in charge, which, of course, is them. That’s their biggest fear, a peasant revolt.”

Tucker Carlson Zeroes in on the Left’s ‘Biggest Fear’

During his opening monologue on Thursday, Fox News’s Tucker Carlson excoriated the ongoing military occupation of Washington, D.C. and explained why it’s still there and what has liberals so fearful.While the left is admittedly scared of pretty much everything, he acknowledged, fear of “the other” has them most wound up now.

“When you’re a liberal, the world is a very scary place, but there is one fear that rises above all other fears in the liberal mind: The fear of “the other.” Like all primitive cultures, modern liberalism is tribal,” he said. “Liberals understand most of the American continent as a mysterious dark space, like a medieval map populated by drooling Trump voters and violent illiterates with extra chromosomes.

“Liberals despise people like this, of course, and on some level, they know they’re hated right back,” he continued. “They worry that someday there will be a backlash against the people in charge, which, of course, is them. That’s their biggest fear, a peasant revolt.”

And so, D.C. looks like Baghdad’s Green Zone, he said.

The left and right were fully prepared for another “insurrection” on March 4, but like a child fearful of the monster in the closet, the threat wasn’t real.

“A lot of liberals were certain that March 4 was the day the right-wing revolution would finally begin. March 4, they believed, with something called ‘QAnon Inauguration Day,'” he said, adding that they have no idea what that means and can guarantee the vast majority of Trump supporters don’t either.

“They’d heard about it from Nancy Pelosi, who told her bodyguards to write up a report on the threat of QAnon Inauguration Day. So that’s what they did. We never really learned any details, but members of Congress were not taking chances,” Carlson continued. “Many of them fled the Capitol Thursday. House leaders rescheduled votes so that the rank-and-file legislators could escape with their lives, if not with their dignity.”

What happened was predictable: nothing. More media showed up than anyone else.

This “credible threat” was just the latest in a series of lies to keep D.C. militarized, he argued, because the National Guard is there for political reasons more than anything else.

“This is very strange behavior for a democracy,” Carlson pointed out. “In a democracy, leaders are supposed to rule with the consent of the governed. You would think that might have occurred to some people on Capitol Hill. If we’re this afraid of American voters, maybe something’s wrong. Maybe we’re not doing a very good job. Maybe we ought to shut up for a second and listen to the complaints of the people whose lives we control. Maybe then we wouldn’t need razor wire around the Capitol.

“Apparently, no one in Washington has thought of this,” he added. “Instead, they’ve convinced themselves that the only Americans who have a problem with the way things are currently going must have been brainwashed by QAnon.”

Meanwhile, as the left prepares itself for battle against imaginary threats, Americans are facing real ones on the streets.

“For all the concern over the safety of our elected leaders, there doesn’t seem to be any concern for the safety of the people who elected them,” he said. “Capitol Hill looks like the Green Zone in Baghdad, but the rest of the city looks like the area outside the Green Zone. Residential neighborhoods in Washington and in cities around the country haven’t been this dangerous in years.  Americans are dying in huge numbers from street crime, but no one in Congress cares. They’re too busy spending tax dollars to shield themselves from the QAnon Shaman and his 70-year-old accomplices.”

Maybe Democratic leaders will start caring if Americans blame QAnon for the crimes, he quipped.

Unrestricted Warfare: China’s Master Plan to Destroy America Paperback

The Overwhelming Evidence of the Origin of the COVID-19 Pandemic Was Covered Up by US Government Officials, US Scientific Authorities and Their Chinese Counterparts

A sobering and fascinating study on war in the modern era, Unrestricted Warfare carefully explores strategies that militarily and politically disadvantaged nations might take in order to successfully attack a geopolitical super-power like the United States. American military doctrine is typically led by technology; a new class of weapon or vehicle is developed, which allows or encourages an adjustment in strategy. Military strategists Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui argue that this dynamic is a crucial weakness in the American military, and that this blind spot with regard to alternative forms warfare could be effectively exploited by enemies. Unrestricted Warfare concerns the many ways in which this might occur, and, in turn, suggests what the United States might do to defend itself.

The Overwhelming Evidence of the Origin of the COVID-19 Pandemic Was Covered Up by US Government Officials, US Scientific Authorities and Their Chinese Counterparts

Already by the end of January 2020, elements within the U.S. government and the U.S. scientific establishment were becoming increasingly concerned that the American people might learn the truth about the origin of the COVID-19.

