Category: Goobermint

I don’t buy Durham’s excusing FBI agents as good people

I have not spent any time today listening to John Durham’s testimony, which I find fundamentally uninteresting. He managed to craft a report that, even as it hinted at a damning coup attempt within the government against the duly elected president, nevertheless gave everyone involved what amounted to a pass. Maybe it’s that jaundiced attitude that leaves me unimpressed with the fact that Durham claims that most FBI agents are really good people.

As I often do, I turned to the Daily Mail, which is more honest than the American news outlets:

Former special counsel John Durham revealed that FBI agents have apologized to him for their handling of the Trump-Russia probe as he confirmed he saw bias among key officials in charge of the investigation like Peter Strzok.

‘I have had any number of FBI agents who I’ve worked with over the years, some are retired, some are still in place, who have come to me and apologized for the manner in which that investigation was undertaken,’ Durham revealed at the top of the high-profile Judiciary hearing.

To him, that proved that a majority of the FBI are ‘good, hard-working people’ who ‘swear under their oaths to abide by the law.’

‘Our findings are sobering,’ said Durham. ‘Having spent 40 years plus as a federal prosecutor, they are particularly sobering to me.’

First of all, “any number” is a meaningless statement. That could be three. Second, their secretive little apologies to Durham mean nothing. What we’re learning is that, from the top down, the DOJ and the FBI are corrupt. And we’re also learning that the men and women who work for it, or who retired during this corrupt era, are either complicit in the corruption or too afraid to do or say anything.

If the DOJ/FBI were the law firm I once worked for, where a corrupt partner bilked clients, and everyone stayed silent, it’s easy enough to give a pass to the ones who stayed silent. After all, this was one law firm, which wasn’t going to change the world, and the employees who knew what was going on had families that relied on them, student loans (which, in those days, had to be paid off), mortgages, health problems, etc. The downside risk of squealing on one attorney just didn’t seem worth it.

However, the DOJ and FBI are not one little law firm, one school, or one corporation. They are at the very heart of the federal criminal justice system; they sit on more secrets than we can imagine (Jeffrey Epstein’s little black book and, theoretically, whatever is making Chief Justice John Roberts jump when required, etc.); and they used their massive, unfettered authority to try to take down the president of the United States.

Under those circumstances, when we’re staring at a festering carbuncle at the very heart of the American government, it’s not okay to stay silent. This is bigger than an individual’s needs. This requires moral courage, patriotism, and decency—and not a single one of those agents who quietly whispered into Durham’s ear did a damn thing. They didn’t blow the whistle when these historic crimes were being committed, and they haven’t come forward since then to say, “Yeah, it’s true. Something really is rotten in the State of Denmark.”

So, no, Mr. Durham, I’m not impressed. Those agents who apologized to you may be hard-working but, given the corruption lying at the center of our constitutional republic, they are not good.

UPDATE: Within a short time of publishing the above, I was strongly reminded of DOJ/FBI issues when I listened to the opening monologue in Matt Walsh’s video podcast which reminded me, in turn, of Tucker’s podcast about the DOJ’s and FBI’s treatment of Hunter Biden.

 

SloJoe’s relationship with the truth was always nonexistent but now his lies don’t even make sense.

Joe Biden Is Not OK.

There is nothing unique about being a scatterbrained 80-year-old. But a scatterbrained 80-year-old should not be president.

The other day, Joe Biden ended a big gun-control speech in Connecticut with the words, “God save the queen, man.” Why did the president express adoration for the departed Brit monarch? Was he confused about royal succession? Is he a Sex Pistols fan? Who knows.

When asked about the incident, White House aides offered nonsensical and conflicting answers — because they have absolutely no idea, and neither does the president. It’s likely that the octogenarian spontaneously used a cool-sounding phrase, much like when your elderly neighbor tells you to “keep on truckin,’” for no apparent reason. It happens.

Yet, Axios writer Alex Thompson points out that Biden “has an arsenal of wacky phrases.” And the president’s “quirky aphorisms,” he contends, “are sometimes weaponized by Republicans to insinuate the 80-year-old president is in mental decline.”

There is no need for insinuation. Biden’s mental acuity, never impressive, has considerably deteriorated. Sure, he also tends to botch “old-timey” sayings like, “lots of luck in your senior year,” which he says is a gibe from his Corn Pop days. But most reporters who pretend perceptions of Biden’s decline are due to his propensity for homespun maxims or previously unknown stuttering problems almost surely wouldn’t find him fit enough to babysit their kids.

Every week, the president of the United States says something completely bonkers, and everyone goes on with their day. We’re not talking about his propensity to lie about politics or his blustery lifelong fabulism (his “folksiness,” The New York Times recently explained, “can veer into a personal folklore” with “the factual edges shaved off to make them more powerful for audiences.”) We’re talking about his inability to articulate simple ideas without notes — and often with notes. There are rarely any fact-checks of these statements. How can there be? They don’t even make sense as lies. There is no handwringing about the role of competency in our democracy. There is no discussion about the 25th Amendment.

Just listen to any one of his speeches. “Put a pistol on a brace, it turns into a gun — makes it more — you can have a higher-caliber weapon, higher-caliber bullet coming out of that gun,” the president explained before wishing Her Majesty his best. This was also complete gibberish. There is so much gibberish.

Only a couple of days before his “God save the queen” comment, Biden informed a crowd gathered for a League of Conservation Voters endorsement that “we” have “plans to build a railroad from the Pacific all the way across the Indian Ocean,” which must have really impressed everyone in attendance. “We have plans to build in Angola one of the largest solar plants in the world,” Biden went on. “I can go on, but I’m not. I’m going off-script. I’m going to get in trouble.”

