Biden’s DOJ Asks SCOTUS to Gut the 2nd Amendment in 67-Page Brief

In a notable development, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) has submitted a significant brief (67+ pages, embedded below) to the United States Supreme Court in the case of United States of America vs. Zaki Rahimi. The focus of this case is the constitutionality of 18 USC 922 G8, which pertains to domestic violence restraining orders and their alignment with the Second Amendment.

Mark Smith, a constitutional attorney, suggests that the DOJ, representing the Biden Administration, is arguing for extensive interpretation measures. The contention seems to be that the Second Amendment allows Congress and other legislative bodies the power to disarm individuals [aka “infringe”] deemed not “Law Abiding” or “responsible.” The criteria for such judgments, as outlined in the brief, could range from minor infractions like jaywalking to more serious criminal activities.

The broad implications of such an interpretation might leave a vast number of citizens without the right to keep and bear arms.

Central to the case is Zaki Rahimi’s incident from December 2019, where he allegedly assaulted his girlfriend and threatened a witness with a firearm. The event resulted in a restraining order against Rahimi in February 2020 after he ostensibly admitted to the accusations.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals previously held that the federal law in question in Zaki Rahimi’s case was in violation of the Second Amendment. Still, the DOJ’s arguments seem to lean heavily on connecting firearms with domestic violence, potentially setting a precedent for justifying ‘red flag’ laws. Their position leans on the Heller case from 2008, which identified the rights of “law-abiding and responsible” individuals to bear arms.

The DOJ attempts to spin its argument based on three main talking points, all taken out of legal and historical context:

  1. Previous court precedents distinguished between law-abiding citizens and those deemed otherwise.
  2. Historical precedents allowed for disarmament during the founding era, citing laws that existed during the period.
  3. Arguing that the majority of American states having similar domestic restraining orders suggests a national consensus.

Critics rightfully argue that simply because many states have implemented certain rules doesn’t automatically affirm their constitutionality.

This shocking 67-page brief from the DOJ would be a significant shift in interpreting the Second Amendment. Whether this unconstitutional human rights grab prevails will be determined by the Supreme Court in its upcoming deliberations.

Biden DOJ Legal Brief to SCOTUS in U.S. v. Rahimi

BLUF
America needs only look to the recent past to see how the federal government handles a “public health crisis.”…  The tendency of the government to assume police-state authorities is enough to warn Americans when their elected officials want to invoke a “public health crisis.”

VICE PRESIDENT HARRIS PROPOSES PUBLIC HEALTH GUN CONTROL REMEDY

Vice President Kamala Harris believes gun control is a public health issue, giving Americans more reasons to be wary of gun control efforts.

The problem is, crime isn’t a disease, as much as gun control advocates want to treat it as such. Criminal activity is a behavior and science has yet to bring about a medical remedy that prevents an individual from committing crimes. That’s not stopping Vice President Harris from tossing out debunked data, purposefully confusing suicides with criminal firearm misuse and conveniently glossing over the Biden administration’s failures to address the real problem of crime.

“I — as Vice President of the United States, I am acutely aware of the fact that gun violence is the leading cause of death of the children of America,” Vice President Harris told Everytown for Gun Safety Action Fund’s Annual Gun Sense University Conference in Chicago last week. “It’s — it’s the number one cause of death — not some disease — well, although this is a form of a disease, to be sure.  Gun violence is the leading cause of death of our children.”

Continue reading “”

Someone with a verified disability could take New Joisey to the cleaners.

Deep Dive: New Jersey’s New ‘John Wick’ CCW Qualification Test

After the U.S. Supreme Court issued its historic Bruen Decision, which obliterated most state restrictions on the public carrying of arms and changed forever how lower courts should decide Second Amendment-related challenges to anti-gun regulations, many blue states seemingly tried to outdo each other with the number of unconstitutional post-Bruen tantrum laws they could pass. At this, New Jersey certainly lead the way, especially for its residents seeking to carry a defensive firearm.

Obtaining a New Jersey permit to carry was never easy. It is not easy now. Instead, it remains an expensive multi-step nightmare specifically designed to make the process as difficult as possible for the applicant.

Now, not only must New Jersians bend a knee, pay a fee and beg permission from the Crown to buy back their constitutional rights, they must also pass a difficult shooting test that was designed for police, not civilians, to prove they’re capable of exercising their constitutional rights to the government’s satisfaction.

Last month, the Superintendent of the New Jersey State Police in conjunction with the state’s Attorney General, issued new requirements titled “Use of Force Interim Training for Private Citizen Concealed Carry.” The document contains written material for in-person classroom training as well as the requirements for an arduous 50-round qualification course that every concealed-carry applicant must pass.