That is, it was an artificial virus created in a laboratory in the People’s Republic of China with the assistance of U.S. scientists and funding from the U.S. government.
In addition to pressure coming directly from the Chinese Communist Party, there was, no doubt, similar coercion being brought to bear on susceptible and compliant people in Washington D.C. by international financial interests, whose investments in China would be placed in jeopardy if it was widely accepted that China manufactured the COVID-19 virus.

Continue reading “”

Biden’s Gun Control Isn’t Intended to Fight Crime, It’s Intended to Criminalize Gun Owners.

The Biden administration is not trying to address an issue or fix a symptom. It is targeting a phantasm. The president has yet to address fully how to combat the larger issue of illegally acquired firearms used to commit offenses.

Based on the 2016 Survey of Prison Inmates, the Justice Department reported in 2019 that “among prisoners who possessed a gun during their offense, 90% did not obtain it from a retail source.” Read that again. Among those individuals arrested, convicted, and sentenced, 90% of the firearms used in gun-related crimes did not come from legal sources, which include gun shows.

Astoundingly, only 0.8% of prisoners who had a firearm during their offense legally “obtained it at a gun show.” So, less than 1% of all firearms used in gun-related offenses came from gun shows. This is fascinating, seeing that the current administration and congressional majority would have us believe the “gun show loophole” is one area where the plague of gun violence is spawning from and it is just “common sense” to address it. But yet again, the facts show this is an illusion.

What is not an illusion is this: If the Biden administration successfully shoves firearm regulation through Congress or enables it through executive action, Biden will be solely responsible for criminalizing the estimated 72 million people who legally own firearms, as if our prison and legal system weren’t overburdened enough. So much for common sense.

NSSF: ‘Charleston Loophole’ Gun Control Could Come Next Week

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) warns that gun control targeting the so-called “Charleston Loophole” could be before Congress for a vote as early as next week.

The NSSF told Breitbart News the bill, the Enhanced Background Check Act of 2021, is sponsored by House Whip Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC) and “could be on the floor as early as next week, bypassing House Judiciary altogether.”

Bill Would Allow The Government To Shut Down Gun Sales Nationwide At Any Time

This Bill Would Permit The FBI To Shutdown Gun Sales Anytime They Wish

To understand how this would be possible you first have to understand the current system.  When you go to buy a firearm, the law requires a background check.  The check normally takes about 30 minutes, often less.  In a tiny number of cases, more time is required.  The law currently gives the FBI three days to get it done.  If they cannot clear the buyer in three days, they can deny the sale.  The buyer then can appeal.  Most appeals are indeed successful.  However, if the FBI doesn’t give any answer in three days, the gun dealer MAY release the firearm to the buyer.  Sadly, there have been cases where the FBI has screwed up, not given an answer, the dealer released the firearm, and the person was indeed prohibited.  In one horrible case, the FBI screwed up and there was a mass shooting in a church.  This has been called the “Charleston Loophole” by gun control groups.

Why Is There A Three Day Limit?

When the current background check bill was drafted, the NRA insisted on a time limit because without one, the president could simply order the FBI to stop processing background checks.  Without a yes or no decision, the buyers could not appeal.  Gun rights groups surely would appeal to the courts, but meanwhile gun sales would stop nationwide.  To eliminate this abuse of the background check system, both sides agreed on a three day limit.

What This Bill Would Do

This bill extends the time the FBI has to complete the background check and issue a decision to “at least 10 business days”.  This sounds reasonable – and if it was indeed a simple expansion of the time allowed to 10 days this would be something we could have a reasonable discussion about.  The problem is that the bill says “at least 10 days” not “no more than 10 days”.  In fact, the FBI could simply take the position that they have an unlimited amount of time to complete the background checks.  This would likely result in both long delays for the average person and the ability to simply stop processing checks – stopping all gun sales nationwide.

Continue reading “”

demoncrap for brains and stupid besides

Majority of House Democrats vote in favor of lowering voting age to 16

Progressive Democrats in the House of Representatives unsuccessfully pushed an amendment lowering the federal voting age to 16 as part of the H.R. 1 voting rights package on Wednesday.

