Category: Deceit O’ The Day

There’s Proof Biden’s Border Crisis Was Intentional… And It’s Being Covered Up.

As soon as it became clear that Joe Biden was going to be inaugurated as president, illegal immigrants started flooding our nation’s southern border.

During Donald Trump’s time in office, the number of illegal border crossings dropped dramatically—an undeniable result of Trump’s zero-tolerance policy for illegal immigrants. The border wall also worked well in stopping people from crossing illegally. But when Biden became president, things changed. On his first day in office, he signed an executive order halting border wall construction. As anyone could have predicted, illegal immigration skyrocketed after Biden took office. Within months of Biden taking office, the number of illegal border crossings shot up to six times more than what the Obama administration deemed to be crisis level, and it’s only gotten worse.

The White House has repeatedly sought to blame Republicans for the crisis that they don’t official recognize as a crisis, but confidential documents obtained by the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) have pulled the curtain back on the border crisis, revealing that the historic influx of illegal immigrants is entirely by design.

According to a lawsuit by IRLI against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the agency ceased the 287(g) program under Joe Biden. The 287(g) program enables the removal of illegal migrants involved in serious criminal activities such as child rape, attempted murder, assault, carjacking, and other criminal offenses. The program gives local law enforcement the ability to work with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to capture illegal immigrants who have committed crimes and bring them to federal custody for arrest and deportation.

Sure sounds like a sound program, doesn’t it? To most people, yes. But to the Biden administration, not so much. The program was canceled in January 2021, soon after Joe Biden took office. The agency never provided any explanation for the decision.

“It is ironic that the Biden administration insists it is ‘the most transparent in history’ when, in reality, it has repeatedly attempted to change immigration laws without congressional authorization and then tried to hide the evidence of its misdeeds from the American public,” IRLI Director of Investigations Matt O’Brien explained.

Our sister site Townhall has more:

Flash forward to September 2023, the IRLI filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to ICE, requesting to obtain internal documents regarding the agency’s suspension of the 287(g) program. However, the government did not comply with a rule that they must reply within 20 days. ICE authorities have yet to respond.[…]

Twenty-three agreements between local law enforcement and ICE were set to go into effect before Biden suspended the program. However, they were canceled after the president took office. Currently, ICE has 287(g) relationships with nearly 140 law enforcement organizations nationwide.

“Increased cooperation between ICE and local law enforcement is critical and makes our communities safer, so of course, this administration wants to limit that effort,” IRLI Executive Director Dale Wilcox said in a statement. “There is no benefit to this country or its legal residents by keeping criminal aliens in the country, yet it appears to be a priority of this White House. The American people own those emails, yet we are not allowed to see them because it might embarrass this administration and expose their extremist agenda.”

The Secretary of Defense – and ONLY him, not some underling – by law is in the direct chain of command of the U.S. military from POTUS to the Combatant Commanders. This was blatant dereliction of duty what with a senile delusional dotard sitting in the oval office.

BLUF
Austin’s Department of Defense is a barking shambles. It is incompetent in action and not trustworthy. It not only lies to the people and to Congress, but to the White House and itself…okay, maybe that isn’t all that unusual. As the old saying goes, a fish rots from the head down. If Biden lets this slide by, he’s a much bigger imbecile than even I had considered possible.

SecDef Austin Did Not Tell Biden’s National Security Adviser He Was in the ICU

The Department of Defense didn’t notify the White House that Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin was in the Walter Reed National Medical Center intensive care unit until Thursday. That’s it.

I’ve posted twice on the growing mystery of why the Defense Department failed to notify Congress that Secretary Austin was in the hospital. In the first episode, it was revealed in a Pentagon statement on Friday that Austin had been in the hospital since New Year’s Day due to “complications” from an “elective medical procedure.” This came as a shock to the Pentagon Press Corps and Congress.

