Categories
gun control guns Intelwars Joe Biden Merrick Garland mike lee Second Amendment

Merrick Garland admits his DOJ would ‘advance’ Joe Biden’s gun control agenda: ‘Entitled to pursue’

Merrick Garland, the nominee for attorney general, admitted Monday that the Department of Justice would most likely enforce President Joe Biden’s gun control agenda.

What did Garland say?

Garland revealed his philosophy toward the Second Amendment during questioning from Utah Sen. Mike Lee (R).

Lee asked, “Do you support banning of certain types of firearms?”

“Well, as I’m sure you know, the president is a strong supporter of gun control and has been an advocate all his professional life on this question,” Garland responded.

“The role of the Justice Department is to advance the policy program of the administration as long as it is consistent with the law,” he continued. “Where there is room under the law for the president’s policies to be pursued, then I think the president is entitled to pursue them.”

Garland, however, conceded the Supreme Court has given “a little indication” about the extent of the Second Amendment, a reference to
D.C. v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago, two landmark Supreme Court cases affirming the fundamental nature of Second Amendment rights.

Garland later said his view is “totally controlled” by those Supreme Court precedents.


Senate holds Merrick Garland’s confirmation hearing

youtu.be

What about Biden’s gun goals?

Biden has made gun control a central concern of his political agenda, both throughout his presidential campaign and since taking office last month.

Biden’s aggressive gun control agenda includes, among other promises:

  • Banning the manufacture and sale of “assault weapons and high-capacity magazines,” which Biden calls “weapons of war”
  • Restricting Americans to one firearm purchase per month
  • Ending online firearm and ammunition sale
  • Putting “America on the path to ensuring that 100% of firearms sold in America are smart guns”
  • Requiring “gun owners to safely store their weapons”

While the constitutionality of assault weapons bans have yet to be determined by the Supreme Court — the high court rejected hearing 10 gun-related cases last year, which included cases involving assault weapons bans — the court has already ruled on at-home safety restrictions.

While many states require gun owners to keep firearms out of access for minors, there is no federal law mandating the safe storage of firearms.

However, the Supreme Court ruled in D.C. v. Heller that a portion of D.C.’s firearm regulations that required all firearms in a home be “unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock” was unconstitutional.

Still, the Supreme Court has affirmed that some restrictions on the Second Amendment are not unreasonable, and therefore permissible. Where the proverbial line in the sand exists, though, has not been made clear, and will likely be established in due time.

Anything else?

The White House confirmed last week that Biden may use executive action to enact his gun control agenda.

Biden earlier used the third anniversary of the Parkland, Florida, tragedy to push for gun control.

“Today, I am calling on Congress to enact commonsense gun law reforms, including requiring background checks on all gun sales, banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and eliminating immunity for gun manufacturers who knowingly put weapons of war on our streets,” Biden said on Feb. 14.

Share
Categories
gun control gun registry gun rights guns Intelwars Sheila Jackson Lee

Democratic bill would create public registry of gun owners, their guns, and where they keep them

A Democratic bill introduced in the House of Representatives this year aims to create a mandatory and publicly accessible registry listing the names of gun owners, how many guns they have, and even where they keep their firearms.

Additionally, the bill, H.R. 127, would ban several types of commonly used ammunition .50 caliber or greater, require gun owners to purchase firearm insurance costing $800 per year, and force those seeking to buy a gun to complete a psychological evaluation and a government training course prior to the purchase.

Should gun owners fail to adhere to the new restrictions, they could face an harsh penalty of 10 years in prison and fines of $50,000 to $150,000.

Sponsored by Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas), the bill is one of the most aggressive attempts yet by progressive lawmakers to curb Americans’ Second Amendment rights and is already drawing intense scrutiny from gun rights groups.

“All gun control bills share the same basic goal: a world in which fewer people own firearms,” the National Rifle Association wrote about the legislation. “Some bills simply ban certain types of firearms or ammunition outright. Others place obstacles in the path of owning firearms or ammunition to make them more difficult and expensive to obtain, thereby shrinking the market for them … H.R. 127 combines both failed approaches.”

“It bans common types of ammunition and original equipment magazines for most self-defense firearms. And, it makes all firearms more difficult to obtain and possess through a punitive licensing and registration scheme,” the group continued.

Speaking with the Washington Times, the leaders of several retired police officer groups also slammed the bill as a brazen attempt to curtail Second Amendment rights — and a hazardous one at that. Under the legislation, retired officers would not be exempt from the public registry.

“This is very dangerous, especially for retirees,” Kevin Hassett, president of the New York’s Retired Police Association, told the outlet. “Things have gone so downhill with this level of hostility towards cops and we are out there with the label that we are no longer cops. Retired cops don’t have partners or backup. We are out there on our own.”

Association of Retired Police Officers president Gerald G. Neill Jr. expressed concern that a registry would lead to the targeting of former cops.

“There is danger in having this as part of the public record,” he said.

While the bill has a long way to go before becoming law — it has no co-sponsors and has yet to be scheduled for a committee hearing — its mere introduction demonstrates the confidence of anti-gun lawmakers under the Biden administration and in a Democratic Party-controlled Congress.

“H.R. 127 is so outrageous, persecutory, and unworkable that its main function is simply to display the hostility of its author and supporters toward firearms, those who own them, and those who want to own them,” the NRA added in its blistering writeup.

Biden has yet to comment on Jackson Lee’s bill, but he appears set to make gun control a major issue of his presidency, as this week he called on Congress to enact “commonsense” reforms such as banning “assault weapons.” The White House has not ruled out using executive authority to push Biden’s gun control agenda.

Share
Categories
Americans basic rights David hogg draconian laws Florida government is slavery gun control Headline News human rights Intelwars Joe Biden Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Nikolas Cruz Parkland shooting propaganda PSYCHOPATHS school un laws wake up

Biden Shamelessly Exploits Parkland Shooting to Push Draconian Gun Ban

This article was originally published by Matt Agorist at The Free Thought Project. 

Pulling on the heartstrings of Americans on Valentine’s Day, President Joe Biden urged Congress to implement unprecedented gun bans, magazine bans, ammo bans, and going after gun manufacturers. He pushed for these draconian measures by evoking an emotional reaction, through the exploitation of the Parkland shooting.

“The Parkland students and so many other young people across the country who have experienced gun violence are carrying forward the history of the American journey. It is a history written by young people in each generation who challenged prevailing dogma to demand a simple truth: we can do better. And we will,” Biden said in a statement.

This Administration will not wait for the next mass shooting to heed that call. We will take action to end our epidemic of gun violence and make our schools and communities safer. Today, I am calling on Congress to enact commonsense gun law reforms, including requiring background checks on all gun sales, banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and eliminating immunity for gun manufacturers who knowingly put weapons of war on our streets.”

For those who remember, this was a tactic employed by Donald Trump as well, who took to his pulpit after Parkland to call for removing due process.

“I like taking the guns early like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida … to go to court would have taken a long time,” Trump said at a meeting with lawmakers after the shooting.

“Take the guns first, go through due process second,” Trump said.

In the afternoon on Feb. 14, 2018, a man identified by authorities as Nikolas Cruz, now 22, walked into Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and opened fire with an AR-15 rifle. The shooting left 17 dead, including 14 students. Since then, this tragedy has been exploited by the anti-gun crowd as a means of removing guns from the hands of law-abiding citizens. Dozens upon dozens of “red flag” gun laws and other such bills have been passed and are being used across the country.

Although the ostensible intention of these laws is to stop a future tragedy, it is important to point out that there were already laws on the books that should’ve stopped Nikolas Cruz from ever getting a gun. This is a fact that is ignored by Biden and the rest of the anti-second amendment ilk.

Citing Cruz as the reason for advocating the erosion of the 2nd Amendment, the anti-gun activists are claiming he should’ve had his guns taken which would have prevented the tragedy. Sadly, however, they are ignoring the fact that he was accused of multiple feloniesand should’ve never been able to purchase a gun in the first place—but law enforcement failed to act on any of it.

According to a report by CNN, records obtained from the sheriff’s office by CNN show the law enforcement agency received at least 45 calls for service relating to Cruz or his brother from 2008 to 2017.

As TFTP previously reported, Cruz warned that he was going to shoot up a school and kill people and the FBI did nothing. “I’m going to be a professional school shooter,” A YouTube user named Nikolas Cruz commented on a video on Sept. 24, 2017. The video was posted on the channel “Ben The Bondsman,” and the owner, Ben Bennight, immediately took a screenshot and submitted it to the FBI. Nothing happened.

While this is bad enough, the Sheriff’s department records show that police were given this exact same warning—a year before—because Cruz had been declaring his wishes to shoot up the school publicly.

According to the records, in 2016, a neighbor warned police that Cruz posted on Instagram that he said he “planned to shoot up the school.” The person who made that call came forward in March and said that she begged the sheriff’s office to intervene. Instead of intervening though, police told her that they couldn’t act until Cruz actually did something.

The incompetence is staggering, especially given the fact that making a direct threat of violence is illegal.

A few months after he said he wanted to shoot up the school on Instagram—because the police failed to heed this warning and the dozens of other ones—Cruz bought the rifle he would use in the shooting—none of the gun control laws or the actual laws on the books designed to stop him from getting a gun worked.

In Florida, if a person making death threats intends for the victim to fear for his or her safety, specifically fearful of death or bodily harm, it is considered a credible threat under the law, which changes the crime from stalking, a first-degree misdemeanor, to aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree. Cruz was reported at least 4 times for this very crime before he bought his AR-15 — and police did nothing.

The reactionary nature of disarming Americans because deranged psychopaths kill people is dangerous and only serves to keep the guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens. Moreover, deranged psychopaths don’t even need guns to cause mass death.

Biden has been outspoken about his desires to disarm Americans and gun-control advocacy groups are pushing both executive orders and legislative packages to make sure this happens. As Democrats control both chambers of Congress and the White House, these actions have an even better chance of getting rammed through.

The post Biden Shamelessly Exploits Parkland Shooting to Push Draconian Gun Ban first appeared on SHTF Plan – When It Hits The Fan, Don’t Say We Didn’t Warn You.