The vote was 125-302 in the House with the majority of Democrats voting in favor, 125-93, according to C-SPAN.

“A sixteen-year-old in 2021 possesses a wisdom and a maturity that comes from 2021 challenges, 2021 hardships, and 2021 threats,” Rep. Ayanna Pressley, one of the members of Congress behind the amendment, said in a statement on Monday. “Now is the time for us to demonstrate the courage that matches the challenges of the modern-day sixteen- and seventeen-year-old.”

Pressley, Rep. Grace Meng, D-N.Y., and Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., reintroduced the amendment on Monday.

Pressley said in February she was “shocked” that lowering the legal voting age to 16 is a “polarizing” subject of debate.

Continue reading “”

“Show me the man (business) and I’ll find you the crime” is a quote from a Russian communist, and is not how the justice system is supposed to operate in the U.S.

Anti-Gun Activists Salivating Over NJ’s Investigation Of Smith & Wesson

We’ve previously discussed the fishing expedition currently underway by New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal against American gunmaker Smith & Wesson, in which the AG is trying to get his hands on decades’ worth of internal marketing documents. Grewal hasn’t officially accused the company of any wrongdoing; rather, he wants to peruse those documents in the hopes of finding something that he can portray as a violation of the state’s laws against fraudulent advertising.

It’s a gross abuse of power, so of course gun control advocates love the idea. The New York Times’ Aaron Ross Sorkin has even penned a love letter of sorts to Grewal, expressing his full support for the witch hunt.

Continue reading “”

BLUF:
Blumenthal commented on the legislation, saying, “The American people are responding to a political movement that has resulted from Parkland, Sandy Hook, Las Vegas — the shorthand of tragedies that have caused this political movement to be a force that has met this moment of reckoning.”

Ironically, universal background checks would not have stopped any of the three mass shootings mentioned by Blumenthal. That is because in two of them–Parkland and Las Vegas–the attackers passed background checks for guns. In the third, Sandy Hook, the attacker stole his gun, so no amount of point-of-sale background checks would have mattered.

OK, so Blumenthal merely reconfirms he’s a stupid liar.
Nothing unusual for a demoncrap.

Democrat Chris Murphy Introduces Universal Background Check Bill

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) introduced universal background check legislation to expand retail point-of-sale background checks to private sales as well.

On February 14, 2021, Biden urged legislators to put forward universal background check legislation and on February 18, 2021, Breitbart News noted Murphy was expected to do it.

Continue reading “”

AKA the “Beat-O Robert O’Rourke Needs A Job” Act.

House Demoncraps Push Biden to Create ‘National Gun Violence’ Director

Several House Democrats on Friday called on President Joe Biden to appoint a “national gun violence” director, coming after the White House pushed Congress to try and pass more gun-control measures including one that would limit liability shields for gun manufacturers.

“Currently, federal efforts to combat gun violence, including research on the impacts and causes of gun violence and law enforcement efforts to combat it, are siloed across agencies,” a letter from Reps. Joe Neguse (D-Calo.) and Lucy McBath (D-Texas) read (pdf). “Appointing a National Director of Gun Violence to promote coordination of federal agencies will ensure these agencies are working collaboratively, including via the dissemination of critical data and coordination of shared goals, including the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms, and Tobacco, Department of Justice, Health and Human Services, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”

The director role, they said, should reduce firearms deaths and injuries by at least 50 percent for the next ten years.

However, the appetite for gun control among the American public might be diminishing. In the past year, gun sales exploded as about 8.5 million people purchased firearms for the first time, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation. The FBI also said it processed nearly 40 million gun background checks.

Jurgen Braue, the chief economist at Small Arms Analytics and Forecasting, told Business Insider that “wave upon wave of uncertainty and concern [are] driving firearm demand” in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic and riots last year.

Continue reading “”

Joe Biden Is Our Worst Nightmare

DINESH D’SOUZA—
Joe Biden just gave a talk, perhaps his most detailed and, one might have to say coherent, presentation of how his foreign policy is likely to go over the next four years. This was at the Munich virtual security conference, and I read the talk carefully because Biden focuses on the issue of democracy. Biden basically says that the United States is going to stand for democratic values around the world and stand against the autocracies that are anti-democratic.