It is easy to get lost in the minutia of the qualification standards and lose sight of the big picture: New Jersey’s concealed-carry requirements are a massive infringement of the Second Amendment, which clearly violate Bruen. Does New Jersey test other constitutional rights? Do journalists there need to demonstrate competency before writing news stories? Do clergy in the Garden State need to pass state testing before delivering a sermon? Must voters prove proficiency before they’re allowed into a booth?

Clearly, New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin and his state police sycophants want to hold gun owners to a higher standard than those who exercising other constitutional rights.

Continue reading “”

Lucky the lady was slow on the trigger.

Oopsie! 15-year-old robber with pellet gun ran away when woman pulled out a real gun

CHICAGO — A 15-year-old boy who pointed a pellet gun at a woman during a robbery attempt in Uptown ran away when his would-be victim pulled out a real firearm, Chicago police say.

It happened around 12:31 p.m. Tuesday in the 5000 block of North Winthrop, not far from the Argyle Red Line station.

But the woman had another idea. She pulled out her own firearm, and the group ran away, police said.

Cops took the 15-year-old into custody a few minutes later and confiscated his pellet gun.

Charges are pending.

The ‘double homicide’ was two of the crims winning free trips straight to the morgue.

Double homicide began as vape shop robbery that ended in deadly shootout

SHREVEPORT, La. (KSLA) — A double homicide at a Shreveport vape shop began as a robbery that ended in a shootout between at least one customer and the robbery suspects, police say.

Two of the robbery suspects — 19-year-old Anthony Lee and 18-year-old Martavious Henderson — were struck by gunfire and ultimately succumbed to their injuries.

Now detectives are sharing surveillance camera videos and photographs in hopes someone can help them identify the third robbery suspect as well as the two customers who were in the store at the time of the robbery.

Police say these surveillance camera images show two customers who engaged three robbers in a...
Police say these surveillance camera images show two customers who engaged three robbers in a shootout Aug. 12, 2023, outside a Shreveport vape shop, killing two of the suspects. Now detectives are asking for help identifying the customers.(Source: Shreveport Police Department)

Lee, Henderson and another male were armed when they entered the business in the 1900 block of Centenary Boulevard about 4:55 p.m. Saturday (Aug. 12). At one point during the holdup, two of the three robbers jumped the counter and took a handgun and other items from the store clerk.

During the vape shop robbery Aug. 12, 2023, two customers escaped the business and went to...
During the vape shop robbery Aug. 12, 2023, two customers escaped the business and went to their vehicle, described as a blue Chevrolet 1500 extended cab pickup. There, they armed themselves then engaged the robbery suspects as the three left the business, killing two of the suspects, police say.(Source: Shreveport Police Department)

While this was going on, the two customers escaped the business and went to their vehicle, described as a blue Chevrolet 1500 extended cab pickup. There, they armed themselves then engaged the robbery suspects as the three left the business.

The third robbery suspect escaped on foot and has not been identified. He is described as a Black male who stands about 5′6″ to 5′8″ tall and who has a slender build. He was wearing gray shorts and a black hoodie.

People in Shreveport’s Highland neighborhood are shaken up by the double homicide Saturday evening on Centenary Boulevard near Olive Street.

“I’m going to tell you, it was scary. It was very scary,” one resident said.

Police said one of the slain men was found outside the shop while the other was inside.

“I’m going to be honest with you, I was taking my son to work. I was at the stop sign when it happened. When everything happened, yeah. We was in the car.”

He said he didn’t know if the incident occurred inside the store.

“It had to been because one in and one out. It had to been because the young man that was on the other side, it looked like he was running. But as he got closer to the end of the building, he got slower and slower. So I knew then he got shot. We heard gunshots and everything; but who did it, I don’t, I can’t tell you.”

The double homicide began as a vape shop robbery that ended in deadly shootout.
Police early on described both Lee and Henderson as suspects.

Neighbors said people in the community are upset.

“Maybe because they were children; I mean, that’s the only way I can see it. But when you doing wrong. You can’t say how it’s going to come back on you. And it just so happened the day they did whatever they did, it came back on them the same day.”

Even before police said so, neighbors also believed it could have been a robbery gone wrong.

Whoever those lil kids were, they actually went up in there and tried to rob them. And you know people going to protect their goods. You know so, that’s what I feel. I don’t know if that happened, but that’s what it seemed like.”

Biden Administration Argues Texas and Florida Anti-Censorship Laws Are a First Amendment Violation

Presented as an effort to safeguard speech rights, the Biden administration has called on the Supreme Court to dismantle controversial segments of the anti-censorship social media laws ratified in Florida and Texas.