Share
Categories
Biden gun control Biden guns executive action Executive Orders gun control Intelwars

White House: Biden considering using executive action to push gun control agenda

President Biden has not ruled out using executive action to push through his gun control agenda, White House press secretary Jen Psaki confirmed Tuesday.

The news followed a meeting between gun control group leaders and top White House officials last week which left the leaders feeling confident that the Biden administration would enact gun reform via executive order, if necessary.

When asked by a reporter during Tuesday’s press briefing whether or not the administration was still considering bypassing Congress to force action on guns, Psaki said that Biden “has a range of actions at his disposal” and added that he “hasn’t ruled out” using executive power to address the issue.


White House Holds Press Briefing: February 16 | NBC News

youtu.be

Biden, who made weakening Second Amendment rights a major theme of his campaign, issued a statement this week on the anniversary of the shooting in Parkland, Florida, urging Congress to get moving on what he called “commonsense” gun laws — which includes the outright ban of so-called assault weapons.

“Today, I am calling on Congress to enact commonsense gun law reforms, including requiring background checks on all gun sales, banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and eliminating immunity for gun manufacturers who knowingly put weapons of war on our streets,” he said.

During the news conference, Psaki was also asked about Biden’s statement and, specifically, the chances that such an aggressive gun control plan has to pass in Congress.

In response, Psaki noted that the administration hadn’t put together a legislative package yet, perhaps signaling that executive action is the administration’s preferred route.

“Well, we haven’t proposed a package at this point, so it’s hard for me to make a prediction about its likelihood of passing,” she said. “But I will say that the president is somebody throughout his career who has advocated for smart gun safety measures. He has not afraid of standing up to the [National Rifle Association]. He’s done it multiple times and won on background checks and a range of issues. And it is a priority to him on a personal level, but I don’t have a prediction for you, or preview for you on a timeline of a package, and certainly not what it will look like and how it goes through Congress.”

(H/T: Daily Wire)

Share
Categories
2nd Amendment Biden administration gun control guns Intelwars Joe Biden Nancy Pelosi Parkland shooting Second Amendment

Biden uses Parkland anniversary to call on Congress to enact gun reforms: ban ‘assault weapons’ and ‘weapons of war’

On the third anniversary of the Parkland school shooting, President Joe Biden called on Congress to implement “commonsense gun law reforms.”

On Sunday, Biden made remarks about the horrific 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.

“Three years ago today, a lone gunman took the lives of 14 students and three educators at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida,” Biden said in a statement. “In seconds, the lives of dozens of families, and the life of an American community, were changed forever.”

Biden called for gun control.

“This Administration will not wait for the next mass shooting to heed that call,” the president stated. “We will take action to end our epidemic of gun violence and make our schools and communities safer.”

“Today, I am calling on Congress to enact commonsense gun law reforms, including requiring background checks on all gun sales, banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and eliminating immunity for gun manufacturers who knowingly put weapons of war on our streets,” Biden declared. “We owe it to all those we’ve lost and to all those left behind to grieve to make a change. The time to act is now.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) also marked the anniversary of the tragedy by detailing how Democrats would enact gun control measures in Congress.

Pelosi proclaimed, “Today, we continue to grieve and work with the Parkland families and survivors who have turned their pain into courageous action, inspiring a movement across the country to say, ‘Enough is enough!’

“Last Congress, moved by the daily epidemic of gun violence and guided by the millions of young people marching for their lives, House Democrats took bold action to save lives and end the bloodshed by passing H.R. 8, the Bipartisan Background Checks Act, and H.R. 1112, the Enhanced Background Checks Act,” Pelosi said in a statement on Sunday.

“Now, working with the Democratic Senate and Biden-Harris Administration, we will enact these and other life-saving bills and deliver the progress that the Parkland community and the American people deserve and demand,” Pelosi claimed.

To commemorate the lives lost from the Parkland shooting, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis ordered flags to be flown at half-mast on Sunday. The Republican governor also implored Floridians to join him in a “moment of silence” at 3 p.m. in remembrance of the lives lost in the shooting.

DeSantis asked the country to mourn the lives of the victims, “Whereas, our state and nation continue to mourn and will always remember the lives of Alyssa Alhadeff, Scott Beigel, Martin Duque Anguiano, Nicholas Dworet, Aaron Feis, Jaime Guttenberg, Chris Hixon, Luke Hoyer, Cara Loughran, Gina Montalto, Joaquin Oliver, Alaina Petty, Meadow Pollack, Helena Ramsay, Alex Schachter, Carmen Schentrup and Peter Wang.”

The Parkland school shooting perpetrator is still awaiting trial.

“The case could have been all over by now. [The alleged shooter’s] lawyers have repeatedly said he would plead guilty in exchange for a life sentence. But prosecutors won’t budge on seeking the death penalty at trial,” the Associated Press reported.

Share
Categories
Company David hogg gun control Intelwars Mike lindell Mypillow

Gun control activist David Hogg announces launch of pillow company to take on MyPillow

Gun control activist David Hogg announced Thursday that he and a partner are starting a company that will “prove that progressives can make a better pillow,” promising to take on MyPillow, founded by conservative Trump supporter Mike Lindell.

What are the details?

Hogg tweeted that he and software developer William LeGate “are going to prove that progressives can make a better pillow, run a better business and help make the world a better place while doing it.”

He added, “We will have the name announced soon but we need to get through the legal process of trademarking as (sic) so on.”

Hogg, who became famous for co-founding activist organization “March for Our Lives” after surviving the Parkland, Fla., mass murder at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School, confirmed to Axios that taking on Lindell is his goal.

“Mike isn’t going to know what hit him,” Hogg told the outlet, saying, “this pillow fight is just getting started.” The teen noted that his new venture is expected to launch in six months or so with the goal of selling “$1 million in product within our first year.”

“[W]e would like to do it sooner but we have strict guidelines on sustainability and [U.S.] based Union producers,” Hogg explained.

Lindell did not appear phased by the news, telling Axios in response, “Good for them….nothing wrong with competition that does not infringe on someone’s patent.”

The MyPillow founder and CEO has become a target of the left for years over his outspoken support of President Donald Trump, but Lindell has faced additional heat and legal threats in recent months over his yet-unsubstantiated insistence that voting machines in the U.S. were manipulated by foreign countries to steal the election from Trump.

Lindell has was issued a cease and desist letter over his claims by Dominion Voting Systems, one of the companies he has accused of being involved in an election fraud scheme. Dominion has already sued pro-Trump attorneys Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani over similar claims.

But Lindell issued a defiant response to the threat, telling Axios last month, “I want Dominion to put up their lawsuit because we have 100% evidence that China and other countries used their machines to steal the election.”

Lindell has also seen several major retailers drop his products in recent weeks, and he has been issued a permanent ban from Twitter for “repeated violations” of the platform’s “Civic Integrity Policy.”

Editorial note: In the interest of full disclosure, MyPillow is a current advertiser on a program that appears on BlazeTV.

Share
Categories
5G rollout big oil Big Pharma Chelsea Manning Donald Trump Drain the swamp establishment Executive Orders expansion government is slavery Great Divider gun control Headline News Intelwars Jeffrey Epstein Joe Biden Julian Assange left vs. right paradigm lie power presidential kill list ruling class The Swamp WikiLeaks

Here Are 18 Ways Trump Supported The Swamp During His Presidency

This article was originally published by Derrick Broze at The Last American Vagabond. 

*They are all on the same side, and that side is against us. It is time to face reality.

On January 19, Donald Trump said farewell to America as he acknowledged “this week, we inaugurate a new administration.” Trump is yet to officially concede – a point which his most hardcore followers still believe indicates he will remain president – however, he finally spoke about handing over the reins of power to the Biden administration. “Now, as I prepare to hand power over to a new administration at noon on Wednesday, I want you to know that the movement we started is only just beginning,” Trump stated during his farewell address.

While he might not have mentioned Biden or Harris by name, it is clear that Joe Biden is going to be sworn in as the next President of the United States. Before America races to forget the Trump years we owe it to ourselves to pause and reflect on the facts of the Trump era. First, Donald Trump did not drain the swamp. As I illustrate below, Trump used his position of power to continue to empower the same industries and figures which have benefitted from every Democratic and Republican president before him. Indeed, I stand by my assessment of Trump made in November 2016: Donald Trump’s role was to be The Great Divider. He used his position to stoke the flames of division and chaos, all the while playing the role of the “anti-establishment” President (an oxymoron if there ever was one).

In 2018 I asked, “When Will Trump Supporters in The Freedom Movement Realize They Were Duped?”. I didn’t have much faith at the time, stating, “Now, of course, there are the diehards who will inevitably stick with Trump through his entire presidential career no matter what policy he takes, even when in contradiction with not only his own words but with the principles previously espoused by these die-hard followers.” Now, as Biden is about to wield the Presidential powers, Trump’s most diehard followers still claim Trump is going to stop Biden from being president.

My concern is that folks who previously supported many of the actions taken by Trump will not recover the principles they once held, and instead, further entrench themselves in the false left/right paradigm, convincing themselves that Trump represented the fight against the “Deep State” and Biden is the Swamp incarnate. The problem with this belief is that it reinforces the idea that one party is actually better than the other when in reality they both play for the same masters. Most importantly, this belief that Trump was fighting the Deep State is not backed up by the facts. Allow me to present a partial list of the evidence showing Trump’s relationship with the swamp.

1. Nominating Industry Insiders

From the moment he took office it was clear that Donald Trump was going to continue the practice of his predecessors and continue the revolving door relationship between government and corporations. As I wrote in March 2018:

“President Donald Trump nominated Peter C. Wright to be the assistant administrator for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Land and Emergency Management (OLEM). The nomination of Wright is another indication that the Trump administration will continue the practice of nominating industry insiders and corporate lawyers to positions of power.