BACKGROUND: Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin Has Been Hospitalized for a Week and Just Told Congress Today

The second act materialized earlier on Saturday with the report that Austin hadn’t just been in the hospital; he’d been in the intensive care unit from Monday to Friday evening. His deputy, Kathleen Hicks, was on vacation in Puerto Rico at the time. While he was incapacitated and she was sunning herself, the US ordered a drone strike on the leader of an Iranian militia; the US Navy was trying to make the Red Sea safe for commercial traffic without upsetting the Iranians or Houthis, a war raged between Israel and Hamas, and North Korea lobbed a couple of hundred artillery rounds into South Korean waters.

I ended that update with this note.

While we are focused on Congressional notification, no one has yet asked if the White House was told.

Now we have the answer to that question.

The Pentagon did not inform senior officials in the White House’s National Security Council of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s hospitalization until Thursday — three full days after he arrived at Walter Reed Medical Center, two U.S. officials said.

The news came as a shock to top staff, including national security adviser Jake Sullivan, as they were unaware the DOD chief was dealing with complications following an elective medical procedure, the officials said. NSC staffers were surprised it took the Pentagon so long to let them know of Austin’s condition. The Pentagon didn’t make the information public until Friday evening, notifying Congress about 15 minutes before releasing a public statement.

For three days, Biden’s national security adviser Jake Sullivan, the National Security Council, and, it seems, a lot of senior Pentagon officials did not know where Austin was, nor did they miss him.

The Pentagon did not inform senior officials in the White House’s National Security Council of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s hospitalization until Thursday — three full days after he arrived at Walter Reed Medical Center, two U.S. officials said.

The news came as a shock to top staff, including national security adviser Jake Sullivan, as they were unaware the DOD chief was dealing with complications following an elective medical procedure, the officials said. NSC staffers were surprised it took the Pentagon so long to let them know of Austin’s condition. The Pentagon didn’t make the information public until Friday evening, notifying Congress about 15 minutes before releasing a public statement.

In what is probably a monument of understatement, one unidentified US official said, “This should not have happened this way.”

Ya think?

There is a Paul Harvey “Rest of the Story” angle that remains to be teased out. What possible elective surgery could Austin have had that he’d literally go AWOL for a week and put the Nation’s security at risk rather than discuss?

Still, there are apologists at work. Democrat apparatchik Brad Carson doesn’t see anything wrong.

There is no standard protocol for when to announce a defense secretary’s hospitalization or temporary inability to do the job, said Brad Carson, formerly under secretary and chief management officer of the Army, though he added it could depend on the severity of Austin’s condition. If Austin were incapacitated, Congress would surely want to know. But if he were still capable of making decisions, even under a doctor’s supervision, “I don’t think Congress has to be notified in such cases.”

This is bullsh**. It makes no sense to say Congress doesn’t need to know if the Secretary of Defense is in the ICU because that affects national security. It certainly makes no sense to imply the national security adviser doesn’t need to be told.

It’s childish and unprofessional to tell the leaders of both chambers of Congress to FOAD by not informing them you are incapacitated. It is dangerously disloyal not to let the Jake Sullivan, idiot that he is, know. It is a sure bet that if Sullivan didn’t know that Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines were also out of the loop.

Austin’s Department of Defense is a barking shambles. It is incompetent in action and not trustworthy. It not only lies to the people and to Congress, but to the White House and itself…okay, maybe that isn’t all that unusual. As the old saying goes, a fish rots from the head down. If Biden lets this slide by, he’s a much bigger imbecile than even I had considered possible.

Nearly 300,000 lives could be saved in the next decade if states followed California’s example on gun laws, study says

Right, yeah sure ya betcha. Read the screed if you want, then come back to this

Everytown designated five foundational laws that they say have proven to be the most effective in lowering gun violence rates – all of which are in effect in New York and California.

They include requirements for a background check and/or permits to purchase firearms; a permit to carry concealed guns in public; the secure storage of firearms; the rejection of ‘Stand Your Ground’ laws; and the enactment of ‘extreme risk’ laws that temporarily remove a person’s access to firearms when there is evidence that they pose a serious risk to themselves or others.

Notice how “assault weapon” bans are nowhere on this list, and yet that’s what they are always calling for. Strange.

But as for this list?