We obtained a copy of the filing for you here.

(President Biden is also using the argument that banning his administration from asking platforms to remove speech is a First Amendment violation.)

The laws in question restrict the autonomy of leading social media platforms by preventing them from censoring citizens speech and discriminating on the basis of political viewpoint.

Both Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and Texas Governor Greg Abbott staunchly support these laws as a means of protecting voices from being suppressed. Governor DeSantis, at the law signing in May 2021, criticized Big Tech’s bias for Silicon Valley ideology and emphasized the need for accountability.

The Texas law, featuring a provision prohibiting discrimination based on viewpoints, incorporates several exceptions, permitting platforms to ban content promoting violence, criminal behavior, child exploitation, and harassment of sexual-abuse survivors and more. The law presses social media platforms to adopt user complaint procedures, disclose content and data management practices, and publish a comprehensive biannual transparency report.

The legislation only applies to platforms attracting over 50 million monthly users.

The Florida law has a similar scope and, in addition, mandates a detailed justification for each content moderation. The legislation also forbids the banning of political contenders or “journalistic enterprises.”

US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar perceives this as an encroachment on First Amendment rights. She contended in a recent court filing that such laws infringe the liberty of tech giants in selecting, editing, and arranging user-generated content. Essentially, she claimed these actions are all protected under the First Amendment.

Endorsing two industry trade groups that have formally contested the laws, she implored the Supreme Court to scrutinize both measures.

Federal appeals courts, however, are divided over the issue. The 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta has primarily blocked Florida’s legislation, deeming it potentially unconstitutional. Conversely, the New Orleans-based 5th Circuit backed the Texas law but held it back to permit an appeal to reach the Supreme Court.

Certainly, both states, as well as the trade groups, are petitioning the Supreme Court to adjudicate on a range of issues concerning the two cases. An announcement of the court’s decision is expected as early as September.

While Prelogar largely aligns with the social media companies, she refrained from endorsing their protest against the “general-disclosure provisions” that require the publishing of content-management policies and production of transparency reports. These issues, she argued, are not the main subject of the lawsuits and high court review would be premature.

Biden Promises Maui Fire Survivors $700 Per Household — Less Than What is Spent on Ukraine

President Joe Biden announced Monday that survivors of the Maui fires would receive “a one-time $700 payment per household,” after he faced criticism for telling a reporter he had “no comment” on the rising death toll.

His account posted: “We’re laser-focused on getting aid to survivors, including Critical Needs Assistance: a one-time $700 payment per household offering relief during an unimaginably difficult time.”

The one-time payment of $700 per household is less than the estimated cost to each American household for the Ukraine War, according to a budget expert at the Heritage Foundation.

Richard Stern, director of The Heritage Foundation’s Grover M. Hermann Center for the Federal Budget, calculated that the congressionally-approved aid to Ukraine of $113 billion amounts to roughly $900 per American household.

“The formal aid packages alone amount to a staggering $113 billion — roughly $900 per American household and almost 12 times the spending cuts promised by House leadership in the annual spending bills,” Stern said in an email to The Daily Signal, Heritage’s news outlet.

Furthermore, he said the $113 billion would cost more than $300 in interest costs per household over the decade.

On Thursday, as the Maui fires continued burning, Biden asked Congress for an additional $20 billion more in aid for Ukraine.

“As the war in Ukraine becomes a prolonged conflict, Americans are rightly growing skeptical of sending more taxpayer dollars and equipment from our depleted armory,” Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts told The Daily Signal.

“Washington has failed to address their concerns, explain our nation’s strategy in the war, or enact basic oversight for our aid,” Roberts said. “If Congress can’t fix those fundamental issues, they have no business sending more money into the fog of war.”

August 16

1777 – U.S. forces led by General John Stark rout British and Brunswick troops under Friedrich Baum at Bennington near Walloomsac, New York.

1780 – British forces under the command of General Cornwallis rout U.S. troops led by General Horatio Gates near Camden, South Carolina

1792 – During the French Revolution, a month after the Storming of the Bastille, Maximilien de Robespierre presents the petition of the Commune of Paris to the Legislative Assembly, demanding the formation of a revolutionary tribunal.

1793 –During the French Revolution, a levée en masse –a general conscription for military service – is decreed by the National Convention.

1812 – During the War of 1812, General William Hull surrenders Fort Detroit to the British Army without a fight.

1841 – President Tyler vetoes a bill which called for the reestablishment of the Second Bank of the United States. Whig Party members riot outside the White House in protest.