In addition to his work with Dow, Wright’s LinkedIn page lists him as an Environmental Attorney for Monsanto from 1989 to 1996. Wright’s association with The Dow Chemical Company and Monsanto— corporations known for producing hazardous chemicals and pesticides along with genetically engineered seeds— could be an indication that the Trump Administration may have a sympathetic ear for these industries. If so, it would be the continuation of a trend that has extended through the last few American presidencies.”

2. Cozy with Big Oil

One of the most obvious areas where Trump was in bed with the corporations is the oil industry. In his first week in office Trump issued an Executive Order to fast track the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline, a project that has a legacy of oil leaks and militarized police. Additionally, Trump passed Executive Orders which said the pipelines, roads, and railways along the border will take no more than 60 days to be approved or denied and that the decision will now come directly from the President himself, effectively giving the president unilateral powers for approving oil projects.

In March 2019 further evidence was revealed after conversations between Interior Secretary David Bernhardt and oil executives were leaked. In a secret recording obtained by Reveal, oil executives can be heard discussing David Bernhardt and celebrating the access they currently have to the Trump Administration. The recording took place during a 2017 Independent Petroleum Association of America (IPPA) meeting in Southern California.

3. Cozy with Big Pharma

Another massive indicator that Trump continued the practice of allowing the corporations to regulate themselves was his appointment of various cronies of Big Pharma. In 2017, Trump chose Alex Azar for Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. The nominee immediately came under scrutiny for his former connections to the pharmaceutical industry.

Azar formerly served as U.S. Deputy Secretary of Health and Human Services under George W. Bush from 2005 to 2007. In June 2007, Azar began working as a lobbyist for pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly and Company. Azar also served as Eli Lilly’s spokesman as its Senior Vice President of Corporate Affairs and Communications. Beginning January 1, 2012, Azar was promoted to President of Lilly USA, LLC, the largest division of Eli Lilly and Company – a position which put him in charge of Eli Lilly’s entire U.S. operation.

This trend continued into 2020, when Trump appointed Dr. Moncef Slaoui to the head of his Operation Warp Speed – itself an example of the worst kinds of public private partnerships. Slaoui has extensive ties to the pharmaceutical industry and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. As I reported in May 2020:

“Following his education, Slaoui joined the pharmaceutical industry, serving on the board of Directors of GlaxoSmithKline between 2006 through 2015. Slaoui served in several senior research & development (R&D) roles with GlaxoSmithKline during his time with the company, including Chairman of Global Vaccines. GSK has a history of working with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation on projects such as the development of a malaria vaccine and anti-HIV compounds used as microbicides. In fact, Dr. Slaoui worked for 27 years on the malaria vaccine, ultimately partnering with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to develop a $600 million malaria vaccine. When Slaoui took over at GSK, his predecessor, Tachi Yamada, joined the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

More recently, Slaoui sits on the boards of pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology organizations. He is also partner at MediciX investment firm,chairman of the board at Galvani Bioelectronics, chairman of the board at SutroVax and sits on the boards of Artisan Biosciences, Human Vaccines Project and Moderna Therapeutics. Each of these companies is involved in vaccine development and the emerging field of bioelectronics.”

4. Support for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Dr. Slaoui was not the only connection to the Gates Foundation we saw from the Trump administration. In October, the NIH signed contracts with companies connected to DARPA, Big Tech, and the Gates Foundation.

Additionally, the Trump administration signed off on giving billions of taxpayer dollars to the Gates founded and funded GAVI, the Global Vaccine Alliance.

5. Ending Investigations Into Pesticide Dangers

The Trump admin faced lawsuits from activist groups for ending ongoing investigations into the dangers of pesticides.

6. Making GMO’s Easier To Enter the Food Supply

On June 11, 2019, Trump quietly issued an executive order to “streamline” GMO regulations in the United States. The order, titled Modernizing the Regulatory Framework for Agricultural Biotechnology Products, is the latest move by the Trump administration aimed at promoting the use of genetically engineered or modified crops. In his executive order, Trump called on federal agencies to fix what he called a “regulatory maze” related to the farming and selling of GMO products.

Greg Jaffe, biotechnology director at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, told the Associated Press that the impact of the order depends on how the federal government responds. “There needs to be an assurance of safety for those products,” Jaffe said.

7. Bad on Gun Rights

Depending on your political view this issue might not matter much, but for Trump’s base, gun rights are an issue close to their hearts. During his administration, Trump supported calls for controversial Red Flag Laws – government-approved removal of weapons based on spurious claims – and a bump stock ban on firearms.

8. Support of and Expansion of the 5G Roll Out

Despite opposition by thousands of scientists, doctors, researchers, activists, and health professionals, Donald Trump pushed for the expansion of 5G networks, at one time calling for 6G. In April 2019, Trump issued an executive order stating that local and state bodies must now approve new 5G infrastructure within 90 days. The Trump administration also initiated a cap on the fees local governments can charge telecom companies wanting to install 5G technology.

9. Support of the Syria False Flag Narrative

In April 2018, the United States and some of the international community claimed that Syria President Bashar al Assad had gassed his own people in Douma, Syria. This alleged gas attack was immediately called into question by neutral observers. Even a former investigator with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) testified to the United Nations about attempts to suppress evidence that contradicted the OPCW’s final report. The report claimed Syrian President Bashar al Assad was responsible for an alleged gas attack in April 2018.

Despite the fact that many journalists have pointed out the flaws in the story, Donald Trump bombed Syria based on this false flag attack. The media has continued to prevent the public from finding out the truth, including firing journalists who question the mainstream narrative. 

10. The Drone Emperor

While Obama was known as the “Drone King” for his reliance on drone technology for taking out accused terrorists – and killing their innocent families – Trump took it to a new level. First, Trump removed rules which required reporting on drone deaths that were put in place by Obama, once he decided he had his turn with drone murder. In fact, in 2019, airstrikes from the US and its allies in Afghanistan killed 700 civilians, more than in any other year since the beginning of the war in 2001 and 2002, according to new research from Brown University’s Cost of War project. The report stated that “the number of civilians killed by international airstrikes increased about 330 percent from 2016, the last full year of the Obama administration, to 2019, the most recent year for which there is complete data from the United Nations”. 

11. Fighting to Keep Presidential Kill List Secret

In December 2017, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration in an attempt to force the release of newly established rules related to the U.S. military’s secret program of killing. The program was established during the Obama Administration and expanded under Donald Trump.

12. Lying to the 9/11 Victims’ Families

Despite making vague statements about “finding out the truth” about 9/11, Donald Trump never used his position to challenge the official narrative surrounding the 9/11 attacks. Even worse, Trump actually lied to the victims’ family members when he promised he would get to the bottom of the Saudi involvement in 9/11. Despite the family’s efforts to have Trump investigate Saudi Arabia, he failed to do any meaningful investigation of one of the American government’s favorite partners.

13. Imprisoned an American Citizen Without Trial or Charge

In a story that received way less attention than it deserves, the Trump administration held an American citizen without trial or charge for over a year. An American man had reportedly traveled to research and document the ongoing conflict in Syria when he was seized by Kurdish forces and handed over to the U.S. military. The Trump administration labeled him an “enemy combatant” and held him without charges for more than a year without officially charging him with a crime. After help from the American Civil Liberties Union, that unidentified American was freed. Unfortunately, he was set free and forced to go live in an unidentified country that is not his home.

“My case has shown the worst and the best of my country,” the man said in a statement issued by his lawyers to the Washington Post. “No one, no matter what they are suspected of, should be treated the way my government treated me. Once I got the chance to stand up for my rights, the Constitution and the courts protected me.”

14. Continued Support of the NDAA Indefinite Detention Clause

Speaking of detention, another product of the War on Terror (aka the War on Freedom) is a provision contained in the NDAA which was originally included in the 2011 version of the bill. Some readers may recall that since 2011 the NDAA has included a provision that allows for indefinite detention of American citizens without a right to trial. The bill was signed into law by former President Obama and the indefinite detention provision is still contained in the NDAA, having been approved by Trump every year since it first passed.

15. Attempted to Block Testimony on CIA Torture

The Trump admin invoked states secrets privilege in an effort to prevent the two psychologists who created the CIA’s torture program from testifying in court.

16. Empowering and Expanding the Police State

The expansion of the police and surveillance states has happened under the Trump administration in a variety of forms. Specifically, the Trump admin expanded the militarization of law enforcement and surveillance tools under the guise of fighting illegal immigration. As Trump discussed building a wall along the southern border of the United States – a wall which American taxpayers paid for – he was also working with Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to increase surveillance.

During the Trump admin, ICE faced lawsuits for using secret surveillance tools which they refuse to release details about. In January 2020, CBP and ICE released a Privacy Impact Assessment detailing plans to collect DNA from individuals temporarily detained at border crossings. This was the first attempt to collect the DNA of individuals who are detained but not charged with a crime.

The Border Patrol also launched a program to scan the face of every person flying out of the U.S., and a program to scan the faces of everyone inside vehicles that are driving across international borders.

17. Supporting the Persecution and Prosecution of Julian Assange & Chelsea Manning

During his campaign for President, Donald Trump famously said he loved Wikileaks, but after he was elected he began singing a different tune. Trump eventually called for the prosecution of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and the Trump admin put pressure on the Ecuadorian Embassy in London to turn Assange over to the United States. Now, as Trump’s presidency slips away Assange’s supporters are desperately hoping for a pardon that does not seem to be coming.

The Trump administration has also recently come under fire for the treatment of U.S. Army whistleblower Chelsea Manning. Manning was recently summoned to answer questions as part of a grand jury subpoena. For refusing to participate in the secret grand jury process, she was arrested and has been held in solitary confinement since. It is believed that the questions relate to Manning’s 2010 leaks of U.S. Army documents to Wikileaks.

18. Trump’s Nearly 3 Decade Relationship with Jeffrey Epstein

When serial abuser Jeffrey Epstein was arrested in 2019, Donald Trump did not mention his relationship with Epstein. The well-documented relationship goes back to the 1980s and includes extensive ties with Epstein’s partner in crime, Ghislaine Maxwell. Epstein had 14 different numbers from Donald Trump in his little black book and numerous videos and pictures show the men spending time together. Despite the attempt by Trump’s base to place distance between him and Epstein, one of Epstein’s earliest victims says Trump, the Clintons, Alan Dershowitz, and the Rothschilds were all involved in the disturbing sex trafficking schemes.