A few days before the railroad comment, Biden couldn’t remember Winston Churchill’s name when speaking to the prime minister of Britain. Listen, I’m not great with names myself, and I’m sure as an 80-year-old I’d have trouble recalling world leaders … but I’m confident I wouldn’t think myself competent enough to be the most powerful man in the world. Nor should Biden.

That same week, when asked why a Ukrainian FBI informant referred to Biden as the “Big Guy,” the president lashed out for being posed “dumb questions.” He does this often in frustration. When the president isn’t flubbing canned lines to the rare tough question, he yells things like “c’mon, man!” A few years ago, this kind of rhetoric was considered democracy-shattering. Now, it’s quirky and folksy.

The week before he couldn’t remember Churchill’s name, the president also tripped and fell on stage after a commencement speech at the Air Force Academy. Biden’s surrogates pointed out that there had been a sandbag right there, as if no one, whether young or old, could possibly be expected to walk over a small bag without falling to the floor.

You might recall that after the former president gingerly navigated a ramp after giving a speech at West Point in 2020, The New York Times’ headline the next day was: “Trump’s Halting Walk Down Ramp Raises New Health Questions.” The president, the Times went on, “also appeared to have trouble raising a glass of water to his mouth during a speech at West Point a day before he turned 74, the oldest a president has been in his first term.”
The sitting president is now six years older than Trump was at the time — he would be a decade older should he finish a second term.

Of course, everyone ages differently — John Fetterman, only 53, can barely put together a thought while some septuagenarian is out there writing his literary opus right now. Nor is there anything wrong with or especially unique about being a scatterbrained and tired 80-year-old. In this case, maybe Americans who elected a scatterbrained and tired 80-year-old deserve to be governed by him — good and hard, as Menken might say. But please stop pretending Biden is OK. He’s not.

The Strange Idea That a Cabinet Officer Should Report to the President

A Trump administration agency head’s struggle against bureaucracy illuminates the need to subordinate executive agencies to the president’s will.

David L. Bernhardt, former U.S. secretary of the interior, deputy secretary, solicitor, and an independent agency commissioner, lets us in on an intriguingly strange secret about what insiders like him would recognize was an exceptional command he received from a U.S. president.

In 2018, President Donald Trump called in Deputy Bernhardt and informed him that, “You’re going to be running the ship [at Interior] for a while,” as acting secretary. And the president added, “Do you have any questions?” The savvy Bernhardt only asked one: “Who do I report to?” He tells us that “President Trump looked at me quizzically. ‘You report to me,’ he said.”

Bernhardt had earlier served under President George W. Bush and tells us in his new book, You Report to Me: Accountability for the Failing Administrative State, that even cabinet secretaries normally had to fight through the White House Office bureaucracy to get access to the president himself. To some extent, the same has been true under most modern presidencies.

So, Bernhardt replied to President Trump: “I know that’s what the Constitution says,” choosing his words “carefully,” “but who do I actually report to?’ ‘You report to me,’ he repeated. He could not have been more clear: I reported directly to him and to no one else!” Bernhardt then tested the offer, both as acting and permanent secretary, and it actually worked!

Why is access so important? Bernhardt explains that his direct access to the president

avoided the massive periods of inactivity that plagued much of my prior experience in the Department of the Interior under President George W. Bush. Far more critically, Trump’s expectation that those serving in the executive branch actually report to him reflected a reality about the presidency and his view of it. The Constitution of the United States confers all the executive power on the president.

As I see it, as director of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management under Ronald Reagan during his first term, this critical relationship justifies the seemingly strange book title You Report to Me. Interestingly, William P. Barr, in his book on his experiences as attorney general under presidents George H. W. Bush and Trump, also raises this matter of reporting. It is clear between the lines that he had much more access to Trump than he did to Bush. This is an attribute of the more recent president that has not been widely reported, especially by the mainstream media.

Open cabinet access to the president had been the norm since George Washington, but it violates most modern Washington insiders’ presumed knowledge that the White House Office and the Office of Management and Budget expert staffs should and actually do run the modern presidency. The fundamental administrative fact is that, if the traditional direct presidential relationship fails, it is replaced by irresponsible bureaucracy, both careerist and political.

Bernhardt explains how the government today does not generally work as the Constitution expected. Congress now leaves most of the policy-making to the bureaucracy, the real Article III courts leave legal-policy interpretations mostly to bureaucratic bodies in the executive branch, and the careerist bureaucracy actually performs the major executive functions of the national government — leaving the bureaucracy pretty much unaccountable to anyone.

A big part of the problem with today’s 2 million civil servants (and the generally ignored 20 million contractors) is the enormous growth of government and how that has made managing it so much more difficult over time. Bernhardt says he is generally pleased with the competence of the civil servants he has had contact with but is frustrated with the cumbersome procedures required for the removal of poor performers and the number of ways dysfunctional employees have available to frustrate removal. Only “8 percent of civil service managers with poor-performing employees even attempted to discipline or fire them.”

Continue reading “”

Is the international Counterterrorism Law Enforcement Forum a work-around of Americans’ rights?

The Second Annual Counterterrorism Law Enforcement Forum occurred on Tuesday June 6th, 2023, which the United States co-hosted. Last year was the inaugural event in Berlin, Germany and the 2023 forum took place in Oslo, Norway. The idea of multiple law enforcement agencies getting together to think tank their way around some of the world’s problems with terrorism, or any crime for that matter, is not that radical. Where things get concerning are when we read between the lines. The DOJ release masqueraded the forum as a meeting of the minds on combating acts of terror, however remarks from the U.S. Assistant Attorney General show a clear focus on “domestic” terrorism.

The Justice Department’s Office of Overseas Prosecutorial Development, Assistance and Training (OPDAT) and the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Counterterrorism (State CT) co-hosted the second annual meeting of the Counterterrorism Law Enforcement Forum (CTLEF) with the Government of Norway in Oslo from June 6 to 7.