  1. Background check and/or permits to purchase. Near-universal background checks already exist. If you want to make background checks better,  allocate more funding to make the existing system better and more efficient. And, open it up to the public so people can run their own checks  before selling a gun.

  2. A permit to carry concealed guns in public. Such has never yet stopped the criminal element from carrying a gun and everyone knows it. But, they have finally come to admit that law abiding people do carry.

  3. Secure storage. Awesome. Let’s subsidize the purchase of gun safes, trigger locks, etc.

  4. Rejection of “Stand Your Ground” laws. The various “stand your ground” laws aren’t gun laws at all,  they are criminal defense statutes that provide that person doesn’t have to run away before they can defend themselves.

  5. Extreme risk laws. If only there was a way to go further and physically restrain a dangerous person who had made credible threats of violence, based on a finding of probable cause by a judicial officer.
    Oh, wait: That’s called an arrest. How about we just arrest people who make felony threats?

And the vast majority are suicides, so I really don’t figure how

 

Well, I never had the jab, so there.

Had You Known, Would You Have Taken the Jab?

Would 92% of American adults have gotten a Covid shot had they known the “vaccines” only offered a 0.85% reduction in risk? Would young men have taken the jab if they had known it did not prevent transmission?

Americans came to understand that the media campaigns supporting the shots were fraudulent. The touted benefits – preventing infection and transmission – were lies. In response, fewer than one in five Americans elected to receive “boosters” despite multi-billion dollar propaganda campaigns.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has now brought a suit to bring accountability for the fraud that resulted in record profits for the pharmaceutical industry. Last week, he filed a complaint alleging that Pfizer misrepresented Covid vaccine efficacy and “conspired to censor public discourse” in violation of Texas’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA).

While Big Pharma enjoys immense government-provided insulation from legal liability for vaccine injuries, it cannot lie to promote those products.

Paxton alleges that the $75 billion Pfizer has raked in through sales of Covid vaccines were the “direct and proximate result” of the company’s deceit.

The DTPA requires Paxton prove two questions to succeed in his case. First, he must establish that the company lied or failed to disclose known information concerning its Covid vaccine. Second, he must prove that the company’s fraud was designed to promote sales of the shots.

Brownstone previously analyzed the applicability of the DTPA against Moderna. Now, Paxton’s lawsuit threatens Pfizer with fines of $10 million as well as awards of “restitution, damages, or civil penalties.”

Paxton’s case argues that Pfizer deceived the public on three issues: (1) the efficacy of the vaccine; (2) whether the shots reduced the risk of transmission; and (3) the company’s efforts to “censor[] persons who threatened to disseminate the truth.”

In each instance, the company skewed the public debate in order to induce Americans to take its shots. The efforts stripped us of the right to informed consent, deceiving us on purported benefits while hiding established risks.

Continue reading “”

Emergence of a New Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease: 26 Cases of the Human Version of Mad-Cow Disease, Days After a COVID-19 Injection

Abstract
Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease, the formerly rare but universally fatal prion disease in humans, normally progresses over several decades before it leads to death. In the Appendix to this paper, we highlight the presence of a prion region in the spike protein of the original SARS-CoV-2, and in all the “vaccine” variants built from the Wuhan virus.
The prion region in the spike of SARS-CoV-2 has a density of mutations eight times greater than that of the rest of the spike, and, yet, strangely that entire prion region disappears completely in the Omicron variant.

In the main body of our text, we present 26 cases of Creuzfeldt-Jacob Disease, all diagnosed in 2021 with the first symptoms appearing within an average of 11.38 days after a Pfizer, Moderna, or AstraZeneca COVID-19 injection.
Because the causal progression, the etiopathogenesis, of these atypical and new cases of human prion disease — cases of what is apparently a totally new form of rapidly developing Creuzfeldt-Jacob Disease — we focus on the chronology of the symptomatic development.

We consider it from an anamnestic point of view — one in which we compare the typical development of pre-COVID cases of Creuzfeldt-Jacob Disease to the extremely accelerated development of similar symptoms in the 26 cases under examination. By such an approach, we hope to work out the etiopathogenesis critical to understanding this new and much more rapidly developing human prion disease.