Due to Epstein’s untimely disappearance, we will likely never know the true extent of Trump’s involvement. That is unless Ghislaine Maxwell decides to save her own skin by exposing everyone involved in the Epstein-Intelligence operation.

Question Everything, Come To Your Own Conclusions.

The post Here Are 18 Ways Trump Supported The Swamp During His Presidency first appeared on SHTF Plan – When It Hits The Fan, Don’t Say We Didn’t Warn You.

Share
Categories
Barack Obama Donald Trump Executive Orders Force freedom gun control Headline News implement will Intelwars Joe Biden Laws liars mandates no process Politicians Politics registration rights ruling class SLAVERY statism system The Matrix tyranny Violence Vote WHITE HOUSE

One of the First Executive Orders Biden Will Pass is Gun Control — Will You Comply?

This article was originally published by Matt Agorist at The Free Thought Project. 

On Tuesday, Stef Feldman, the national policy director of Joe Biden’s presidential campaign, announced in a meeting put on by the Georgetown Institute of Politics and Public Service, that gun control is at the top of Biden’s list. There will be no vote or democratic process, and like Trump and Obama before him, Biden will use Execute Orders to implement his will.

Feldman pointed out that when he gets in the White House, Biden is planning to “make big, bold changes through executive action, not just on policing and climate like we talked about previously, but in healthcare and education, on gun violence, on a range of issues,” adding, “there’s really a lot you can do through guidance and executive action.”

This statement should come as no surprise as Biden has been an outspoken gun-grabber and on his campaign website, he’s stated that he will use executive action to enforce gun control.

On the site, Biden states that he will use executive action to “get weapons of war off our streets.” Calling an AR-style weapon a “weapon of war” is laughable given the fact that Biden, under President Obama, aided in the wholesale slaughter of countless innocent civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, and Somalia — using actual “weapons of war” like drone strikes, hellfire missiles, and sanctions.

Nevertheless, the new boss — who is the same as the old boss, contrary to what many believe — plans to immediately ban the “manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.”

Joe Biden will enact legislation to once again ban assault weapons. This time, the bans will be designed based on lessons learned from the 1994 bans. For example, the ban on assault weapons will be designed to prevent manufacturers from circumventing the law by making minor changes that don’t limit the weapon’s lethality. While working to pass this legislation, Biden will also use his executive authority to ban the importation of assault weapons.

Biden also plans to force all legal gun owners to register their firearms with the state, or be forced to turn them in, going so far as to issued an ultimatum.

This will give individuals who now possess assault weapons or high-capacity magazines two options: sell the weapons to the government, or register them under the National Firearms Act.

Biden also plans on instituting legislation that will limit how many guns you can purchase. On top of that, he plans on telling you how you can purchase them by banning the “sale of firearms, ammunition, kits, and gun parts online.”

Perhaps one of Biden’s most ominous moves in regard to controlling guns is his push for “smart gun technology” that will require biometrics to fire in an ostensible move to “prevent unauthorized use.” In reality, however, this paves the way for bad actors, including the state and hackers, to be able to control, hack, or essentially turn off your gun, making it a paperweight.

Biden also plans to pick up where Trump left off in regard to extreme risk laws, also called “red flag” laws. Under Biden’s plan, which is similar to the many plans implemented under Trump, family members or law enforcement officials will be able to make claims — many which involve no evidence — allowing a person’s guns to be temporarily taken until that person is declared fit enough to get them back.

But would grabbing guns from people deemed a risk by the state actually have any effect on mass violence? Not likely, nor would the stronger background checks that Biden is also pushing for.

Stronger background checks would have little to no effect on mass shootings as most of the mass shooters acquire their guns legally and pass the background checks. As Reason points out:

The elements of that legislation are mostly window dressing that would do little or nothing to prevent attacks like these. The most frequently mentioned policy, “universal background checks,” is plainly irrelevant to these particular crimes, since both the El Paso shooter and the Dayton shooter purchased their weapons legally, meaning they did not have disqualifying criminal or psychiatric records. Nor do the vast majority of mass shooters, who either passed background checks or could have. Neither requiring background checks for private transfers nor creating “strong background checks,” as President Donald Trump has proposed (perhaps referring to the same policy), would make a difference in such cases.

Citizens who are targeted by these laws will be deemed guilty first and only after their guns are taken, will they have a chance to defend themselves in court. This is the de facto removal of due process.

As Reuters reports, under the legislation, a family member or law enforcement officer could petition a judge to seize firearms from a person they think is a threat to themselves or others. The judge could then hold a hearing without the targeted person being present and grant a temporary order for 14 days.

Under the fifth and fourteenth amendments, due process clauses are in place to act as a safeguard from arbitrary denial of life, liberty, or property by the government outside the sanction of law.

In spite of what officials and the media claim when a person is stripped of their constitutional rights, albeit temporarily, without being given the chance to make their own case based on what can be entirely arbitrary accusations, this is the removal of due process. And, contrary to what Biden wants, it doesn’t work.

We’ve seen this play out before already. Last year, a tragedy unfolded in California as a deranged gunman, Kevin Douglas Limbaugh, walked up on an innocent woman, officer Natalie Corona, pulled out his guns and began shooting her repeatedly until she died. Limbaugh then fired several more shots at others before turning the gun on himself and taking his own life. Had more people been nearby, Limbaugh would’ve likely carried out a mass shooting.

Limbaugh’s case is important to bring up due to the fact that — before he killed a cop — he was subject to California’s “red flag” laws in 2018. Limbaugh was given a high-risk assessment that ordered him to turn in his registered weapons to police, the only one being a Bushmaster AR-15. On November 9, Limbaugh turned in the weapon.

Despite being banned from possessing a weapon, he still obtained one illegally and used it to commit murder. Laws do not stop those willing to break them.

What’s more, there were already laws on the books that should’ve stopped Nikolas Cruz, the murdering psychopath in Parkland Fl, from ever getting a gun as well. But none of them worked.

Citing Cruz as the reason for advocating the erosion of the 2nd Amendment, the anti-gun activists are claiming he should’ve had his guns taken which would have prevented the tragedy. Sadly, however, they are ignoring the fact that he was accused of multiple felonies by multiple peopleand should’ve never been able to purchase a gun in the first place—but law enforcement failed to act on any of it. These threats included specifically saying he was going to carry out a mass shooting and threatening to kill individual people.

The reactionary nature of disarming law-abiding Americans because deranged psychopaths kill people is dangerous and only serves to keep the guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens as the above two cases illustrate. Moreover, as Biden attacks, guns, he is forgetting that deranged psychopaths don’t even need guns to cause mass death.

According to a 2015 study, even if all guns were removed from America, in a ten year period, 355 people still would’ve been murdered in mass killings. 

From 2006 to 2015, 140 people were murdered by arsonists in mass fires, 104 were stabbed in mass stabbings, and 92 people were beaten to death in mass killings. To reiterate, these are deaths in which four or more people were killed.

“People sufficiently enraged to commit such crimes may also be motivated to find other ways,” criminologist James Alan Fox of Northeastern University points out.

Despite all this information to the contrary, the left led by Biden and the right led by Trump seems hell-bent on further eroding the rights of the 99.9999999 percent of the innocent people who are not murderous psychopaths. And all of it will be and has been “legal” — due process and innocence be damned.

The post One of the First Executive Orders Biden Will Pass is Gun Control — Will You Comply? first appeared on SHTF Plan – When It Hits The Fan, Don't Say We Didn't Warn You.

Share
Categories
artificial intelligence gun control Intelwars Joaquin oliver Parkland parents Parkland shooting

Parkland parents use artificial intelligence video of their dead son to push gun control

The parents of a student killed during the Feb. 14, 2018, mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, recently used an artificial intelligence video of their dead son to promote gun control.

In the aftermath of their 17-year-old son, Joaquin “Guac” Oliver’s death, Manuel and Patricia Oliver founded the nonprofit organization Change The Ref to help empower young people to advance reform on a number of issues, but most notably gun violence, the Associated Press reported.

As a part of an initiative to get-out-the-vote among young people, the Olivers worked with a team of artists to create a video of their son urging viewers to vote for politicians who support gun control.

The upcoming election would have been the first one in which Joaquin could have cast his vote.

“I’ve been gone for two years and nothing’s changed, bro. People are still getting killed by guns … what is that?” he passionately exclaims in the video. “I’m tired of waiting for someone to fix it.

“I’ll never get to choose the kind of world I wanted to live in, so you’ve got to replace my vote,” he continues. “Vote for politicians who care more about people’s lives than the gun lobby’s money. Vote for people not getting shot, bro.”


UnfinishedVotes.com

youtu.be

The Olivers reportedly helped craft every detail of the video, from their son’s wardrobe to his mannerisms to the very words he spoke.

“It’s something where you just put the dots together if you see his posts, the way he thinks, he was still thinking, the way he was expressing his frustration about situations,” Patricia Oliver told the AP in a phone interview.

“We are letting Joaquin grow into his ideas … and how he will be reacting to things that are happening today. We know our son so well and we knew exactly what he wanted from life,” Manuel Oliver added.

The report suggested that Joaquin had been politically active from a young age. When he was 12, he reportedly penned a letter to gunmakers asking why they didn’t support universal background checks.

His mother said the lifelike video was extremely difficult for her to watch.

“I couldn’t even breathe well,” she said. “Of course we know that is not Joaquin, but they did such an amazing job with the technology that you can’t say, ‘Oh my God, how I wish that could be the real Joaquin there talking to everybody.'”

His father, who has been keeping his son’s gun control message alive using his artistic abilities, said of the video: “I wouldn’t describe this as painful but as powerful.”

On his son’s birthday, Manuel Oliver painted a mural outside of the National Rifle Association’s headquarters in Virginia. He painted another mural near the headquarters of major gunmaker, Smith & Wesson, in Massachusetts.