Now, right away, the question becomes, are you really going to stand against the largest autocracy in the world, the one that governs over a billion people? That is far more tyrannical than any other we can think of in the world today, namely China? And to this, Biden gives a few “eh hems”… “Well, I’ve gotten a lot of money from those guys over the last several years, guys. Don’t expect me to be too hard on them.” So right away, the sincerity of this project is somewhat called into question. Biden has made very favorable noises toward China, which raised the question of whether even this rhetoric of democracy is going to be honestly applied.

Now, I think Biden intends to apply it in all kinds of places, but the places he wants to apply it to, he’s not likely to be successful, for the simple reason that the United States has very little of any leverage in those places. For example, there was recently a coup in Myanmar, an attempt to overthrow the government, anti-democratic actions and movements in that country. But let’s think about it, what is the United States’ security interest in Myanmar? Zero.

What is our trade leverage over Myanmar? Pretty much zero.

So, what is the point of Biden jumping up and down on his podium and going, “There needs to be democracy in Myanmar! There must be democracy in Myanmar!” Well, the people in Myanmar don’t care. Why? Because what is Biden have to do with them? Biden’s not going to invade Myanmar, even if some neoconservatives’ eyes are lighting up, “Oh, another war! What a great idea!”

When you don’t have leverage over a country, your rhetoric doesn’t really matter. Now, the Biden administration is playing footsie with a very autocratic regime right now, and that’s Iran. And very interestingly, there have been some news reports in the last couple of weeks that key people who are now in the Biden administration, including John Kerry, have maintained an ongoing relationship with Iran. Kerry, for example, has had repeated contacts and meetings with the Iranian foreign minister, this guy named Javad Zarif.

Now, why? Very interestingly, this is motivated not even directly with anything to do with Iran. It’s motivated by the idea of let’s work with our enemies, Iran, to undermine Trump. And what that means is that from John Kerry’s point of view, and the point of view of some of these Biden people, there is a near enemy, Trump, and there’s a far enemy, Iran. But the far enemy is far away and a distant threat, so let’s not worry about it right now. In fact, let’s work with the far enemy to politically undermine the near enemy at home. This is a real departure in American foreign policy.

Continue reading “”

Kamalamania: prepare for President Harris
Ask where Harris stands and the footwork begins

kamalamania

Kamala Harris was always going to be a most prominent Vice President. When Joe Biden’s campaign called a midmorning ‘lid’ — ending his working day before it really began — Harris would stay out on the trail, addressing car rallies in Pontiac, Michigan; going viral on social media by dancing in the Florida rain. She is significantly younger and more energetic — traits the Biden campaign capitalized on in the campaign. Her fanbase considers her to be a political celebrity: when she’s getting bad press, they rally the #KHive on social media — an online community ready and willing to defend the VP — a spin-off of the #BeyHive hashtag used by Beyoncé’s loyal fans worldwide.

The media is overwhelmed by Kamalamania. To them, she is a sensation: so much so the Los Angeles Times has created a new section, ‘Covering Kamala Harris’ — not a report on her moves in the White House, but a retrospective beat ‘dedicated to her historic rise.’ Three days before the inauguration, CBS News used their interview with Harris and Second Husband Doug Emhoff to ask tough questions about her ‘several closets full’ of ‘Chucks’, her Converse basketball shoes.

Meanwhile, the New York Times dedicates its resources to a hard-hitting interview with her stepchildren. We learn that Harris and Emhoff are ‘vomit-inducingly cute and coupley’. Harris has also snagged a coveted Vogue cover, though the photograph became the subject of controversy: some people thought the lighting of the image amounted to ‘whitewashing’. Harris’s team was reportedly distressed by the editor’s pick of a casual photo, so Vogue will be releasing another, more formal one.

It’s important that the press is doing its job. Not only is Harris the first woman (and woman of color) to fill the VP’s office: she also wields immense power. After the Democrats’ double win in Georgia’s January runoff elections, Republican and Democratic representation in the Senate is split right down the middle. If the Senate votes along partisan lines, Harris’s vote will make or break legislation for at least the next two years.

Harris is more than a spare spokesperson for the administration. She’s active in policy formation and delivery. The party’s keyholders only whisper it, but no one is banking on a second Joe Biden term — not even Biden himself. It’s hardly a secret that Harris has presidential ambitions. The question is, what is her vision for the country — and will Americans endorse it?