By recalling the sequential pathway of that the formerly subacute and slowly developing disease followed in the past, and by comparing it with this new, extremely acute, rapidly developing prion disease — one following closely after one or more of the COVID-19 injections — we believe it is correct to infer that the injections caused the disease in these 26 cases.

If so, they have probably also caused a many other cases that have gone undiagnosed because of their rapid progression to death.
By late 2021, 20 had died within 4.76 months of the offending injection. Of those, 8 died suddenly within 2.5 months confirming the rapid progression of this accelerated form of Creuzfeldt-Jacob Disease.
By June 2022, 5 more patients had died, and at the time of this current writing, only 1 remains still alive.

Left-wing activists sue to change public policy where their candidates cannot win

EXCLUSIVE — Left-wing activist organizations are at the forefront of shaping public policy through lawsuits in places where their aligned political candidates are unlikely to win.

A new Alliance for Consumers report obtained by the Washington Examiner shows how groups such as the anti-gun Everytown for Gun Safety or climate change activist group EarthRights International sue companies to advance their policy preferences to circumvent the legislative process.

These organizations often represent local governments in “public nuisance” lawsuits, which are used to claim that the public is generally harmed by the existence of something, such as tobacco, in order to obtain favorable public policy outcomes and massive settlements.

“Public nuisance lawsuits have almost nothing to do with helping consumers, but a lot to do with pushing a left-wing agenda,” Alliance for Consumers executive director O.H. Skinner told the Washington Examiner. “There’s been growing attention to the political donations that these lawsuits help drive toward left-wing candidates.

“More attention needs to be paid to the public interest groups and shadowy nonprofit funding networks, like Arabella Advisors, who staff, finance, and promote these cases,” Skinner continued. “That is what we have done with this report, and we think it illustrates clearly what these lawsuits are really about and why they are a threat.”

The report, which Alliance for Consumers sent to every Republican governor in America on Wednesday, highlights several organizations involved with public nuisance claims that are aimed at altering or circumventing the policy decisions made by those elected to decide them.

Everytown for Gun Safety, a group founded by former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg to limit gun rights, has been active in trying to change public policy on guns, including by using its Victory Fund to start a “Demand a Seat” initiative to get its trained activists to run for political office. This year, the group boasted that 17 of its candidates won elections in Virginia alone.

The group launched Everytown Law to focus on being “the largest and most experienced team of litigators in the country dedicated to advancing gun safety in the courts and through the civil and criminal justice systems.”

Everytown has been active in filing lawsuits against gun manufacturers for “contributing to the violent crime epidemic,” as it did when representing Kansas City, Missouri, in a public nuisance complaint in 2020 against the Nevada-based Jimenez Arms and other manufacturers and distributors.

It also represented the city of Chicago when it sued an Indiana gun store because its sales of firearms have “created, exacerbated, and sustained a public nuisance that causes harm to the health, safety, and well-being of Chicago residents.”

The legal wing of the activist organization also trains government lawyers on how to defend limitations to the Second Amendment, and it files direct challenges to laws protecting the right to own and use guns, such as Stand Your Ground laws, which offer some protection for the use of lethal force in self-defense.

Continue reading “”

BEN EXPOSUN

This is a population control tactic. If anyone was paying attention about 3 years ago the world population was teetering on 8 billion.
That’s when measures of LGBTQ yadda yadda were pushed and literature/tv shows/movies started to push male masculinity down.

Then you started to see the push for war. This has been used in the past. Not only were we promoting war we were and are continuing to fund it.
The Pandemic was introduced. The gates foundation started reducing the birthrate in Africa with vaccines. Sterilizing people.

If you recall Elon Musk stating that the world is depopulating and this will cause major harm and stagnant economies. Then Elon was attacked. They hit him everywhere including hiring Americans at Space X.
He purchased Twitter and you witnessed the outrage. He took away a large percentage of the control tactics from the powers that be.

How Anti-Gunners Manipulate the Data

Yesterday, researchers from Johns Hopkins said gun-friendly states have the highest rates of gun deaths. The problem with this statement is that ten of the fifteen states with the lowest homicide rates are constitutional carry states.