Share
Categories
Bail reform Frank umbrino gun control gun laws Intelwars Rochester Rochester protests Rochester shooting

Rochester police captain blasts Dem’s bail reform and politicians wanting more gun laws: ‘You don’t know what you’re talking about’

There was a tragic mass shooting in Rochester this weekend where 14 people were shot, and two teenagers were killed at a party, where more than 40 rounds were fired. The two people killed were identified by police as Jarvis Alexander and Jaquayla Young, both age 19. All of the shooting victims are between the ages of 17 and 23. Rochester Police Department Captain Frank Umbrino gave a press conference about the mass shooting where he criticized policies by Democrats that he said have made the New York less safe.

Umbrino was asked about enforcing new gun laws to stop shootings, and he responded by saying New York has “some of the toughest gun laws in the country.” He then asked, “Why are we going to create more laws when we don’t enforce the laws that are on the books?”

“But when you have the same people committing the same crimes over and over and over again, new laws aren’t gonna help them,” Umbrino said.

“I’ve been doing this a long time, and I’ve been involved in hundreds of homicide investigations here in the city of Rochester,” the captain said. “Do you know how many of those homicide investigations involved individuals that owned legally-registered handguns? Honestly, I can’t remember one that wasn’t justified or ruled as justified by a grand jury in which a suspect committed a murder with a legally owned handgun.”

“So again, if these politicians want to get up and spew that we need more gun laws, they’re just lying, they don’t want to answer the real questions that need to be answered,” Umbrino said.

“I’m not surprised by the violence that’s been taking place,” Umbrino said, as reported in The Daily Wire. “You know, I’m going to get in trouble, probably, for this, but if I hear one more politician talk about what we need to do to stop the violence; we need more gun laws, we need this, we need that — quite frankly, I’m going to vomit. These people who say that have no idea what they are talking about.”

“We have a lot of gun laws currently on the books that we don’t enforce. I shouldn’t say we don’t enforce — we enforce them, but you have individuals locked up for illegal handguns, and being released from custody the next day,” the captain said, referring to bail reform. “That’s disgusting. How does that happen?”

“So, if anybody is surprised that there’s been an uptick in violence, since we don’t enforce the current gun laws that we have, I don’t know what to tell ya. But those are the facts,” Umbrino added. “These politicians that wanna say we need more gun laws, we need this, we need that, do me a favor: just stop talking, because you really don’t know what you’re talking about.”

Captain Umbrino then lambasted bail reform, a policy that Democrats have recently embraced.

“Bail reform, in my opinion — as a 30-year veteran in law enforcement, and working in the city of Rochester for the last 30 years — bail reform has a significant impact on the amount of crime and the uptick in crime that’s been occurring in our community and throughout New York state,” he claimed. “Look at the numbers. … the numbers are terrible. And anybody that says bail reform is not part of the blame in that is fooling themselves. And stop telling us that.”

Umbrino said he has been talking to local residents who have been “getting frustrated” in the last three weeks. This when the anti-police brutality protests regarding the death of Daniel Prude, who died in police custody, started. The captain said local residents were getting upset with outsiders and they told him they wanted these people to “get the hell out of our city and let us take care of our problems the way we need to take care of them.”

“It’s a tragedy, unfortunately, it’s another innocent person that’s gunned down for absolutely no good reason whatsoever, it’s heart-wrenching when you have innocent people getting killed,” Umbrino stated. “I just hope, a month from now, everybody remembers their names.”

No suspects in the mass shooting are in custody. The police investigation is ongoing.

Umbrino’s comments about gun control and bail reform begin at the 11-minute mark.


RAW: Frank Umbrino updates Rochester media on mass shooting

www.youtube.com

Share
Categories
2nd Amendment gun control History Intelwars james madison right to keep and bear arms Second Amendment Thomas Jefferson

Did Jefferson and Madison Believe in Restrictions on the 2nd Amendment? No.

Ever since we ran our report outlining how President Trump has ramped up enforcement of unconstitutional federal gun control for three straight years, I’ve been inundated by excuses. They range from “he has to enforce the law” to “Hillary would have been worse.”

One of the most disheartening excuses is that “The Second Amendment isn’t absolute. It has its limits.”

This sounds an awful lot like Nancy Pelosi’s view of the Constitution.

And it’s flat-out wrong. You won’t find an asterisk after “shall not be infringed.” No terms and conditions apply. The Second Amendment absolutely prohibits any federal infringement on the right to keep and bear arms.

One reader tried to back up his assertion by pointing out that even Thomas Jefferson and James Madison believed the Second Amendment had its limits. His proof? Both men were present at a University of Virginia Board of Visitors meeting that banned firearms on the university grounds.

We’ve heard this exact argument before from people on the left supporting this or that federal gun control, and it reveals a gross misunderstanding of the Second Amendment.

It is true Madison and Jefferson were present at the board meeting in October of 1824, along with James Breckenridge, John H. Cocke, George Loyall and Joseph C. Cabell. It’s also true that the board banned students from possessing firearms on the university campus. The ban was part of a long list of rules for student conduct approved by the board.

“No Student shall, within the precincts of the University, introduce, keep or use any spirituous or vinous liquors, keep or use weapons or arms of any kind, or gunpowder, keep a servant, horse or dog, appear in school with a stick, or any weapon, nor, while in school, be covered without permission of the Professor, nor use tobacco by smoking or chewing, on pain of any of the minor punishments at the discretion of the Faculty, or of the board of Censors, approved by the Faculty.” [Emphasis added]

The board also banned students from making “disturbing noises” in their rooms, from making “any festive entertainment within the precincts of the University,” and prohibited “habits of expense.”

It’s important to note that the board did not pass any laws. Violaters could not be charged with a criminal offense. They were only subject to student discipline up to and including expulsion from the university. It was, in effect, nothing more than a student code of conduct. In fact, you could argue that the board didn’t completely ban weapons from campus. It simply prohibited “students” from possessing or using them.

But given that the UVA was a state-funded public university, doesn’t the Second Amendment prohibit this infringement on a student’s right to keep and bear arms?

No.

The Second Amendment was not understood to apply to state governments. The Bill of Rights restricts federal power. The preamble to the document makes this clear. Nobody arguing for the ratification of the Bill of Rights claimed it applied to state or local governments. In fact, if they had, it would never have been ratified. It wasn’t until the Supreme Court invented the “Incorporation Doctrine” out of thin air based on a dubious reading of the 14th Amendment that anybody seriously considered the Bill of Rights as a restriction on the actions of state governments.

Up until the Incorporation Doctrine began to take hold, the actions of state and local governments were only restricted by the bill of rights in the state constitutions. It would have never occurred to Madison or Jefferson that the Second Amendment might be in play when creating a code of conduct for university students. If anything, they would have looked at the Virginia State Constitution of 1776. And the state Bill of Rights did not include any restrictions on regulating firearms.

Based on Jefferson and Madison’s participation on the UVA Board of Visitors and the student weapons ban, you could reasonably conclude that they didn’t believe the right to carry a firearm was absolute. But it does not prove that they believed the Second Amendment has limits. The Second Amendment had no bearing on the UVA’s student code of conduct. Madison and Jefferson’s actions prove nothing about the Second Amendment.

Share
Categories
ATF Donald Trump Firearms gun control Intelwars right to keep and bear arms Second Amendment

Report: Trump Ramps Up Enforcement of Federal Gun Control for Third Straight Year

“At my direction, the DOJ banned bump stocks. Last year we prosecuted a record number of firearms offenses.”

During a public appearance in 2019, President Donald Trump proudly reminded us about his gun control credentials, bragging that his administration implemented new gun control and has conducted more enforcement actions than anyone in history. 

The president didn’t back off his commitment to enforcing gun laws in 2019. For the third straight year, the Trump administration has ramped up enforcement of unconstitutional federal gun control, according to the latest data released by the ATF.

Last year, the ATF investigated 35,790 firearms cases. That was on par with the 35,839 firearms cases the agency investigated in 2018. This after the ATF significantly increased the number of cases it pursued during Trump’s first year in office.

In 2016, the final year of the Obama administration, the ATF investigated 31,853 firearms cases. During Trump’s first year, the agency investigated 35,302. That was 3,349 more firearms cases than under Obama, a 10.81 percent increase. (See Footnote 1)

Cases Recommended for Prosecution

The big jump we saw in 2019 was in the number of cases recommended for prosecution.

Last year, the ATF  recommended 11,319 cased for prosecution. That compares with 10,691 cases recommended for prosecution in 2018, a 5.9 percent increase year-on-year. This continues an upward trend in prosecutions we’ve seen going back to the Obama years.

  • 2019 – 11,319
  • 2018 – 10,691
  • 2017 – 9,591
  • 2016 – 8,805
  • 2015 – 7,516
  • 2014 – 7,577

Since Trump has been in the White House, the number of cases recommended for prosecution has increased by 28.6 percent.

Indicted cases

The number of cases leading to indictment also went up significantly last year. The ATF got indictments in 8,360 cases last year compared to 7,630 in 2018. In all, the feds indicted 12,441 defendants last year.

  • 2019 – 8,360
  • 2018 – 7,630
  • 2017 – 7,137
  • 2016 – 6,357
  • 2015 – 5,503
  • 2014 – 5,310

Convicted cases

The number of cases leading to a conviction was up 20.4 percent year on year. In 2019, the ATF tallied 6,887 convicted cases compared with 5,485 the year before. In total, the federal government convicted 9,773 defendants in cases brought by the ATF.

  • 2019 – 6,887
  • 2018 – 5,485
  • 2017 – 6,068
  • 2016 – 5,517
  • 2015 – 4,031
  • 2014 – 4,482

The ATF also investigates arson, cases involving explosives, and alcohol and tobacco cases, but these make up a small percentage of the total. Under Trump, 92 percent of the cases investigated by the ATF have involved firearms. It was slightly less under Obama – 90 percent.

ATF enforcement of federal gun laws under Trump in year one increased at roughly the same trajectory as it did during the last three years of Obama’s second term and it has continued at roughly the same pace since. In other words, the NRA-backed, GOP protector of the Second Amendment has been no better than the Democratic Party gun-grabber.