The CTLEF, which focuses on countering the global threat of racially or ethnically motivated violent extremism (REMVE), brought together law enforcement, prosecutors, and other criminal justice practitioners from Europe and North and South America, as well as specialists from INTERPOL, Europol, the International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law and other multilateral organizations to discuss how to effectively address and counter REMVE threats.

Drilling down on what REMVEs there are, our Assistant Attorney General, Matthew G. Olsen, did not hold back on discussing his ideas when he delivered the opening remarks for the forum.

Last May, we gathered in Berlin, for our inaugural meeting. I departed the forum daunted by the scale of the problem, but heartened to see the partnership of so many likeminded countries.

I returned to D.C. from Berlin on a Thursday. Two days later, on Saturday afternoon, I received the first alerts from the FBI that there was an active shooter in Buffalo, New York. What we would come to learn over the next hours and days was that an individual espousing white supremacist ideology took a semiautomatic weapon into a grocery store and murdered 10 people.

This tragedy in Buffalo – just over one year ago – is part of an alarming trend.

What’s the alarming trend that Olsen is really talking about? What were some of the threats that Olsen identified in his speech? “In particular, we face an increasing threat from racially and ethnically motivated violent extremist groups, including white supremacists and anti-government groups,” Olsen said. Who are classified as “anti-government groups”? Would people that are critical of the United States Government, in particular overreaching agencies, be considered anti-government?

Doubling down Olsen identified obstacles to being able to effectively police these groups of individuals.

The simple truth is that the ability of violent extremists to acquire military-grade weapons in our country contributes to their ability to kill and inflict harm on a massive scale. A recent article in The Washington Post noted that about a shocking number of Americans – one in 20 adults, or roughly 16 million people – own at least one AR-15 assault rifle.
…
It is important to be clear, the Department of Justice investigates violent extremists for their criminal acts and not for their beliefs or based on their associations, and regardless of ideology. In the United States, upholding our core values means respecting First Amendment rights and safeguarding the exercise of protected speech, peaceful protests, and political activity. We hold those rights sacred.

Olsen had no problem pairing the roughly 16 million law-abiding citizens with violent extremists, lumping them into the same category of hateful and murderous actors. The numbers should be staggering to Olsen that we do have 16+ million alleged owners of AR variant – not “assault” – rifles, and have such an incredibly small amount of issues with those arms.

The other obstacle naturally is the First Amendment. It’s grand that Olsen says that the DOJ et.al. respects and holds “those rights sacred,” but he really means that for only some people. It’s clear that if there’s an individual or group that does not align with the ideologies of the current swamp, they become an enemy of the state. When there’s “mostly peaceful” acts of extremism, that’s alright as long as it’s the correct flavor of extremism.

Whatever may stand in the way between the government and combating domestic terrorism, Olsen has the solution.

We have to be united in confronting domestic extremism within our countries. Collaboration and information sharing is essential to understanding and countering the threats that terrorist and violent extremist groups pose.

International partnerships are especially important where we observe transnational linkages in domestic violent extremism. We have seen some U.S.-based supporters of domestic terrorism attempt to establish links with likeminded foreign individuals and organizations. In some cases, U.S.-based domestic terrorists have traveled overseas to link up with counterparts who espouse the same beliefs.

These trends are one reason why international forums like this are so valuable. This is an opportunity to hear from foreign partners about the violent extremist groups and networks that are most concerning; where transnational linkages exist; how these actors are raising and moving funds; how groups are recruiting and training new members; how they are communicating and spreading their messages and propaganda; and the sources and drivers of radicalization to violence.

The Assistant Attorney General of the United States stated that in order to combat domestic extremism it’s important to “establish links with,” collaborate with, and find out how groups are “raising and moving funds; how groups are recruiting and training new members; how they are communicating and spreading their messages and propaganda,” from foreign governments. In short, Olsen wants foreign countries to do what our CIA can’t do; spy on Americans. There are no Fourth Amendment protections for American citizens when it’s a foreign entity doing the infringing.

Who all could this reference though? Bad guys, right? Those “anti-government” types. Olsen brought up the events that transpired on January 6th. Regardless of one’s view on what happened during January 6th, what occurred was not as bad as it’s been purported by mainstream media, nor were the actions completely benign.

Olsen spoke extensively about all the arrests and charges that sprung up in the wake of that day, “The January 6 investigation is the largest in the history of the Justice Department. We have arrested and charged more than 1,000 individuals who took part in the Capitol assault. Nearly 500 people have pled guilty or been convicted at trial.”

Olsen further observed concerning January 6th:

We have brought serious charges, including seditious conspiracy against numerous defendants – members of extremist groups who plotted to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power in our country.
…
We believe our success in this case serves as a stark warning to those who would seek to violently attack our government and our democracy. It makes clear our determination that the rule of law will prevail.

Not that we needed any confirmation that the DOJ would aggressively go after those that don’t help serve the bigger picture of what’s desired of the Biden-Harris administration, but this is the Assistant Attorney General saying as much in black and white. The “members of extremist groups who plotted to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power in our country” includes a whole lot of people that got arrested, charged and in some cases convicted, for simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time. The issues involving anything January 6th are so multi-faceted, to even bring the date up is flirting with disaster. Do what we say or you’ll end up like them.

On a small scale, Olsen found it problematic that 16+ million people have access to semi-automatic rifles. He clearly pegged that as an obstacle to being able to do the proper police work needed to fight “extremism” or those who are “anti-government.” Olsen further opined that our civil liberties are an issue, as there’s nothing they can do about people expressing their opinions, which the government “respects.” But alas, they found their solution in the form of partnerships with other countries, id.est., having other nations do the spying on the American people.