In a constitutional carry state, you do not need any training or a permit to carry a firearm. The researchers claimed to have used “advanced statistical modeling” to support their claim.

The study looked at 34 states that made it easier to carry a gun between 1980 and 2019 and compared them to “predicted” crime rates using data from “may issue” states.

Professor Cassandra Crifasi said, “If you graph all of the states in the U.S. by their rate of gun death from the highest to the lowest, a very clear pattern emerges.”

Several factors make this study inaccurate, but let’s look at the one that jumped out first. If you sort the data differently, you will get a different result.

The researchers used “advanced statistical modeling,” but @AHistory pointed out on X that ten of the fifteen states with the lowest homicide rates are constitutional carry. These states have some of the least restrictive gun laws since they are constitutional carry states.

Here are fifteen of the safest states based on factual homicide data, not “predicted” crime rates.

constitutional carry safest states

The researchers used the same old talking points that don’t hold up under scrutiny. “When states made it easier for potentially untrained gun owners to carry their weapons in public, assaults with guns increased.”

Part of that can’t be backed up with reliable data because what do they consider assaults?

“While the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision is forcing some states to weaken their concealed carry permitting systems, this study shows that states can reduce the expected increase in gun assault rates by including training requirements.”

This video from @wethepewple tries to explain the confusion since the gun control groups seem to be using fussy math.

 

Christopher Wray Says FBI Couldn’t Admit Hunter Biden Laptop Was Real Because it Was ‘An Election Season’

Senator John Kennedy grilled FBI Director Christopher Wray in the Senate on Tuesday, demanding to know why the agency did not come out and say that Hunter Biden’s laptop “was real” when it was reported on by the New York Post in October 2020. The FBI had known about the existence of the laptop for nearly a year before the contents were made public. Despite this, the FBI had warned Twitter execs to be on the lookout for potential Russian disinformation, such as a hypothetical Hunter Biden laptop.

“Why didn’t the FBI just say ‘hey, the laptop’s real?’ Why didn’t you just tell everybody ‘the laptop’s for real. We’re not vouching for what’s on it, but it’s real. This isn’t a fiction.'” Kennedy asked Wray.

“Well, I, as you might imagine,” Wray replied, “the FBI cannot, especially in a time like that, be talking about an ongoing investigation. Second, I would tell you that at least my understanding is that both the FBI folks involved in the conversations and the Twitter folks involved in the conversations, both say that the FBI did not direct Twitter to suppress that particular story.”

“But others were in government,” Kennedy said.

“Again, I can’t speak to others in government. That’s part of the point that I was trying to make because the—”

“You’re the FBI,” Kennedy interrupted, “you’re not part of the White House and part of Homeland Security. You’re not supposed to be political. You see all this controversy going on? Why didn’t the FBI say ‘timeout folks, we’re not getting in the middle of this but the laptop is real.'”

“Again, we have to be very careful about what we can say— especially in the middle of an election season— because that’s precisely some of the problems that led to my predecessor’s negative findings from the inspector general,” Wray said.

The laptop was widely derided as having been Russian disinformation. This messaging came from the Biden campaign, was disseminated from there to the intelligence community, and was picked up as fact by mainstream media outlets, many of which had to go on to eat their words as it was proven, again and again, that the contents belonged to Hunter Biden.

In addition to cracked-out photos of the younger Biden, his genitals, and his dates, the laptop contained potential evidence of influence peddling, information about the Biden family business, emails, correspondence, and more. This material has been used as a starting point for Republicans to investigate the Bidens’ relationship to foreign business partners and to insinuate that Joe Biden has been guilty of selling the power of his office during his time as Vice President in Barack Obama’s White House.

 

If Biden is against antisemitism, why does he continue to fund it?

Late last month, President Joe Biden declared that he was “very” concerned about the rise of antisemitism . If he were sincere, he would direct his administration to stop funding it.