And Trump did something even Obama didn’t do. He instituted new federal gun control with the implementation of a “bump-stock” ban. He has also suggested he might impose a similar ban on firearm “silencers.”

Some might argue it would have been worse if Hillary Clinton had won. Perhaps. But if you support the Second Amendment, don’t you find it problematic that the president who’s supposed to be the good guy continues to ratchet up enforcement of existing unconstitutional federal laws?

A true supporter of the right to keep and bear arms would do better.

And make no mistake; all federal gun control laws are unconstitutional.

Even among the strongest supporters of “gun rights,” most hold the view that the Second Amendment allows for “reasonable” federal regulation of firearms. But as originally understood, the Second Amendment includes no such exceptions. Constitutionally speaking, the federal government should not regulate the manufacture or private ownership of firearms.

At all.

There wasn’t an asterisk after “shall not be infringed.” No terms and conditions apply.

The bottom line is we can’t trust Republicans in Washington D.C. to uphold the Second Amendment. Unfortunately, it appears we have the same problem with Republicans in state legislatures as well.

When Barack Obama was president, Republicans in state legislatures introduced dozens of bills to nullify federal gun control by refusing to help with federal enforcement. After Trump won the White House, those efforts virtually stopped, even though not one single federal gun control law has been repealed.

During the last two years of the Obama administration, there were more than 50 bills directly pushing back against federal gun control introduced in 22 states. During the four state legislative sessions since the Trump administration took over, the number of bills dropped by more than half and the number of states nearly did too.

Not only that, the bills that were filed after Trump took office didn’t go anywhere. Governors signed five bills into law directly taking on federal gun control during the last two Obama years. Since then – zero.

If you didn’t know better, you’d think there weren’t any more threats the right to keep and bear arms. And yet the federal gun control acts of 1934, 1968 and 1986, along with other various laws violating the Second Amendment, remain on the books. And they’re still being enforced by the feds just as aggressively as they were when Obama was president.

By and large, Republicans use the Second Amendment as a campaign prop, but they do very little to actually stop the federal government from infringing on your right to keep and bear arms. They barely hold the line on new gun control and they don’t do anything to challenge the unconstitutional laws already on the books.

Footnote 1

All enforcement statistics were taken from the following ATF Fact Sheets

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

Footnote 2

These numbers include all cases investigated by the ATF, including arson, explosives, and alcohol and tobacco. In 2017, 2018, and 2019, approximately 92 percent of the ATF cases investigated involved firearms. In 2016, 90 percent of the cases were firearms-related.

Share
Categories
angry COVID-19 Dependent Firearms gun control gun purchases handguns Headline News Humans Intelwars Jurgen Brauer LIES lockdowns Madness Mainstream media official narrative Protection Sales scamdemic Self-Defense system throwing a fit

MSM Outlets Are “Angry” The Lost Control Of The Gun Control Narrative

At least one major mainstream media outlet, the LA Times, has been reportedly “angry” that gun sales have shot up because of the tyrannical takeover of government in response to the COVID-19 panic they induced. Apparently, fear can have effects on the public that the MSM and government do no want – more self-reliance.

According to a report by Big League Politics, the LA Times is “throwing a fit” that other humans are buying weapons to defend themselves against the obvious tyranny.  Remember, this follows their theme.  The more dependent you are on them and the system they set up against you, the easier you will be to control. Taking your self-defense into your own hands was never a part of their plans. In fact, the LA Times editorial board described the increase in gun sales as follows:

Since the start of the pandemic, Americans are buying more guns. The FBI says it conducted a record 3.7 million background checks for would-be gun buyers, a loose proxy for firearm sales, in March as lockdown orders spread across the nation. In April the checks dropped to 2.9 million but rebounded to 3.1 million in May. The monthly average for 2019 — itself a record year for background checks — was 2.4 million. So even as we get fresh studies connecting possession of firearms with increased risk of gun violence, accidental shootings (usually by children) and suicides, we are adding more firearms to the nation’s already numbingly large privately owned arsenal of some 300 million guns (no reliable count is available) owned by about a third of the population. -LA Times

The board goes on to say that this amount of gun sales can be considered “madness.”

Breitbart News reported Small Arms Analytics & Forecasting’s chief economist Jurgen Brauer noted “the ratio of handguns to long-gun sold…[set] a new record of 1.94” in April. That ratio “[broke] the previous high of 1.84 set just one month ago.” The uptick in handgun purchases are indicative of a populace feeling like an extra layer of self-defense in warranted.

I’ve often suggested stocking up on three metals: gold, silver, and lead.

 

Share
Categories
anti gun dana loesch gun control Intelwars Police Private Security

Dana Loesch calls out the left’s gun-control hypocrisy: ‘You shouldn’t hire private security if you’re anti-gun’

In this episode of “The Rubin Report,” BlazeTV host Dave Rubin spoke with national radio host Dana Loesch about liberty, freedom and civil disobedience in a time of polarizing civil unrest.

Dana exposed the hypocrisy of many gun-control advocates who don’t want the average citizen to be able to protect themselves with a gun while they hire armed private security for themselves. She said the Second amendment and the right to protect yourself with a gun is something that should be available to all citizens, not just the wealthy who can afford private security.

“A lot of people think they are anti-gun, but they’re really not. They are anti-you-having a gun,” Dana said.

“I always tell people, if you’re anti-gun, you shouldn’t believe in calling the police to come with their guns … you shouldn’t hire private security if you’re anti-gun … If we’re to have discussion about legitimate class warfare, I would think the idea that only people wealthy enough to hire private security to protect them, that’s incredibly classist.”

Watch the video below to catch more of the conversation:

Want more from Dave Rubin?

Looking for smart and honest conversations about current events, political news and the culture war? On “The Rubin Report,” comedian Dave Rubin engages the ideas of some of society’s most interesting thought leaders, authors, and politicians. Subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multiplatform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Share
Categories
Bugs bunny Elmer fudd gun control Intelwars Looney tunes

‘Looney Tunes’ reboot will have an ultra-liberal change — and a key character will be forever different

“Looney Tunes,” the classic children’s cartoon featuring famous characters like Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck, is receiving a reboot — but with a liberal alteration that will forever change one of the show’s most infamous characters.

The show was relaunched on HBO Max last week under the title “Looney Tunes Cartoons.” The show will feature the renowned “Looney Tunes” characters, and it will include many of the antics for which the “Looney Tunes” are known, such as “the sticks of dynamite, the intricate booby traps, the anvils and bank safes dropped on unsuspecting heads,” the New York Times reported.

However, Elmer Fudd, the character known for hunting Bugs Bunny, will be without his hunting rifle in an apparent nod to gun control.

Image source: YouTube screenshot

Instead, Elmer Fudd will carry a scythe.

“We’re not doing guns,” executive producer Peter Browngardt told the Times.

“But we can do cartoony violence — TNT, the Acme stuff,” he explained. “All that was kind of grandfathered in.”

“Looney Tunes” is not the only classic to receive a progressive makeover this year.

In an upcoming production of “Cinderella,” the character known as “Fairy Godmother” will be played by a man — a suggestion that the godmother is genderless. That remake will be released next year.

Share
Categories
Background Checks Confiscation FBI government panics gun control Headline News human rights illegal guns Intelwars Justice Department no guns no rights panicked restrictions Self-Defense Trump administration

Trump’s Justice Department Wants More Money To Confiscate Guns

President Donald Trump’s justice department is asking for more money “to help confiscate guns from people who shouldn’t legally be able to own them.”  Because gun sales are surging due to the tyrannical rights-trampling of all governments, the Justice Department wants to be better protected from the public, so they can finish locking on the shackles.

The ruling class must know that gun sales have skyrocketed because people are sick of being slaves and ready to defend themselves. According to Politico, these requests to enforce more gun control are recent, and due to the increase in sales.

In recent outreach to Capitol Hill, DOJ made two requests related to the spike in gun purchases, according to two sources with knowledge of those asks. First, the department asked for funding to help the FBI hire more staff to keep up with the growing number of background checks and appeal requests going through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. The bureau runs that system, which handles background checks on millions of gun buyers every year.

The department also asked for more resources and personnel for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to deal with firearm retrievals and other field work related to delayed denials, according to the two sources. The term “delayed denials” refers to situations in which people buy weapons and take them home before the NICS system can flag those buyers as ineligible to own guns.-Politico

The criminals that think they own us and can tell us we aren’t allowed to defend ourselves against them as they take every last human right we have are ramping up their control.  They don’t want any of us to have the ability to fight them.

Self-Defense Is A Basic Human Right: A Website That ENDS The Gun Control Debate For Good

This might be difficult for Trump’s supporters to hear, but you need this information. He’s not showing himself to be on the side of humanity right now.  He himself said he’s in control of “Operation Warp Speed,” which is speeding up the vaccine timeline.  Based on how awful his track record has been, I doubt we’ll ever see the swamp drained or anyone indicted.  He’s had almost four years, and people are being crushed by totalitarianism. If he was going to help us, he would have by now.  The truth is, we are on our own.

The numbers are startling. No wonder the government (which includes the Trump administration’s Justice Department) is beginning to panic:

The FBI ran more than 2.9 million background checks in April 2020, the most April background checks since 1999. And in March, it ran a whopping 3.7 million background checks — the most in any month since November 1998, when the FBI launched the NICS program, according to its website.  –Politico

It’s nice that they are this panicked.  This means they know people are figuring out that they don’t have to live like slaves. If Trump is still the savior many claim him to be, perhaps he should move up his timeline since the tyrants have moved up theirs. Personally, I’m not holding my breath.

Trump’s history on the basic human right to self-defense has not been all that stellar either:

More Gun Control: Trump Says He’s “Seriously” Considering Banning Silencers

“Take The Guns First” – Trump Breaks With Republicans Over Gun-Control Plan

 

 

 

 

Share
Categories
2nd Amend. 2nd Amendment gun control gun rights guns Intelwars

New report reveals the 10 states with the highest — and lowest — levels of household gun ownership

A new report shows that household gun ownership in America has gone down over the last 40 years, and nearly every state in the union has followed that trend. There are currently only 11 states where at least 50% of households have firearms.