These events and little get-togethers that American officials attend sure seem like they’re “for the better good.” Really, no one wants extremism or terrorism, domestic or otherwise. However, if we read between the lines, eh, I’m going to say that maybe these trips on the taxpayers’ dime are not in the best interest of the people. Could this be a misread? Sure. But they kind of make it clear that they’ve adopted a Conan approach; “crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women.” But, clearly it’s the AR’s that are the problems…

The Department of Justice is corrupt. No one should trust it.

‘TWO-TIERED SYSTEM OF JUSTICE:’ GOP Presidential Candidates React To Hunter Biden’s DOJ Deal.

Several Republican 2024 presidential challengers weighed in Tuesday on the deal between President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, and the Department of Justice (DOJ) on federal gun and tax charges.

Hunter Biden will plead guilty to two tax misdemeanors and enter a probation agreement with the DOJ for a felony gun possession charge; Biden has been under investigation in the Federal District of Delaware since 2018 over allegedly failing to pay taxes and lying on a federal firearm application. Many of the 2024 GOP contenders criticized the deal as letting Hunter Biden off easy, as the younger Biden was able to avoid jail time, contrasting the legal treatment with that of former President Donald Trump.

“Today proves there is a clear two-tiered system of justice—one for Democrats and one against President Trump,” Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung told the DCNF. “As President Trump predicted earlier this month, Hunter was given a sweetheart deal that sweeps his crimes under the rug in a blatant attempt to interfere with the 2024 election. All the while, Joe Biden continues to be given a pass by his weak special counsel for his classified documents strewn all across his garage and in his Chinatown office building. The Biden Crime Family continues to show they are willing to sell out America to dangerous foreign actors in order to line their pockets with millions and millions of dollars.”

“Looks like Hunter received a sweetheart deal and is not facing any charges on the massive corruption allegations,” DeSantis wrote in a tweet. “If Hunter was not connected to the elite DC class he would have been put in jail a long time ago.”

Continue reading “”

No morals. No ethics. No self respect. No respect for others…
Standard Leftist LIEberal

Fact Check: White House Press Secretary Falsely Claims ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Lowered Gun Violence

CLAIM: White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said the 1994-2004 federal “assault weapons” ban lowered gun violence while speaking from Air Force One on Monday.

VERDICT: False. The Department of Justice’s National Institute of Justice (NIJ) issued a report, noting that any impact the ban had on crime was negligible.

Jean-Pierre said, “You’ve heard the President say this, and I’ll just repeat what he said. When he was able to get this done, in the 90s, to ban “assault weapons,” you saw it have an effect on lowering…violence in that first ten years.”

On February 19, 2018, Breitbart News referenced the NIJ study, which was written just as the federal “assault weapons” ban was ending.

In 2004, the Washington Times quoted University of Pennsylvania professor Christopher Koper, an author of the NIJ report, saying, “We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence.”

The authors of the NIJ report observed that “The ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement.”

They further explained that the “assault weapons” ban was not impactful because “assault weapons” are not the firearms of choice for day-to-day criminals.

On October 10, 2022, Breitbart News reported FBI figures showing that over two times as many people were stabbed to death with knives and cutting instruments than were shot and killed with rifles of any kind. And on January 18, 2013, Breitbart News reported that “assault weapons” were “tied to less than .012 percent of [U.S] deaths in 2011.”

Jean-Pierre’s claim that the “assault weapons” ban lowered gun violence is false.

Chicago shootings:75 shot, 13 fatally, in weekend gun violence across city

CHICAGO (WLS) — Chicago shootings over the holiday weekend have left more than 75 shot, 13 fatally, police said.

The latest shootings attacked groups of teenagers.

Gunfire erupted in the West Garfield Park as three teens were standing on a front porch in the 3800-block of West Gladys Avenue when someone in a dark-colored car opened fire, police said.

A 17-year-old girl was rushed to the hospital in critical condition with a gunshot wound to the right eye. A 17-year-old girl was shot in the leg and buttocks and a 19-year-old man was shot in the arm and both were transported to hospitals in good condition.

Just a few hours earlier and less than two-miles away, police said a 14-year-old boy walking down the block in the 100-block of North Francisco Avenue when an unknown gunman opened fire on him. He was struck in the right arm and right leg and transported to a hospital in fair condition.

On the South Side, 32-year old father of four Brian Ross, was gunned down along with another men during a large Father’s Day gathering at Smith Park in the Roseland community.

Relatives said he was not the intended target.

“They literally stopped where they were at, open fired on them, didn’t care about the kids being around or nothing. And, by the grace of God, no kids get hit,” Kandace Ross, the victim’s husband, said. “They didn’t care about nothing or nobody because there were kids out there. There were women out there, there were grandmas, anybody. They just came and just shot it up just so they can, I don’t know, brag about it.”

Police are looking into if social media played a role in the attack.

The violence happened on almost every side of town including the Bucktown neighborhood

Continue reading “”

Saving Our School Children from Tennessee Politicians

Tennessee politicians left our students defenseless, and we have to save them. A celebrity-seeking mass murderer killed students in a Nashville private school. That should be a wakeup call that the Republican controlled legislature and Governor have failed us again. We need angry parents to change the status quo and save our kids. As grim as this sounds, there is plenty of good news. We also know how to reduce and to prevent mass murder in our schools. Tennessee parents have been ignored for too long.

The gun-control politicians say we should disarm honest citizens to protect our children. Other politicians say they will put armed deputies in the schools to save our kids. Both have been lying to us for years. Gun-control fails and the legislature never funds enough school resource officers to protect our kids. I understand the problem because mass-murders are rare and even a small school needs several defenders. The solution is simple, but it is not politically easy.

I want our children protected at school the same way our kids are protected by their parents at home. I want our children protected the way our politicians are protected at the capital, and I want it now. Unlike some proposals that sound good in theory, we know this solution stops mass-murderers. Don’t listen to what politicians and celebrities say they want. Instead, look at what they do.