Consider his longtime staffer, Antony Blinken. The secretary of state often speaks about his stepfather Samuel Pisar, who lost his entire family in the Holocaust. Blinken related Pisar’s escape from the Nazis at his confirmation hearing, and he has spoken about Pisar more than a dozen times since, often to establish his bona fides in the fight against antisemitism.

“We live in a time where antisemitism is again on the rise, in America and around the world,” Blinken told the U.S. Holocaust Museum. “When hateful ideology rises, violence is never far behind.” As secretary, he has promised to call out antisemitism and declared the United States would be “resolute in the fight against antisemitism.”

How sad, then, that Blinken pursues policies that reward antisemitism. Consider Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas: Blinken restored funding to Abbas, a man who denies the Holocaust, promotes antisemitic blood libel, and pensions terrorists who kill Jewish children. Blinken’s silence during his visits to Ramallah suggests his rhetoric about Pisar is cynical, meant only for gullible Americans.

Abbas, after all, wrote a doctoral dissertation arguing that Zionists supported the Holocaust. Over subsequent years, he downplayed and denied the Holocaust. In September, he speculated that Hitler targeted the Jews not from antisemitism, but because they were moneylenders. With a 40-year track record of Holocaust denial and diminishment, is there any question that Abbas promotes antisemitism? If so, how does funding him send a message about being “resolute in the fight against anti-Semitism”?

Or consider Yemen : One of the first actions Blinken undertook as secretary was to lift sanctions on the Houthis, a group that goes even beyond Iran’s “death to America, death to Israel” chants to add “damn the Jews” in its motto. Five years ago, a Washington think tank delegation queried Houthi representatives about their slogan. The Houthi spokesman was blunt: “That’s our program.” That Houthis now launch ballistic missiles at the Jewish state should surprise no one. That the United States allowed them a windfall should.

National security adviser Jake Sullivan bases his Iran approach on the idea that money and diplomatic outreach can put Iran’s reformers in the driver’s seat. But it was Mohammed Khatami, Iran’s reformist president famous for his “Dialogue of Civilizations” call, who gave asylum to Wolfgang Frohlick and Jurgen Graf, two of the world’s most vociferous Holocaust deniers.

The same holds true with Lebanon and Turkey . Amos Hochstein, the Biden administration’s unconfirmed energy envoy, has pushed to empower both Turkey and Hezbollah through energy deals and endorsement. By supporting the trans-Turkey energy route over that of democratic Cyprus and Greece, Hochstein has primed Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the world’s most antisemitic head of state after Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, to receive tens of billions of dollars, some of which Erdogan now promises to Hamas. Hochstein likewise justified Lebanese maritime claims in a scheme that risks pumping hundreds of millions of dollars into Hezbollah coffers, never mind that Hezbollah’s secretary general once quipped he would be happy if all the Jews returned to Israel, as it would save the trouble of hunting them down in other countries.

Then there is Somalia , a country seldom in the headlines but the recipient of billions of dollars under Biden and Blinken’s watch. Less than six weeks after Blinken met Somali Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly, Barre declared Hamas was not a terrorist group and suggested Jews were the “children of pigs and dogs.” The Biden administration’s response? Crickets. The money still flows to Somalia.

Antisemitism is at its highest level worldwide since World War II. Biden is right to be very concerned, and Blinken is right to condemn it. If only the leader of the free world and his top diplomat had some control over whether antisemites overseas would have access to billions of extra dollars.

The Trace interviews less-lethal gun maker by claiming story is for tech magazine

The Trace – former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun propaganda factory – has proven once again it is completely devoid of ethics and reliable only as a source of fake news.

The Trace wants the public to believe it’s an actual newsroom comprised of actual journalists. It calls itself “The only newsroom dedicated to covering gun violence.” Staffers refer to themselves as journalists, rather than anti-gun activists who are paid by Bloomberg to create his propaganda. The Trace and Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety even share the same president, John Feinblatt.

A Trace story published Thursday titled “Shoot, Don’t Kill,” extolls the benefits of less-than-lethal technology by examining several weapons made by Byrna Technologies, Inc., which use a 12-gram CO2 cartridge to launch .68 caliber projectiles at approximately 330 feet-per-second.