The Rand Corporation updated its Gun Policy in America initiative this week with a new report on gun ownership rates in the U.S. since 1980. The new report, “State-Level Estimates of Household Firearm Ownership,” shows the rate of household gun ownership for every state compared to the national average.

According to Rand’s research, 45% of American households had firearms in 1980. By 2016 (the most recent data available), that rate had dropped 13 points to 32%.

The decline happened in almost every state — from the most pro-gun to the most anti-gun.

For example, the five “best gun-friendly states” as ranked by Guns & Ammo magazine — Arizona, Idaho, Alaska, Kansas, and Oklahoma — all saw their rates of household gun ownership fall.

  • Arizona dropped 22 points (58% to 36%)
  • Idaho dropped 13 points (67% to 54%)
  • Alaska dropped 19 points (75% to 56%)
  • Kansas dropped 17 points (57% to 40%)
  • Oklahoma dropped 8 points (60% to 52%)

The magazine’s five “worst gun-friendly states” — California, Hawaii, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and New York — saw similar drops:

  • California dropped 23 points (39% to 16%)
  • Hawaii dropped 16 points (25% to 9%)
  • New Jersey dropped 12 points (21% to 9%)
  • Massachusetts dropped 10 points (19% to 9%)
  • New York dropped 9 points (22% to 13%)

So, which states have the highest and lowest rates of household gun ownership? We rank them below, based on Rand’s most recent data available. You’ll also see where the states stood in 1980 (the furthest back the report goes), as well as each state’s most recent record highs and lows within the data set.

TOP 10 STATES

No. 1: Montana

? 2016 Rate: 63%
? 1980 Rate: 74%
? Record high: 75% (1984)
? Record low: 62% (2010)

No. 2: Wyoming

? 2016 Rate: 58%
? 1980 Rate: 79%
? Record high: 79% (1980)
? Record low: 57% (2011)

No. 3: West Virginia

? 2016 Rate: 57%
? 1980 Rate: 62%
? Record high: 63% (1985)
? Record low: 55% (1998)

No. 4: Alaska

? 2016 Rate: 56%
? 1980 Rate: 75%
? Record high: 75% (1980)
? Record low: 56% (2016)

No. 5: Idaho

? 2016 Rate: 54%
? 1980 Rate: 67%
? Record high: 68% (1982)
? Record low: 51% (2010)

No. 6: South Dakota

? 2016 Rate: 52%
? 1980 Rate: 59%
? Record high: 62% (1994)
? Record low: 51% (2014)

No. 7: North Dakota

? 2016 Rate: 52%
? 1980 Rate: 55%
? Record high: 59% (1988)
? Record low: 51% (2002)

No. 8: Oklahoma

? 2016 Rate: 52%
? 1980 Rate: 60%
? Record high: 65% (1989)
? Record low: 47% (2006)

No. 9: Alabama

? 2016 Rate: 51%
? 1980 Rate: 60%
? Record high: 63% (1990)
? Record low: 48% (2010)

No. 10: Missouri

? 2016 Rate: 51%
? 1980 Rate: 54%
? Record high: 56% (1990)
? Record low: 43% (2004)

BOTTOM 10 STATES

No. 50: New Jersey

? 2016 Rate: 9%
? 1980 Rate: 21%
? Record high: 25% (1982)
? Record low: 7% (2013)

No. 49: Massachusetts

? 2016 Rate: 9%
? 1980 Rate: 19%
? Record high: 21% (1992)
? Record low: 9% (2016)

No. 48: Hawaii

? 2016 Rate: 9%
? 1980 Rate: 25%
? Record high: 25% (1980)
? Record low: 7% (2015)

No 47: New York

? 2016 Rate: 13%
? 1980 Rate: 22%
? Record high: 28% (1990)
? Record low: 12% (2014)

No 46: Rhode Island

? 2016 Rate: 14%
? 1980 Rate: 13%
? Record high: 22% (1993)
? Record low: 10% (2013)

No. 45: California

? 2016 Rate: 16%
? 1980 Rate: 39%
? Record high: 41% (1982)
? Record low: 16% (2016)

No 44: Maryland

? 2016 Rate: 18%
? 1980 Rate: 41%
? Record high: 41% (1982)
? Record low: 18% (2016)

No. 43: Connecticut

? 2016 Rate: 19%
? 1980 Rate: 28%
? Record high: 34% (1992)
? Record low: 16% (2012)

No. 42: Illinois

? 2016 Rate: 23%
? 1980 Rate: 31%
? Record high: 36% (1990)
? Record low: 22% (2008)

No. 41: Florida

? 2016 Rate: 28%
? 1980 Rate: 45%
? Record high: 45% (1983)
? Record low: 26% (2003)





















Share
Categories
gun control Intelwars Law Ralph Northam Red Flag Virginia

Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam signs five gun control bills into law

Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam (D) is celebrating after signing five new gun control bills into law on Friday as part of the agenda he promised when Democrats won control of both chambers of the commonwealth’s General Assembly in November.

What are the details?

Gov. Northam announced he signed into law a “red flag” bill, an expansion of background checks, and reinstated a limit that restricts Virginians from purchasing more than one handgun in a one-month period “to help curtail stockpiling of firearms and trafficking.”

Citizens of the commonwealth will also now face a civil penalty if they do not report a lost or stolen firearm to law enforcement within 48 hours, and will face a criminal charge for leaving “a loaded, unsecured firearm in such a manner as to endanger” a child younger than 14.

“This is an exciting day for me,” Northam told gun control activists during a conference call on Friday, according to Fox News. He added, “It was time to have our legislators come to Richmond and to take votes and pass laws, and that’s exactly what they did this year.”

Democratic Speaker of the House Eileen Filler-Corn also took a victory lap on Friday, saying in a statement, “In November, Virginians called out loud and clear for meaningful legislation to address gun violence in the Commonwealth. They demanded action and we delivered.”

While Northam made gains with his gun-control platform this week, his push to ban so-called assault weapons failed in February when a handful of moderate Democrats joined Republicans in shutting down the initiative in a Senate committee following protests from gun owners.

Undeterred, Northam has vowed to take up the assault weapons ban again next year, acknowledging that he “came up short” on that goal, ABC News reported. The governor vowed, “I will not stop.”

Share
Categories
assault weapons assault weapons ban banning barrel shroud control Draconian eliminate rights Elizabeth Warren Emergency Preparedness enslave enslavement Firearms government control government tyranny gun control guns hank johnson Headline News hidden legislation house bills HR 5717 human rights Intelwars Police State rights SB 3254 Self-Defense Senate bill stock threaded barrel totalitarian

While The Masses Panicked Over A Virus: U.S. House Wrote A Bill Will Ban “Assault Weapons”

GOOGLE Is Doing Whatever It Can To De-Monetize Us And Shadow-Ban us. During these TOUGH financial times, we ASPIRE to stay completely independent and pay our full staff, so we can continue to deliver VALUE to you. It is possible for you to HELP us, by supporting our COVID-19 expert survival report HERE! Thank You, ShtfPlan.com Staff

While the majority of the country has been laser-focused on the coronavirus, stocking up on decades worth of toilet paper, and  mass purchasing Clorox wipes, the United States House of Representative wrote a bill that will ban “assault weapons.”

Representative Hank Johnson, a Georgia Democrat who sits on the House Judiciary Committee, introduced H.R. 5717 on January 30, which would, among other items, ban the purchasing and possession of assault weapons, according to USA Today. Senator Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., introduced in February the Senate version of the bill, S.3254.  Not long after, the coronavirus hype was all over mainstream media burying the news of this draconian legislation.

The legislation introduced a variety of reforms with the intent to “end the epidemic of gun violence and build safer communities by strengthening Federal firearms laws and supporting gun violence research, intervention, and prevention initiatives.”

It would require state law enforcement authorities to be notified when a background check is denied and mandate the attorney general to issue an annual report to Congress detailing the number of background check denials.

It would also necessitate all firearm owners to obtain a federal firearms owner’s license, although purchases made before the enactment of the bill are exempt.

And the bill, as correctly stated by the Military Arms Channel, would make it illegal “to import, sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, a semiautomatic assault weapon.” –USA Today

The bill defines a semiautomatic assault weapon as any firearm with the capability to “accept a detachable magazine” and either a pistol grip, forward grip, grenade launcher, barrel shroud, threaded barrel or a folding, telescoping or detachable stock.

Self-Defense Is A Basic Human Right: A Website That ENDS The Gun Control Debate For Good

The government is, of course, exempted from the assault weapons ban. Law-enforcement officers (and other state agents) can possess these firearms as can those who are providing security at nuclear energy facilities. Firearms that are “manually operated by bolt, pump, lever or slide action,” have “been rendered permanently inoperable” or are antique are exempt from the ban as well.

Neither bill has passed, and it would still be needing President Donald Trump’s signature to become law. However, we thought it important to let you all know what’s going on behind the screens while we direct our attention to a viral outbreak. If you thought things were totalitarian now, just wait…it could get much uglier.

Police forces across the United States have been transformed into extensions of the military. Our towns and cities have become battlefields, and we the American people are now the enemy combatants to be spied on tracked, frisked, and searched. For those who resist, the consequences can be a one-way trip to jail or even death. Battlefield America: The War on the American People is constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead’s terrifying portrait of a nation at war with itself. In exchange for safe schools and lower crime rates, we have opened the doors to militarized police, zero-tolerance policies in schools, and SWAT team raids. The insidious shift was so subtle that most of us had no idea it was happening. This follow-up to Whitehead’s award-winning A Government of Wolves is a brutal critique of an America on the verge of destroying the very freedoms that define it. Hands up!?the police state has arrived.

 

GOOGLE Is Doing Whatever It Can To De-Monetize Us And Shadow-Ban us. During these TOUGH financial times, we ASPIRE to stay completely independent and pay our full staff, so we can continue to deliver VALUE to you. It is possible for you to HELP us, by supporting our COVID-19 expert survival report HERE! 
 