Ask where Harris stands on an issue and the footwork begins. You’ll have an array of answers to choose from. She opposes and supports fracking. She promotes single-payer healthcare but also advocates for private insurance. She goes tough and light on crime. She implied her new boss’s track record was soft on racism, though since selecting her as Vice President, these accusations have not resurfaced. Harris’s inconsistency cost her in the Democratic primaries: her short-lived candidacy polled in the single digits, despite her being the establishment’s preferred candidate.

Her campaign was as disappointing as it was bitter. As party operators sought to understand why their rising star had burned out so quickly, feuds between Harris’s sister and her campaign manager were aired in New York Times longreads. In truth, the Bernie Sanders lite option didn’t prove so popular with the Democratic base, especially when they had Bernie himself to vote for. But dropping out of the race before she was rejected was smart: Harris’s early departure turned the spotlight on Elizabeth Warren — who then got publicly rejected in the voting booths while Harris waited in the wings.

Continue reading “”

At What Point Do We Realize Bill Gates is Dangerously Insane?

“What this comes down to, though, is that Bill Gates has been so rich for so long that he’s spent the bulk of his adult life without anyone telling him he’s wrong”

This isn’t an overreaction to Gates’ latest foray into the news cycle. It’s an observation based on a long pattern of statements and behavior by the founder of Microsoft and one of the richest men who has ever lived which, were any of us normal people guilty of them, would result in our being institutionalized.

Bill Gates is crazy. And he’s dangerous, because he’s willing to put untold sums of money toward making the insane things he believes a reality – and all of those insane things hurt people.

The most recent idiocy? Impossible Burgers for all the white people.

Continue reading “”

The Government Censors Are Here.

Congressional Democrats are demanding to know what communications giants such as Comcast and AT&T are going to do about “the spread of dangerous misinformation.” How quickly this country is descending into an authoritarian regime where the government controls speech and the flow of information.

Ahead of a House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing Wednesday, California Democratic Reps. Anna G. Eshoo and Jerry McNerney wrote a letter to Comcast, AT&T, Spectrum, Dish, Verizon, Cox, Altice, Roku, Amazon, Apple, Google, and Hulu. According to the New York Times, which says it has reviewed the correspondence, the pair is not pleased that “the cable, satellite and over-the-top companies that disseminate these media outlets” – likely referring to Fox News, One America News Network, and Newsmax – “have done nothing in response to the misinformation aired by these outlets.”

The hearing was called to focus on “disinformation and extremism in the media.” In practice it’s a stage for peacock strutting, spin, and projection (a diversionary tactic Democrats are well-practiced in) with the ultimate goal of gaining full control of the flow of information.

The Democrats telegraphed their intentions when Eshoo and McNerney assumed the role of prosecutors to ask the companies what steps they took “prior to, on and following the Nov. 3, 2020, elections and the Jan. 6, 2021, attacks to monitor, respond to and reduce the spread of disinformation, including encouragement or incitement of violence by channels your company disseminates to millions of Americans?”

Eshoo and McNerney further exposed their repressive intentions when they asked the companies if they are “planning to continue carrying Fox News, OANN and Newsmax” on their platforms “both now and beyond the renewal date?” and “if so, why?”

Is this not chilling? The Democrats care nothing about misinformation and disinformation, nor freedom of speech. Their objective is to use the Jan. 6 Capitol trespass-and-vandalize ruckus, as well as legitimate questions about the 2020 election, to shut down the speech of their political opponents. They lust for raw political and social power, to rule, not govern under constitutional limits, forever. It is that simple.

Continue reading “”

Democrats Pressure TV Carriers to Stop Providing Newsmax, Fox News, OANN

Californi Democrat Reps. Anna Eshoo and Jerry McNerney sent a letter to major TV carriers, implying they help the “spread of misinformation” since they provide Newsmax, Fox News, and OANN.

“We are concerned about the role AT&T plays in disseminating misinformation to millions on U-verse, DirecTV, and AT&T TV subscribers, and we write to you today to request additional information about what actions AT&T is taking to address these issues,” they wrote in the letter to AT&T.

They sent the same letter to Roku, Comcast, Verizon, Amazon, Dish Network, Cox, Hulu, and others.

Eshoo and McNerney demanded the providers answer these questions by March 8:

1. What moral or ethical principles (including those related to journalistic integrity, violence, medical information, and public health) do you apply in deciding which channels to carry or when to take adverse actions against a channel?