Politicians are protected by men with guns. Celebrities are protected by men with guns. The spouses and children of politicians and the spouses and children of celebrities are protected by men with guns. When a celebrity-seeking mass-murderer comes to school, even the advocates of gun-control shout that we should call men with guns. The only debate is about when the armed defenders should arrive. I want our kids defended now.

Continue reading “”

3 years ago, this would have gotten one smeared as a racist science denier.

It’s becoming undeniable: COVID came from a Chinese lab.

Evidence that COVID came from a Chinese lab mounted toward a conclusive level last week: “Multiple government sources” say the very first people infected by the bug were Wuhan Institute of Virology researchers, a new report reveals.

More, they were allegedly modifying a close relative of the virus with a key feature unique to it.

The report — by Michael Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi and Alex Gutentag, posted on the outlet Public — names Ben Hu, Yu Ping and Yan Zhu as WIV scientists who developed COVID symptoms as early as November 2019, a month before the world even heard of the outbreak, and who now appear to be “patients zero.”

A source said officials were “100%” certain these three were the ones who developed the symptoms.

It’s “a game changer if it can be proven that Hu got sick with COVID-19 before anyone else,” marvels World Health Organization expert Jamie Metzl. “That would be the ‘smoking gun.’ Hu was the lead hands-on researcher” in the WIV lab.

Add in all the other evidence — especially the scientists’ gain-of-function work using a close relative of the COVID bug — and it’s now impossible to ignore the extreme likelihood that a leak from the lab sparked the global pandemic behind nearly 7 million deaths and untold economic harm.

It also points a damning finger at China for having waged the greatest coverup in history of the world — abetted by Westerners from Dr. Anthony Fauci to Big Tech to countless liberals and left-leaning media voices who misled the public by pooh-poohing the lab-leak theory early on, and actively suppressing those who pointed to evidence backing the theory.

Continue reading “”

SAF sues Pennsylvania Sheriff to stop warrantless searches

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today filed a challenge of Pennsylvania’s promulgated firearms regulation and its enforcement by the Pennsylvania State Police and Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, which includes warrantless searches.

SAF is joined by Shot Tec, LLC and a private citizen, Grant Schmidt. They are represented by attorneys Joshua Prince and Dillon Harris, Civil Rights Defense Firm, of Bechtelsville, Pa. Defendants are Col. Christopher Paris, commissioner of the Pennsylvania State Police (PSP) and Montgomery County Sheriff Sean Kilkenny, in their official capacities. The action was filed in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania.

The petition challenges Col. Paris and the PSP’s “interpretation, implementation and enforcement” of the firearms regulation “which is being enforced” by Kilkenny, according to the court filing. The petition alleges that Sheriff Kilkenny “has implemented a policy…which he contends, based on the PSP’s promulgation and implementation of (the regulation) permit him, in the absence of probable cause and a warrant and in violation of…the Pennsylvania Constitution, to come into those…homes or business.”

Plaintiffs further assert this inspection enables the sheriff to impose sanctions against holders of state licenses to sell firearms “for not having ‘safe storage’” in the event of an emergency when the PSP has “failed to promulgate any regulations addressing what constitute ‘safe storage’ or sufficient safeguards…when the General Assembly only delegated to the PSP the ability to establish such standards.”

“The State Assembly has never enacted a law allowing for warrantless searches of licensees, but the state police promulgated a regulation requiring licensees to submit to such searches, which are now planned by the sheriff’s department,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “We believe there are grave constitutional issues involved in this scheme, particularly when an administrative agency simply waives an individual’s constitutional rights by implementing a regulation without any framework from the legislature. Equally troubling is the Sheriff’s assertion that he would revoke a license from and individual asserting their right to be free from unlawful searches and seizures. We have filed this petition to ensure constitutional rights are respected.”

SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb observed, “No statute should allow carte blanche regulations to be imposed by any law enforcement agency because of the inherent danger of overstepping legal authority and constitutional protections which must be protected in a free society. We’re seeking a remedy from the court to stop this, especially when warrantless searches are involved.”

Oh, So That’s Where Weapons Biden Left in Afghanistan Are Going

When President Joe Biden made the decision to abruptly leave Afghanistan in August 2021, he did so without the U.S. military properly exporting or destroying warehouses full of weapons. Billions of dollars worth of equipment was left behind and now, it’s showing up in the hands of terrorists attacking Israeli citizens.

“The Taliban secured a substantial arsenal of U.S. weapons and equipment, including Black Hawk helicopters, after U.S. forces withdrew from Afghanistan in August 2021. The Israeli commander with whom Newsweek spoke said some of the U.S. small arms seized in Afghanistan have already been observed in the hands of Palestinian groups operating in the Gaza Strip,” Newsweek reports.

The Israeli Defense Force has been dealing with a number of terrorist flare ups over the past year as Palestinian groups continue to attack Israeli civilians. Most recently, Islamic Jihad engaged in multi-day rocket fire against Israeli cities, eventually ending in a ceasefire after the IDF attacked in the Gaza Strip and killed a number of top terror leaders.

On Monday IDF carried out an operation in Jenin, a city in the West Bank that has become a terror hotspot similar to Gaza and Lebanon.

We know why the programs and agencies stay around – it’s an easy way to skim money.

Republican Lawmaker’s Bill Seeks to Phase Out ‘Zombie’ Federal Programs Costing Over $510

House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) wants to phase out the more than 1,100 “Zombie” federal agencies and programs that continue for years on end to get over $358 billion annually despite having expired legislative authorizations.

The McMorris Rodgers proposal is H.R. 1518, the Unauthorized Spending Act (USA), which she has introduced in every Congress since 2016. The Washington state Republican believes her proposal is needed to restore to voters the power of accountability in the nation’s capital.