1858 – President Buchanan inaugurates the new transatlantic telegraph cable by exchanging greetings with Queen Victoria

1888 – Thomas Edward Lawrence more well known as ‘Lawrence of Arabia’ is born in Snowdon Lodge,  Tremadog, Wales.

1896 – ‘Skookum’ Jim Mason, George Carmack and Dawson Charlie discover gold in a tributary of the Klondike River in Canada

1916 – The Migratory Bird Treaty between Canada and the United States is signed.

1927 – The Dole Air Race begins from Oakland, California, to Honolulu, Hawaii, during which 2 of the 8 starting planes crash on takeoff, 2 are forced to return for repairs, and 2 go missing over the Pacific ocean.

1945 – “The Father of the Kamikazi”, Admiral Takijirō Ōnishi commits seppuku without the assistance of a Kaishakunin – an assistant that immediately cuts off the head of the suicide – taking 15 hours to die.

1954 – The first issue of Sports Illustrated is published.

1959 – Fleet Admiral William Halsey, Jr. USN dies while on holiday on Fishers Island, New York.

1960 – Joseph Kittinger parachutes from a balloon over New Mexico at 102,800 feet. The records stands until 2012.

1966 – The House Un-American Activities Committee begins investigations of Americans who have aided the Viet Cong.

1977 – Elvis Presley dies at age 42 in his Graceland mansion, in Memphis.

1987 – Northwest Airlines Flight 255, a McDonnell Douglas MD-82, crashes after takeoff in Detroit, Michigan, killing 154 of the 155 passengers and crew on board, plus 2 people on the ground.

2008 – The Trump International Hotel and Tower in Chicago is topped off at 1,389 feet, at the time becoming the world’s highest residence above ground level.

2010 – AIRES Flight 8250, a Boeing 737, crashes short of the runway on landing at Gustavo Rojas Pinilla International Airport in San Andrés, San Andrés y Providencia, Colombia, killing 2 of the 131 passengers and crew aboard.

2020 – Lightning strikes ignite the ‘August Complex’ fire in California, eventually burning over one million acres of land.

BLUF
Well, I generally believe that when government officials don’t want us to know something, it’s because they fear we would think or act in ways they wouldn’t like if we knew it.

It’s democracy in the dark without Nashville shooter manifesto’s release.

“Democracy Dies in Darkness” is the (sometimes ironic) slogan of The Washington Post.

But it’s also a fair description of what’s happening in Tennessee, as the state Legislature is being called to a special session even as local and federal officials withhold information that might be critical to its decision-making.

Gov. Bill Lee ordered the special session to begin Aug. 21 in response to a March 27 mass shooting in which three adults and three children at the Covenant School, a Christian school in Nashville’s Green Hills neighborhood, were killed.

The Nashville Tennessean article refers only to “a shooter.”

The shooter was a female-to-male transgender shooter named Audrey Hale, aged 28, who left a manifesto before being killed by police.

Hale had chosen to identify as a man, using the pronouns he/him.

The manifesto included detailed plans put together over months to shoot up the school, according to reports just after the shooting from police who had seen it.

Unfortunately, they’re the only ones who have seen it.

Local and federal authorities with access to the manifesto have refused to make its contents public.

Though Hale sent an Instagram message to a friend just before the shooting, saying, “One day this will make more sense. I’ve left more than enough evidence behind,” we haven’t seen that evidence.

Vivek Ramaswamy, running third in the GOP presidential primary, recently called for the manifesto’s release. He characterizes the government position as “stonewalled silence.”

Well, I generally believe that when government officials don’t want us to know something, it’s because they fear we would think or act in ways they wouldn’t like if we knew it.

They seldom keep things secret that would make them look good.

Instead it’s usually something that would reflect badly on them or someone they’re protecting.

What could that be in this case? I don’t know, and they seem determined to keep it that way.

But beyond that, the Legislature is in a curious position.

Lawmakers are being asked to debate and vote on legislative proposals being made only because of the March shooting, even as some of the most important facts are kept secret.

Gov. Lee’s office says he’s called for the release of the manifesto, and it’s the Metro Nashville Police and the FBI keeping the lid on.

Continue reading “”

If Saying An Election Is Stolen Is A Crime, Why Isn’t Stacey Abrams In Prison?

The fourth and latest round of indictments against former President Donald Trump suggests that constitutionally protected actions such as questioning election results, asking for phone numbers, and encouraging voters to watch TV are now indictment-worthy acts of conspiracy. If claiming an election is stolen is truly a crime, as prosecutors and grand jurors in Trump’s Georgia case suggested on Monday, failed gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams should be behind bars.