2. Do you require, through contracts or otherwise, that the channels you carry abide by any content guidelines? If so, please provide a copy of the guidelines.

3. How many of your subscribers tuned in to Fox News, Newsmax, and OANN on U-verse, DirecTV, and AT&T TV for each of the four weeks preceding the November 3, 2020 elections and the January 6, 2021 attacks on the Capitol? Please specify the number of subscribers that tuned in to each channel.

4. What steps did you take prior to, on, and following the November 3, 2020 elections and the January 6, 2021 attacks to monitor, respond to, and reduce the spread of disinformation, including encouragement or incitement of violence by channels your company disseminates to millions of Americans? Please describe each step that you took and when it was taken.

5. Have you taken any adverse actions against a channel, including Fox News, Newsmax, and OANN, for using your platform to disseminate disinformation related directly or indirectly to the November 3, 2020 elections, the January 6, 2021 Capitol insurrection, or COVID-19 misinformation? If yes, please describe each action, when it was taken, and the parties involved.

6. Have you ever taken any actions against a channel for using your platform to disseminate any disinformation? If yes, please describe each action and when it was taken.

7. Are you planning to continue carrying Fox News, Newsmax, and OANN on U-verse, DirecTV, and AT&T TV both now and beyond any contract renewal date? If so, why?

Newsmax responded:

“The House Democrats’ attack on free speech and basic First Amendment rights should send chills down the spines of all Americans. Newsmax reported fairly and accurately on allegations and claims made by both sides during the recent election contest. We did not see that same balanced coverage when CNN and MSNBC pushed for years the Russian collusion hoax, airing numerous claims and interviews with Democrat leaders that turned out to be patently false.”

Yes, where were these Democrats when MSNBC and CNN did nothing but push the Russian collusion hoax for four years? How come they allowed failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to whine about President Donald Trump stealing the election from her?

Continue reading “”

No matter what they say, the ‘Nation of Islam’ isn’t.
“Malcolm X Shabazz” Fields was in it until he actually did convert to be a sunni moslem. After he went on the religion’s mandatory hajj pilgrimage to Mecca he figured out that the ‘Nation’ was a basically nothing more than a religious front for a bunch of racist grifters. And they murdered him for openly saying it.

White People Aren’t Human
How anti-racism adopted the Nation of Islam’s racist theology.

The Nation of Islam may be the largest racist religion in America. It is certainly the most influential with Louis Farrakhan’s original Million Man March drawing some 400,000 racists and allies of the hate group, including a young Barack Obama, who would later be photographed as a senator with the black supremacist leader at a Congressional Black Caucus event.

House Majority Whip Rep. James Clyburn, the third highest ranking Democrat, and the kingmaker who got Biden the Democrat nomination and the White House, had thanked Farrakhan for, “offering up a number of precepts that we ought to adhere to.”

Clyburn is one of a number of congressional Democrats who have Nation of Islam links.

Despite a history of violent terrorism by the Nation of Islam and its spinoff groups, its racist theology which believes that white people are subhuman devils who will be killed off, and its antisemitism and conspiracy theories, the hate group is also incredibly culturally influential.

Continue reading “”

Below The Radar – Gun Safety: Not Sorry Act

Representative Sheila Jackson Lee has not been a friend of law-abiding gun owners – or anyone who values the Second Amendment. If anything, she has been very active, and has introduced some of the most onerous proposals we have seen. But like Dianne Feinstein in the last Congress, she is not averse to more modest bills to unjustly punish those who seek to exercise their Second Amendment rights for horrific acts they did not commit.

In this case, her fallback is HR 125, the Gun Safety: Not Sorry Act. Rather than a sweeping licensing and registration scheme that is deeply intrusive, it instead imposes a one-week waiting period for any semiautomatic firearm, many standard magazines (like those for a Glock 17), suppressors, and “armor-piercing ammo.”

Now, we’ve discussed the waiting period scam before. Put your thoughts about the tactics used to limit the damage done by the Brady Act in 1993 aside. Suffice it to say, when the national instant background check system (NICS) is up and running, there is no justification for a waiting period. If a person is not prohibited, they should be able to take their purchase home with them the moment NICS reports it is a legal transaction.

Continue reading “”