“We have a fiscal crisis in America today, too much of the federal government is on autopilot. Americans are rightly frustrated by a government that thinks it knows best. These frustrations are a symptom of the people losing our power to ensure every penny of taxpayer money and every decision by federal agencies are subject to citizens’ scrutiny,” McMorris Rodgers explained in a statement on her official website.

“The USA Act aims to restore the American people’s ‘power of the purse’ by eliminating unauthorized spending or ‘Zombie’ programs—spending on government programs that haven’t been authorized by the people’s representatives in Congress. This bill is simple, it ensures that every penny of taxpayer money is subject to the scrutiny of the American people.

“It means that the people’s representatives are doing their jobs to effectively review, rethink, and possibly eliminate programs that are no longer needed. It means restoring the power of the purse and ending unauthorized spending,” she continued.

Her proposal currently has 11 co-sponsors, all Republicans, in the House of Representatives, and sits in the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability and the House Budget Committee, awaiting further action. No hearings have been scheduled on the measure.

The Congress Budget Office (CBO), in an April 2023 report, “identified 1,108 authorizations of appropriations that expired before the beginning of fiscal year 2023 and 355 authorizations that are set to expire before the end of the fiscal year. CBO also found that $510 billion in appropriations for 2023 was associated with 428 expired authorizations of appropriations.”

The USA proposal “puts all unauthorized programs on a pathway to sunset in three years, which is enforced by a reduction in overall budget authority based on the total value of unauthorized programs,” according to a fact sheet on the McMorris Rodgers website.

“In the first year after expiration, overall budget authority is reduced by 10 percent of the total value of unauthorized spending. In the second and third years, that increases to 15 percent. The programs in question would sunset at the end of the third fiscal year after expiration,” the fact sheet said.

Congress could also decide to reauthorize a Zombie agency or program, but individual senators and representatives would have to go on record one way or another whether to phase out funding or reauthorize the activity.

The process of deciding what to do about a specific Zombie agency or program would be overseen by a new Spending Accountability Commission (SAC) tasked with establishing reauthorization schedules, conducting reviews of the effectiveness of the agencies and programs, and recommending mandatory budget cuts “to be used as potential offsets to restore budget authority that was reduced due to unauthorized programs.”

For David Ditch, Zombie federal agencies are programs, especially those that have continued with funding but without reauthorization, “are a symptom of a federal government that is far too big for the institution of Congress to manage. No institution in the history of humanity could properly manage an entity [like the federal government] that employs so many people doing so many things and spending so much money covering such a broad range of topics.”

Ditch is a senior policy analyst in the Grover M. Hermann Center for the Federal Budget at The Heritage Foundation think tank. Before joining Heritage, Ditch worked on the Senate Budget Committee where, among much else, he analyzed Zombie agencies and programs.

At the heart of the problem, Ditch told The Epoch Times, is how “Congress, rather than doing the hard work of analyzing the performance of an existing federal agency or program, the instinct is to create new things that you can take political credit for back home.”

4 Decades as a Zombie

“Especially when you combine those political incentives with the astronomical growth of the federal government that took place during the 20th century and which has been allowed to keep growing and festering over time, you end up with a combination of small Zombies that probably should be repealed, and I would say large important programs with nowhere near enough oversight,” Ditch said.

Among the results of such political dysfunction are federal agencies—like the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities—that have continued receiving billions of tax dollars despite their legislative authorizations having expired three decades ago in 1993.

Other examples of Zombie programs include the Title X Family Planning Program in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that expired in 1985 which, Ditch pointed out, primarily provides funding for one of the most hotly debated federal subsidy recipients, the Planned Parenthood Foundation of America, Inc.

“If it is so contentious that we couldn’t reauthorize it, why should that program be entitled to going on four decades of billions of dollars over that time period in federal funds?” Ditch asked.

While the clueless losers chant “RUSSIA! RUSSIA! RUSSIA!” , our goobermint has allowed Chinese commies to run amok in the U.S.

Chinese Intel Arm Quietly Operates ‘Service Centers’ In 7 US Cities

A Chinese intelligence agency quietly operates “service centers” in seven American cities, all of which have had contact with Beijing’s national police authority, according to state media reports and government records reviewed by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) United Front Work Department (UFWD) — which at least one U.S. government commission has characterized as a “Chinese intelligence service” — operates so-called “Overseas Chinese Service Centers” (OCSCs) that are housed within various U.S.-based nonprofits. OCSCs were ostensibly set up to promote Chinese culture and assist Chinese citizens living abroad, according to Chinese government records.

State media reports, Chinese government records and social media posts show that during a 2018 trip to China, U.S.-based OCSC representatives met with Ministry of Public Security (MPS) officials. During the meeting, state security officials demonstrated how they’re leveraging new technology to conduct “cross-border remote justice services” overseas.

MPS is China’s national police authority and has been referred to as “China’s FBI” by China experts. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) says MPS also conducts covert “intelligence and national security operations far beyond China’s borders,” including “illicit, transnational repression schemes” on U.S. soil.

Continue reading “”

PROJECTION, BIDEN STYLE

The New York Post reports on President Biden musing to the press before he boarded the plane to hit the campaign trail in Philadelphia yesterday. The White House has helped us along with a transcript. Here we have a pure case of projection, Biden style:

President Biden kicked off his first day of campaigning for re-election by making excuses for communist China — saying that President Xi Jinping never meant to fly a spy balloon over sensitive American military sites earlier this year.

“I don’t think the leadership knew where it was, and knew what was in it, and knew what was going on,” Biden told reporters Saturday as he headed to Philadelphia for his first campaign rally of the 2024 election. “I think it was more embarrassing than it was intentional.”

Biden does everything thing but thank the Chinese Communists for taking an interest in our military installations. What do they have on him? I should like to think that no one can be this stupid without motivation.