Abrams lost the race for governor in Georgia in 2018 to then-Secretary of State Brian Kemp by 1.4 percentage points. Due to the small margin of victory, Abrams refused to formally concede her loss because she believed the election was “tainted” which led to the “disinvestment and disenfranchisement of thousands of voters.”

In her “non-concession speech,” the Democrat admitted that Kemp “will be certified as the victor in the 2018 gubernatorial election” but stopped short of officially agreeing that she lost.

“To be clear, this is not a speech of concession. Concession means to acknowledge an action is right, true, or proper. As a woman of conscience and faith, I cannot concede,” Abrams said.

The activist threatened lawsuits but never provided evidence for her claims that black voters’ votes were being suppressed at the polls. Instead of facing punishment for her lies, Abrams was elevated by her party and the corporate media as the face of their attempt to permanently manipulate elections ahead of Trump’s second and third runs. She was so encouraged by this attention that she ran and lost against Kemp again in 2022.

Abrams’ sore loser behavior resonated with the Democrat Party, which still clings to its own stolen-election theories used to undermine Trump’s victory in 2016. She quickly entered the pool of possible options for President Joe Biden’s running mate. Her whining even scored her political points with other failed candidates such as Hillary Clinton, who complained that “if [Abrams] had a fair election, she already would have won.”

Years after her initial loss, Abrams was still pretending that Georgia elections were rigged against her. In 2021, she made a national show of calling for boycotts of Georgia when Republicans in her state passed election integrity laws. To this day, she regularly appears on TV to discuss how to advance Democrats’ undemocratic version of “democracy” during elections.

Disclosure filings from her second failed campaign in the Peach State suggest that, between 2018 and 2022, Abrams’ election fraud book tour, speech circuit, and activism made her into a multimillionaire.

In just four years, Abrams went from arguing that her $400,000 in credit card debt, student loans, back taxes, car loans, and real estate debt shouldn’t disqualify her from running to confessing her $3.17 million worth just months before voters would reject her again in the 2022 election.

For objecting to how the 2018 gubernatorial election in Georgia ended, Abrams was handed fame and fortune. For objecting to how the 2020 presidential election in Georgia was handled, Trump was slapped with 13 felony charges and the possibility of jail time.

A majority of Americans already believe the U.S. has a two-tiered system of justice. The fact that Trump, who raised legitimate questions about a poorly conducted election in Georgia, is facing prison instead of Abrams, who never gave evidence for her outrageous election claims, further proves it.

 

So a guy pushing the Trump Russian collusion story was actually colluding with the Russians. You literally can’t make this up.

Former F.B.I. Spy Hunter Pleads Guilty to Aiding Russian Oligarch

The plea by the former agent, Charles F. McGonigal, represented a remarkable turn for a man who once occupied one of the most sensitive and trusted positions in the American intelligence community, placing him among the highest-ranking F.B.I. officials ever to be convicted of a crime.

Appearing before Judge Jennifer H. Rearden of Federal District Court on Tuesday, an emotional Mr. McGonigal stood up and said that he had broken the law after his retirement in 2018 from the bureau, where he had been an expert in Russian counterintelligence, by aiding an effort by Oleg V. Deripaska, a Russian billionaire under U.S. sanctions, to investigate a rival.

“I have understood what my actions have resulted in, and I’m deeply remorseful,” Mr. McGonigal said, his voice breaking. “My actions were never intended to hurt the United States, the F.B.I. and my family and friends.”

The conspiracy charge he pleaded guilty to was newly filed by prosecutors on Tuesday, replacing the original indictment handed up by a grand jury in January that had included more serious charges of violating U.S. sanctions and laundering money. Under the plea deal, the maximum prison term Mr. McGonigal could serve is five years, instead of the sentence of up to 20 years he might otherwise have faced.

In court, Mr. McGonigal, 55, told the judge that he had known he could not legally perform services for Mr. Deripaska, who was placed on a U.S. sanctions list in 2018. He said he had understood that his work in the second half of 2021 to collect “open source” negative information on Vladimir Potanin, an oligarch who was a business competitor of Mr. Deripaska, was likely to be used in an effort to get Mr. Potanin placed on the sanctions list as well.

He admitted knowingly arranging for payments to be routed from a Russian bank through a company in Cyprus, and then to a corporation in New Jersey, to conceal that the source of the money was Mr. Deripaska.

Judge Rearden scheduled Mr. McGonigal’s sentencing for Dec. 4.

In the initial charging document, prosecutors from the U.S. attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York said that Mr. McGonigal and an associate had received payments totaling more than $200,000 for their work investigating Mr. Potanin under a contract with an aide to Mr. Deripaska. They also hired subcontractors for the investigation, the indictment said.