“Users can also opt for ammo loaded with tear gas or oleoresin capsicum, an extract of hot peppers, which can induce nausea, difficulty breathing, and a terrible burning in the throat, lungs, and eyes,” the story states.

The Trace story quotes Byrna’s founder, president and chief executive officer, Bryan Ganz. However, on Friday Ganz told the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project that he had never even heard of the Trace until the story appeared Thursday morning. The freelance writer who wrote the story claimed it would appear in a different publication.

“Originally, he said it was supposed to be published in Wired magazine,” Ganz said Friday. “But once we gave him the quotes, we had no control over where the article was published.”

The story was written by Ted Alcorn, who describes himself in the story as an “independent journalist whose reporting has appeared in numerous publications including the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal.” Alcorn’s bio also shows he was “the founding research director of Everytown for Gun Safety and a policy analyst in the New York City mayor’s office.”

Until he saw it Thursday morning, Ganz had no idea his story would appear on one of the leading websites of the gun-ban industry.

“Our attitude is that the more people who discuss it, the better, I guess,” Ganz said.

Alcorn used a bit too much editorial license and took things a bit too far, Ganz said, especially when he implied that gun owners would somehow realize that their firearms were “problematic,” and switch to his weapons for their reduced lethality.

“It’s easy to see why gun owners might perceive a less lethal offering as an admission that traditional guns are problematic. But over the last century, the primary use of firearms has changed,” the story states. “Lethality was essential when they were mainly tools for hunting animals or national defense, but now nearly three-quarters of people who own guns say they do so for self-protection against other humans.”

“I never said anything like that,” Ganz said. “I support the Second Amendment, and I’ve carried concealed for years. I’ve been a gun owner my entire life.”

Everything the social justice crowd told us was a lie.

Everything the social justice crowd has said for the past 15 years has been a lie.

The movement gained a foothold in American culture around 2008, riding a wave of popular reexaminations of race relations, political divisions, and systemic disparities. It styled itself as an honorable call to right the wrongs of society, both historical and contemporaneous.

The past three weeks, however, have served as definitive proof that the benevolent emperor is a naked tyrant. The warriors for the oppressed are not so noble and selfless as they claim. Neither are they singularly motivated by the ideals of “inclusivity,” “equity,” and “diversity.” They’re as greedy, vicious, prejudiced, and hateful as the oppressors they accuse.

The “social justice” crowd has only ever cared about acquiring power and influence, creeping toward this goal via emotional blackmail, intimidation campaigns, and even occasional violence. Theirs is not a cause for justice, but for self-enrichment; a relatively bloodless conquest for power and treasure. They simply disguise their self-interest in the language of “justice” and altruism, all the while plotting new ways to seize for themselves the “privilege” and “power” they envy in others.

Nothing has done so fine a job of laying bare this reality as Hamas’s Oct. 7 slaughter of 1,400 Israelis, mostly civilians, including children. Since that day of mass murder, social justice activists have flooded city streets and college campuses across the West, cheering war crimes and calling for the destruction of Israel.

Continue reading “”

Only the gullible were fooled.

Mask Off! ‘Bipartisan Gun Safety’ Group 97percent’s Executive Director Joins Gun Control Group Brady

97percent calls itself as “a bipartisan group of gun owners and non-gun owners,” and describes their purported mission as follows:

We are bringing gun owners directly into the conversation about gun safety — creating spaces where both gun owners and non-gun owners can have an honest, civil discussion about ways to reduce gun-related violence, while respecting the 2nd Amendment.

How bipartisan is this group, and how seriously do they take the concerns of gun owners? For starters, their website has several instances of the phrase “gun safety” but not a single mention of “gun control.” 97percent’s research (archived links) led them to support violent misdemeanor laws, universal gun registry (i.e., universal background checks), red flag confiscations, and permit requirements to purchase any gun. They want these laws implemented federally, and where the Constitution bars the federal government from doing so, they want the federal government to “incentivize” the states to do it. They have expressed concern over Bruen (archived links) because of its removal of corrupt discretion from the hands of government apparatchiks.

Continue reading “”