As I noted in “Lost horizon” and again in “The Biden two-step,” the CCP regime goes out of its way to show its disrespect of Biden. “Contempt” is probably more like it. Gordon Chang shows how in the 1945 column: “Secretary Blinken’s Visit To China Is One Giant Mistake.”

Who on earth could have seen this coming?

Remember when Obammy’s communications office tried to pretend he was the anti-1984 guy?

Obama suggests ‘digital fingerprints’ to counter misinformation ‘so we know what’s true and what’s not true.’

Former President Barack Obama suggested in a new interview the development of “digital fingerprints” to combat misinformation and distinguish between true and misleading news for consumers.

Obama sat down with his former White House senior adviser David Axelrod for a conversation on the latter’s podcast, “The Axe Files,” on CNN Audio. During the interview, Axelrod noted he’s seen “misinformation, disinformation, [and] deepfakes” targeting Obama.

“As I’ve told people, because I was the first digital president when I left office, I was probably the most recorded, filmed, photographed human in history, which is kind of a weird thing,” responded Obama. “But just the odds are that I was. As a consequence, there’s a lot of raw material there.”

The former president added that the deepfakes — digitally manipulated images, audio or video that appear legitimate — started with a version of him dancing, “saying dirty limericks” and similar kinds of activity.

“That technology’s here now,” continued Obama, who warned about the issue getting worse moving forward. “So, most immediately we’re going to have all the problems we had with misinformation before, [but] this next election cycle will be worse.”

He then suggested “digital fingerprints” to discern truth from misinformation.

“And the need for us, for the general public, I think to be more discriminating consumers of news and information, the need for us to over time develop technologies to create watermarks or digital fingerprints so we know what is true and what is not true,” he said. “There’s a whole bunch of work that’s going to have to be done there, but in the short term, it’s really going to be up to the American people to kind of say.”

Obama and Axelrod went on to say that today many consumers are only viewing information from sources they are predisposed to agree with and will likely believe what they see.

“Obviously, we saw that during the vaccination stuff. So, I am concerned about it,” added Obama, referring to the COVID vaccine. “And I think the best we’re going to be able to do is to constantly remind people that this is out there.”

The former president said he thinks most people are now aware that “not everything that pops up on your phone is true,” but cautioned misinformation can be used to discourage people from voting by characterizing the system as rigged and corrupt.

“That can oftentimes advantage the powerful,” said Obama. “And I am worried about that kind of cynicism developing even further during the course of this next election.”

The interview came about six weeks after the Obama Foundation on World Press Freedom Day posted a recent video of the former president lecturing about “widespread disinformation” and the need for journalists to create “an information environment” to support democracy.

Last year, Obama announced that his foundation would be launching a new initiative to combat misinformation. Days later, Obama angered conservatives with a speech at Stanford University warning of the dangers of “disinformation.”

During the speech, Obama said, “All we see is a constant feed of content where useful factual information and happy diversions, and cat videos flow alongside lies, conspiracy theories, junk science, quackery, White supremacist, racist tracts, misogynist screeds.”

Critics were quick to point out that Obama promoted the debunked narrative that former President Donald Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election and that Obama infamously won Politifact’s “Lie of the Year” in 2013 by telling Americans, “If you like your health care plan, you can keep it,” referring to the Affordable Care Act.

More recently, the Biden administration came under fire for trying to start the now-defunct Disinformation Governance Board under the Department of Homeland Security. Many Republicans argued such an initiative would act as a Ministry of Truth in a dystopian society by suppressing dissent under the guise of stopping misinformation.

Biden Spent Billions to Prosecute 31 People

It’s already saving lives. There are fewer deaths occurring,

Joe Biden
President United States of America
June 16, 2023
The US passed a landmark gun deal one year ago. Is it working?

Really? How does he know? The FBI crime numbers cannot be trusted.

And from the same article:

The event comes as available data suggests the U.S. is seeing a year-over-year decline in murders nationwide. At the same time, mass shootings appear to be accelerating.

And the numbers they do claim are very telling:

At least 31 people have been charged in 17 cases under new federal straw purchasing and trafficking criminal offenses, data from federal prosecutors through April shows.

31?!!! And strawman purchases were already illegal. Out of probably 15 to 20 million sales they charged 31 people under, what they claim, is a new law. And they think this is success?

Denials stemming from enhanced background checks for people under 21 blocked more than 130 firearm purchases between November and April, Peter Carr, a spokesman for the Department of Justice, previously told USA TODAY.

How many of those 130 blocked purchases resulted in an increase in public safety? And how many of those block purchases resulted in a decrease in public safety?

And at what cost?

It created a $750 million funding pot to incentivize states to create “red flag laws,” closed the “boyfriend loophole” by adding convicted domestic violence abusers in dating relationships to the national criminal background check system, clarified the definition of a “federally licensed firearm dealer,” made it a federal crime to traffic in firearms, stiffened penalties for “straw purchases” made on behalf of people who aren’t allowed to own guns and enhanced background checks for buyers under 21.

The law also appropriated billions in funding for schools and mental health services. That includes $150 million for a national 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline, $250 million for states and territories to enhance community mental health services, $500 million to increase the number of school-based mental health providers and $500 million to train school counselors, social workers and psychologists. It also set aside $250 million in funding for community-based violence prevention initiatives.

Billions were spent to prosecute 31 people and block sales to 130 people who, almost for certain, were not a threat to anyone.

And this is even with them playing their game by their rules instead of based on whether what they are doing is a violation of the Second Amendment, which it is.

They lie, they deceive, and they ignore the specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms.

The Bidens ‘Coerced’ Burisma To Pay $10 Million In Bribes, Says Credible FBI Source

Burisma founder Mykola Zlochevsky wasn’t far from the mark when he said it would take 10 years to unravel the complex payment path that led to Joe Biden

The Bidens allegedly “coerced” a foreign national to pay them $10 million in bribes, according to individuals familiar with the investigation into the FBI’s handling of the FD-1023 confidential human source report. What, if anything, agents did to investigate these explosive claims remains unknown, however, with sources telling The Federalist the FBI continues to stonewall.