But on Tuesday, Mr. McGonigal told the judge that in the end he had netted only $17,500, and he agreed to forfeit that amount.

The plea brings the prosecution of Mr. McGonigal in New York to a relatively speedy conclusion after fewer than seven months. He had been arrested by F.B.I. agents in January at John F. Kennedy Airport upon his return from an overseas business trip.

Mr. McGonigal still faces a second indictment brought by federal prosecutors in Washington on charges that accuse him of concealing his acceptance of $225,000 from a businessman and of hiding dealings in Eastern Europe while working for the bureau. Mr. McGonigal has pleaded not guilty to those charges but is in talks to resolve them; his lawyer, Seth D. DuCharme, told the judge overseeing the Washington case that he expected to provide an update on the talks after Labor Day.

Although Mr. McGonigal was privy to highly classified information, a three-year investigation found no evidence that he had passed secrets to foreign adversaries, according to people with knowledge of the case who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the ongoing matter. The F.B.I. concluded that Mr. McGonigal’s misconduct was limited to corruption, the people said.

Mr. Deripaska, who has been called “Putin’s oligarch” because of his close relationship with the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin, is among the best known of the businessmen who became rich as Russian state resources were doled out to friends of the Kremlin after the fall of the Soviet Union. Mr. Deripaska and others were also accused last year by federal prosecutors in New York of violating U.S. sanctions through real-estate deals and other actions, including trying to arrange for the oligarch’s girlfriend to give birth to their two children in the United States. Mr. Deripaska, a Russian citizen, is unlikely to be extradited to face the charges in the near future.

The prosecutors in Mr. McGonigal’s New York case have said that before the U.S. government expanded sanctions in 2018, following Russia’s interference in the 2016 American presidential election, Mr. McGonigal had reviewed a preliminary sanctions list with Mr. Deripaska’s name on it. Around the same time, they suggested, Mr. McGonigal was seeking a connection with Mr. Deripaska by arranging a New York Police Department internship for the daughter of one of the oligarch’s aides. (A senior police official has said it was actually a “V.I.P.-type tour.”)

After Mr. McGonigal retired, he and his co-defendant in the New York case, a court interpreter and former Russian diplomat named Sergey Shestakov, referred the same Deripaska aide to a law firm for help getting sanctions removed, according to the original charges in New York.

While negotiating the law firm agreement, Mr. McGonigal met with Mr. Deripaska in Vienna and London, referring to him in electronic communications as “the Vienna client,” prosecutors have said. Mr. Deripaska paid the law firm $175,000 a month; the firm passed $25,000 on to Mr. McGonigal as a consultant and investigator, the prosecutors said.

Mr. Shestakov has pleaded not guilty to violating U.S. sanctions, money laundering, conspiracy and making false statements to the F.B.I. His lawyer, Rita M. Glavin, did not respond to a request for comment.

The deal to investigate Mr. Potanin was made with an aide to Mr. Deripaska in the spring of 2021, prosecutors said.

In November of that year, Mr. McGonigal and Mr. Shestakov were trying to obtain “dark web” files, purportedly about $500 million in hidden assets held by Mr. Potanin, in exchange for a payment of up to $3 million, Rebecca Talia Dell, an assistant U.S. attorney, said in court Tuesday. Before that transaction could be completed, F.B.I. agents seized Mr. McGonigal and Mr. Shestakov’s electronic devices, bringing their work for Mr. Deripaska to an end, prosecutors have said.

Don’t Throw Away Those Silica Gel Packets! Here Are 14 Smart Ways to Reuse Them.

Those tiny little packs of dessicant that come in your new pack of shoes or your vitamins have many uses around your home. Anywhere that moisture is a problem, silica gel packets can help alleviate the issue. Keep them stored in an airtight container away from pets and children (they are a choking hazard) and whip them out in the following scenarios.

Around the Kitchen
  • Keep vitamins from moisture damage. (It’s good to just keep those silica packs that come in the vitamin containers; save them once the vitamins are finished.)
  • Keep dry food and pet food fresh and crispy with a silica gel pack taped to the lid of your storage container.
  • Put a few silica gel packs in the bottom of your clothes hamper to absorb moisture from clothes or damp towels.
  • A pack of silica gel will help dry out wet shoes or boots.