On Monday, Sen. Chuck Grassley revealed a foreign national — identified by individuals with knowledge of the matter as Burisma founder Mykola Zlochevsky — allegedly possessed 17 recordings implicating the Bidens in a pay-to-play scandal. While 15 of the audio recordings consisted of phone calls between Zlochevsky and Hunter Biden, two were of calls the Ukrainian had with then-Vice President Joe Biden, according to the FD-1023.

The Federalist has now learned the FD-1023 reported the CHS saying the Bidens “coerced” Zlochevsky to pay the bribes. Sources familiar with the investigation also explained the context of Zlochevsky’s statements, and that context further bolsters the CHS’s reporting.

In the FD-1023 from June 30, 2020, the confidential human source summarized earlier meetings he had with Zlochevsky. According to the CHS, in the 2015-2016 timeframe, the CHS, who was providing advice to Zlochevsky, told the Burisma owner to stay away from the Bidens. Then, after Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential contest, the CHS asked Zlochevsky if he was upset Trump won.

Zlochevsky allegedly told the CHS he was dismayed by Trump’s victory, fearing an investigation would reveal his payments to the Biden family, which included a $5 million payment to Hunter Biden and a $5 million payment to Joe Biden. According to the CHS, the Burisma executive bemoaned the situation, claiming the Bidens had “coerced” him into paying the bribes.

The CHS responded that he hoped Zlochevsky had taken precautions to protect himself. Zlochevsky then allegedly detailed the steps he had taken to avoid detection, stressing he had never paid the “Big Guy” directly and that it would take some 10 years to unravel the various money trails. It was only then that Zlochevsky mentioned the audio recordings he had made of the conversations he had with Hunter and Joe Biden, according to the CHS.

The broader context of this conversation adds to the plausibility of Zlochevsky’s claims that he possessed recordings implicating the Bidens. And we already know from Grassley and House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer that the FBI considered the CHS, who relayed Zlochevsky’s claims to the FBI, a “highly credible” source.

Further, according to individuals familiar with the investigation, the FBI admitted the CHS’s intel was unrelated to the information Rudy Giuliani had provided the Western District of Pennsylvania’s U.S. attorney’s office — the office then-Attorney General William Barr had tasked with reviewing any new information related to Ukraine.

Sources told The Federalist that investigators out of the Pittsburgh office, in addition to reviewing Giuliani’s information, searched internal FBI databases and came across an earlier FD-1023 related to the CHS. That earlier FD-1023 then led to agents questioning the CHS on June 30, 2020, uncovering the details concerning Burisma’s alleged bribery of the Bidens.

What the FBI did to investigate the allegations is unknown, with sources telling The Federalist the bureau refused to either confirm or deny that the DOJ under Barr sent the FD-1023 to Delaware for further investigation. On the contrary, the FBI allowed Rep. Jamie Raskin, ranking member on the House Oversight Committee, to falsely represent to Americans that Barr and Pittsburgh U.S. Attorney Scott Brady had closed the investigation. Raskin’s deceit, tolerated by the FBI, forced Barr to publicly correct the record.

The FBI is also refusing to provide any information on what, if any, steps it took to investigate the detailed claims contained in the FD-1023. But sources familiar with investigative procedures maintain there was insufficient time between the June 30, 2020, interview of the CHS and the FBI headquarters’ closing of an assessment related to the FD-1023 in August 2020 to properly probe the matter. “They couldn’t have done much,” one source said.

There is also no independent confirmation from Delaware indicating any investigative steps were taken regarding the FD-1023. Agents in Delaware “could have sat on it,” according to one individual familiar with the investigation.

While the FBI’s efforts to unwind the pay-to-play scheme seem to have been nonexistent, banking records released in May by the House Oversight Committee show congressional investigators are unraveling the complex web behind the Biden family business. Those records provide concrete evidence of a pattern of public corruption involving foreign nationals, with Joe Biden at the helm. There are still more banking records to review, along with the many details recently discovered when the whistleblower came forward with the FD-1023.

Apparently, Zlochevsky wasn’t far from the mark when he said it would take 10 years to unravel the complex payment path that led to Joe Biden.

Committee approves proposal to regulate Marion County firearms, but state law has to change first

Proposal to control access to guns in Marion County

On Wednesday, the City-County Council’s Public Safety and Criminal Justice Committee approved a proposal that would regulate gun access in Marion County. Nine council members voted in favor of the measure, and four against.

The proposal’s first provision would create a ban on the sale of assault-style weapons such as AR-15s. A second would increase the minimum age to purchase a weapon from 18 to 21. The third would end permitless carry of handguns.

Last month, Hogsett announced that one of his office’s top priorities during the next legislative session would be convincing the General Assembly to change state law surrounding gun regulation.

Currently, individuals do not need a permit to carry a firearm in Indiana. Indiana has a preemption statute that prevents local governments from regulating firearms.

Multiple council members said Wednesday that Indianapolis should be able to enforce its own laws on firearms.

“I implore our state legislature to remove this ban and allow our city to rule for the benefit of our people,” said Democratic council member Dan Boots.

Republican council members like Joshua Bain voted against the proposal.

”We’re going to continue to blame guns, other tools like that, for what is ultimately a spiritual issue that’s affecting our society,” he said.

But IMPD Chief Randal Taylor, who supports the measure, said more concrete solutions are needed.

“I’ve always said that I would much rather someone decide not to shoot someone, work on someone’s heart, and not do these crimes in the first place,” Taylor said at the meeting. “And I’m still all for that. However, we don’t seem to be winning that battle right now.”