Around the House

  • Reduce condensation on windows by setting a silica gel pack on the window sill. (Remember to keep them away from children and pets)
  • Help dry out a non-water-resistant cell phone by putting it in a sealed bag with several silica gel packs.
  • Protect important documents and photos from moisture with a silica gel pack inside the box or file cabinet.
  • Boxes of paper memories — like old papers, photos or notebooks — in storage? Silica gel packs stored in the same container will adsorb moisture.
  • Store silica gel packs with your tools to help prevent rust damage.
  • Store some in your medicine cabinet if you keep medication in there. The silica gel packs will help keep humidity down.
  • Keep razors from moisture damage by storing them in a sealed container with a silica gel pack.
  • Placing a few silica gel packs between your dashboard and windshield in the car will help keep fogging to a minimum.

When You Travel

  • Keep luggage dry while it’s in storage by tossing a silica gel pack in each suitcase.
  • Toss a few silica gel packs in a Ziploc bag if you can’t dry your bathing suit before packing it.

Bonus Tip: To “reactivate” silica gel packs that are saturated with moisture, place them on a baking sheet in a 200 degree oven away from the heating element for two hours.

Conservation Orgs File Intent to Sue Education Dept. Over Archery & Hunter Education Policies

On Friday, August 11, 2023, Safari Club International, along with the Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation, sent a notice of intent to sue the Department of Education over the Department’s misinterpretation of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA), which would prohibit the use of federal funds for shooting sports, hunter education, and outdoor education programs in schools.

Co-sponsors and authors of the BSCA have repeatedly confirmed that it was not intended to restrict funding for these programs. Rather, these programs are vital to helping students find safe and healthy outlets—and to develop a love of the outdoors.

SCI and SAF’s notice of intent to sue warns the Department that its interpretation of the BSCA is arbitrary and capricious, in violation of federal law. It requests a response within ten days, or the organizations will have no choice but to file suit. These shooting sports and hunter education programs are far too important to allow this funding uncertainty to continue.

“SCI is disheartened by the Administration’s lack of urgency in correcting their misinterpretation of the BSCA,” said Ben Cassidy, SCI EVP of International Government and Public Affairs. “Congress has repeatedly confirmed that this was not the BSCA’s intent. The Department mustunderstand there are consequences for ignoring the crucial role these programs play in helping kids learn new skills, enjoy the outdoors, and understand the importance of conservation.”

“SCI Foundation has been dedicated to providing shooting sports and outdoor education programs since 1976,” said SCI and SCI Foundation CEO W. Laird Hamberlin. “Nearly 7,000 educators have been trained in conservation/outdoor education and shooting sports, reaching over 1 million children nationwide. In addition, the Foundation, as well as SCI chapters, have invested millions of dollars in funding archery, hunter education, and outdoor education in schools. The Department’s incorrect interpretation of this the BSCA has put all those programs in jeopardy.”

In addition to a suit, SCI is working with members of Congress to amend the law, to ensure misinterpretations like this cannot happen again. SCI’s Hunter Advocacy Action Center alert provides a direct link to contact Members of Congress, to demand urgent change.

More Background:

Chicago Group Asks Gang Members Not to Shoot People Between 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m.

Native Sons, a group from Chicago’s Rogers Park neighborhood, is asking that gang members pledge to cease fire from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. daily so no one lives in fear of being shot while going about their day-to-day activities.

The push for the cease-fire is being called “The People’s Ordinance,” CWBChicago reported.

Native Sons’ co-founder, Tatiana Atkins, said:

Under this ordinance, we ask that people stop associating with and glorifying ‘shooters,’ stop glorifying ‘switches,’ and stop wearing those ski masks everywhere which perpetuates you as some ‘opp.’ When those who live a certain lifestyle try to hang with ‘regular’ class citizens, they put everyone at risk.…

At the end of the day, five-year-olds are being killed by gun violence, 14-year-olds are being killed by gun violence, 78-year-olds are being killed by gun violence, pregnant women are being killed by gun violence, young boys with bright futures are being killed by gun violence, fathers are being killed by gun violence, and this shouldn’t be happening.

Atkins hopes that gang members will adopt the cease-fire and that parents will react by making sure they have their children home and inside as 9:00 p.m. approaches.

Breitbart News reported at least 23 people were shot over the weekend in Chicago, three of them fatally.

Over 370 people have been killed in Chicago thus far in 2023.

Illinois’ latest gun law is an affront to more than just the Second Amendment

Illinois’ new “Firearms Industry Responsibility Act” isn’t just an attack on our right to keep and bear arms. It’s an assault on our freedom of speech as well. On today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co Mark Oliva of the National Shooting Sports Foundation sits down with me to discuss the group’s newly-filed lawsuit challenging HB 218, as well as the impending ATF rule on private sales and transfers of firearms.

The NSSF’s lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for Southern Illinois, challenges the validity of Illinois’ new gun control law on multiple counts, starting with the argument that HB 218 is preempted by the Protection of Lawful Commerce Act. But the NSSF is also raising a First Amendment challenge, asserting that the law discriminates against speech based on its content or viewpoint and arguing that such discrimination should be subject to strict scrutiny by the courts.

The topics and views that Illinois has singled out in HB 218 do not fall into any “well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech” unprotected by the First Amendment. To be sure, the First Amendment does not preclude imposing liability for false, deceptive, or otherwise “misleading” commercial speech.

But HB 218 does not even purport to target only speech that is false or misleading. It authorizes the imposition of liability for speech about a product—a product expressly protected by the Constitution, no less— even when that speech is truthful and not misleading. Indeed, the words “false,” “misleading,” and “deceptive” appear nowhere in the relevant provisions.

A manufacturer that places online advertisements containing entirely accurate specifications of its products and subsequently sells that product to a distributor, could be liable under HB 218, even if that product is fully lawful in every state in which it is sold, if a Illinois court later deems the product to have been marketed (1) in a way that “contribute[d] to a condition in Illinois that endangers the safety or health of the public,” or (2) encouraged non-servicemembers to use it for “a military-related purpose”.

“They’re trying to squelch the First Amendment rights of firearm manufacturers and retailers,” Oliva explained to me. “If they can eliminate the discussion of safe and responsible firearm ownership to the next generation, they can diminish the desire for ownership and people exercising their Second Amendment rights. So they’re trying to play the long game of eliminating the Second Amendment by eliminating and curtailing the First Amendment. And it’s important to remember that commercial speech is protected by the First Amendment. It is a right for these companies to be able to advertise a constitutionally-protected product.”

In its suit, the NSSF says that the speech code established by HB 218 is so vague that it’s “virtually impossible for regulated parties to tell what speech is and is not permitted, leaving them with no realistic choice but to err on the side of refraining from exercising their First Amendment rights.”

By its terms, HB 218 renders unlawful any marketing of a firearm-related product that “create[s], maintain[s], or contribute[s] to a condition in Illinois that endangers the safety or health of the public” if it is deemed “unreasonable under all circumstances.” This restriction “will provoke uncertainty among speakers,” as such indeterminable and subjective abstractions do not articulate at all—let alone articulate with “narrow specificity”—what kind(s) of speech may later be deemed to have unreasonably contributed to a “condition … that endangers the safety or health of the public.”

Those restrictions are problematic enough, but HB 218 further prohibits marketing “in a manner that reasonably appears to support, recommend, or encourage individuals” who are not in the military “to use a firearm-related product for a military-related purpose.” The problem with this broad prohibition is that Illinois provides no guidance on what qualifies as a “military-related” purpose, leaving industry members to guess whether their marketing materials will later be deemed unlawful.

HB 218 goes on, moreover, to prohibit an industry member from “advertis[ing], market[ing], promot[ing], design[ing], or sell[ing] any firearm related product in a manner that reasonably appears to support, recommend, or encourage persons under 18 years of age to unlawfully purchase or possess or use a firearm-related product.”

A state of course may prohibit speech directly concerning unlawful conduct. But, unless this provision covers nothing more than advertisements that tell minors to buy guns (despite being minors), it is not at all clear what it means. Does any advertisement that shows minors lawfully using firearms (e.g., with a parent while hunting, or at a Boy Scouts shooting event) fall on the wrong side of the line?

What about marketing in a way targeted toward young men, who share many characteristics with those just a few years younger—but are lawfully able to purchase firearms (and serve in the armed forces)? The questions vastly outnumber the answers. And while no statute must preempt all potential complications, when it comes to a prohibition on speech, the lack of clarity is destined to create a massive chilling problem.

If HB 218 is so narrow that it only prohibits advertisements that entice juveniles into breaking the law, then this particular provision is never going to come into play in practice. If, on the other hand, the bill is written broadly enough to target manufacturers like Wee1 Tactical and its JR-15 rimfire rifle, then it’s going to make it virtually impossible to not only market but produce firearms designed for youth shooting. As Oliva says, that’s nothing more than abridging the First Amendment rights of gun makers to curb the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, and a sign of the contempt that Illinois lawmakers have for all of our individual rights.

Check out the entire conversation with Mark Oliva in the video window below, including his initial thoughts on the yet-to-be-introduced ATF rule that seeks to impose a near-universal background check system on gun sales and the dangers it poses to lawful gun owners across the country. Be sure to tune in tomorrow as well, when we’ll be talking with Jim Wallace of the Gun Owners Action League about how gun owners are pushing back on the “Lawful Citizens Imprisonment Act” and what’s happening behind the scenes at the statehouse in Boston.