Thank You, ShtfPlan.com Staff
Share
Categories
Coronavirus Coronavirus panic Coronavirus response gun control Gun retailers gun rights Gun Sales Gun store shutdown Gun stores Intelwars

FBI sees record-breaking requests for gun background checks over pandemic

The panic over the coronavirus pandemic has resulted in such a demand for gun purchases that the FBI has noted a record-breaking number of gun background checks.

The FBI says they fulfilled 3.7 million background checks for the month of March, the largest monthly number they have ever seen.

Previously the record for monthly background checks was 3.3 million in December of 2015.

The record set for March is more than one million higher than that from a year previous in March, when the FBI said they fulfilled 2.64 million checks.

Gun store owners have reported a skyrocketing demand for firearms, and many have sold out their inventory. Long lines delay new gun owners, many of which are frustrated by the gun control laws they face.

Gun control advocates decried the increase and said that higher numbers of gun possession during a time when people are locked in their homes would lead to more gun violence.

Some local governments have attempted to shut down gun shops while others, like the state of Texas, have defined gun shops as “essential” businesses and kept them open.

Many Asian Americans are also rushing to buy firearms after a rise in racist incidents against the Asian American community in the news.

Here’s more about America’s strange new respect for the Second Amendment:


Coronavirus: US gun sales soar amid Covid-19 pandemic fears

www.youtube.com

Share
Categories
Coronavirus Coronavirus america Coronavirus us gun control gun rights Gun Sales Gun stores guns Intelwars Texas Texas guns

Texas Attorney General warns city and county officials against closing down gun shops amid pandemic

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton issued a letter warning city and county officials that they did not have the authority to shut down gun shops in Texas over the coronavirus pandemic.

“While the Legislature granted local officials certain emergency powers to address disaster situations, that local authority is not without limitation,” read the letter sent on Friday.

Paxton outlined the Texas law that governed the power of local governments over firearms sales in his letter and came to a stern conclusion.

“Thus, although section 418.108 of the Government Code may generally allow municipal and county officials to ‘control the movement of persons and the occupancy of premises’ in a local disaster area, notwithstanding that general authority, emergency orders from local officials may not relate to the transfer, possession, ownership or sale of firearms,” he wrote.

Paxton goes on to assert that local authorities do have the right to regulate use of firearms, but that does not extend to the sale or transfer of firearms.

This is in stark contrast to other states like California, where Los Angeles officials have ordered gun shops to shut down and the National Rifle Association has responded by filing a lawsuit to open them back up.

Nationally, there has been a skyrocketing demand for guns and many gun shops are reporting that they have never seen such a volume of interest and sales. Michael Cargill of Central Texas Gun Works in Austin, Texas, told KTBC-FOX7 that they have seen long lines waiting to get into their stores, and they have sold out of firearms.

Here’s more about the coronavirus gun run:


Coronavirus causes spike in gun sales

www.youtube.com

Share
Categories
Bob casey gun control gun control debate gun laws gun rights Intelwars Second Amendment Sen. bob casey Social Media Twitter Twitter outrage

Democrat Bob Casey tries to make coronavirus about guns, and gets torched on social media

Democratic Senator Bob Casey of Pennsylvania attempted to politicize the coronavirus pandemic into some sort of statement about gun control and social media took him to task for the bizarre suggestion.

Casey posted the observation on his official social media account on Friday.

“Right now in America, it is easier to get an AR-15 than a test kit for COVID-19,” he tweeted, referring to coronavirus.

Critics of the president have focused on whether the federal government has done enough to make sure there is a sufficient supply of testing kits to help stop the spread of coronavirus.

Many on social media ridiculed Casey, with some pointing out that the government was to blame for the test kids, while the free market was to be credited for the ample supply of AR-15s.

“Formula: connect a genuinely urgent issue to an issue you want to keep talking about even though its level of urgency just plunged,” said Walter Olson of the Cato Institute.

“For crying out loud,” responded Dana Loesch. “You win the gold for using a pandemic that originated in a communist country as an argument to restrict citizens’ rights.”

“Why did you feel this was an appropriate time to send this incredibly stupid tweet, Senator Casey?” asked gun rights advocate Stephen Gutowski.

“This is a good case for deregulation in both cases. Thanks!” said Ben Shapiro.

President Donald Trump declared a national emergency on Friday but tried to calm Americans’ fears about the pandemic.

Here’s more about the coronavirus pandemic:


CORONAVIRUS BY THE STATS: Will US Medical System be Overwhelmed with COVID 19 Patients?

www.youtube.com

Share
Categories
assault weapons Beto o'rourke communist CORRUPTION elitists establishment politician gun control gun rights Headline News Intelwars Joe Biden lying ruling class Second Amendment taking guns tyrannical promises Viral Video

Joe Biden MELTS DOWN Over “AR-14” Confrontation With A Voter

Creepy Uncle Joe is once again going off his rocker, and this time, it’s over his plans to confiscate guns, which he called “AR-14s.” Biden’s tirade was against a voter who confronted the establishment elitists over his gun control promises.

“You’re full of shit!” Biden yelled when a voter correctly accused the elderly establishment politician of “actively trying to end our Second Amendment Right.”

“I support the Second Amendment,” said Biden, adding in an incoherent ramble: “The Second Amendment – just like right now, if you yell “fire,” that’s not free speech… From the very beginning, I have a shotgun, I have a 20-gauge, I have a 12-gauge, my sons hunt. Guess what, you’re not allowed to own any weapon,” the former vice president ranted according to ZeroHedge.

I’m not taking your gun away, at all,” Biden continued – to which the man interjects “You were on video saying you were going to take our guns away,” to which Biden replies “I did not say that.”

You did! It’s in a viral video!” the man claps back. Then Biden says “Wait, wait, wait, wait, I’ll take your AR-14s!” (Guns that do not exist.) Biden can have all the AR-14s he wants.

Watch Biden lose it when confronted with his own tyrannical promises.

And, for the record, the voter who confronted Biden was correct. The corrupt politician did threaten to take your guns just like every other authoritarian tyrant who has been running for the democrat nomination.

On top of all that, Biden wants to put full-blown communist Beto O’Rourke in charge of nationwide gun control. O’Rourke has also vowed to take your basic human right to self-defense against tyranny away.

Communist Vows He IS Coming For Your Guns

Gun Store Runs Out Of “Beto Special” Named After Gun-Grabbing Communist

Biden’s attack is nothing new.  He’s known for his inappropriate touching of women and his emotional authoritarian outbursts when confronted with his own Communist ideals.

Joe Biden Is Pushing For A Ban On ALL Semi-Automatic Weapons

Share
Categories
2020 democratic race 2020 presidential candidates 2nd Amend. Auto worker Detroit Fox & Friends gun confiscation gun control gun rights Intelwars Joe Biden watch

Michigan blue-collar worker says Joe Biden ‘went off the deep end’ in viral confrontation showing presidential candidate cursing at, threatening him

On the heels of Democratic presidential front-runner Joe Biden’s threatening cuss-out of a blue-collar worker at a Detroit auto plant Tuesday, Jerry Wayne told “Fox & Friends” Wednesday morning that the former vice president “went off the deep end” with him — and doesn’t deserve to be in the White House if he can’t understand that he works for the American people.

What’s the background?

Biden was touring a Fiat Chrysler assembly plant under construction Tuesday and spoke to Wayne, who isn’t an auto worker but was working at the plant. The exchange was caught on video.

At one point Wayne told Biden, “You are actively trying to end our Second Amendment right and take away our guns” — to which Biden replied, “You’re full of s**t.”

After Biden told Wayne he owns shotguns and supports the Second Amendment — though strangely saying, “You’re not allowed to own any weapon. I’m not taking your gun away at all …” — Wayne replied that Biden said he would take away guns in a “viral video” with former Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke.

“I did not say that … I did not say that!” Biden shot back, adding that the video and others like it “are simply a lie.”

Soon Biden was pointing his finger right in Wayne’s face, after which the blue-collar worker waved his hand in front of Biden’s finger and said, “This is not OK, all right?”

Then Biden really lost it: “Don’t tell me that, pal, or I’m going to go outside with you.”

“You’re working for me, man!” Wayne angrily replied.

“I’m not working for you,” Biden growled back, adding, “Don’t be such a horse’s ass.”

Here’s the clip. (Content warning: profanity)

By the way, MSNBC broadcast a selectively edited video of the unhinged interaction, as veteran reporter Andrea Mitchell said she was “paraphrasing” Biden’s “full of s**t” remark as “full of it.” GOP national spokesperson Elizabeth Harrington criticized the network for leaving out Biden’s expletives and threat and instead saying Biden was simply “mixing it up.”

The morning after

During his appearance on “Fox & Friends” Wednesday morning, Wayne said he had asked Biden how he expects votes from the “working man when a lot of us … bear arms, and we like to do that. And if he wants to give us work and take our guns, I don’t see how he’s going to get the same vote.” Then the fireworks began.

Wayne said Biden “could have easily said, ‘I’m not taking questions,’ and I would have very respectfully walked away. But he wanted to listen to my question, and I don’t think that he was ready for it.”

In an extended version of the interview as seen on Mediaite, Wayne added that Biden “doesn’t need to touch anybody’s weapon at all. What we need to do is we need to concentrate on teaching people how to respect firearms and how to use them, not take them away.”

“Fox & Friends” co-host Steve Doocy asked in the extended interview, “Were you surprised … that you asked a civil question, and Joe Biden just went off the deep end on you?”

“Yeah. I thought I was pretty articulate and respectful,” Wayne replied. “I didn’t try to raise any feathers. And he kind of just went off the deep end. I saw that he was digging a hole, and I just kind of let him talk for a while to dig a hole.”

Wayne also said he was put off by Biden’s “I don’t work for you” comment.

“He was the vice president; he wants to be the president now,” Wayne said in the extended interview, adding that “you work for the American people, and if you can’t understand that, then you don’t deserve to have a leg in this race.”

Anything else?

During the interview with Wayne, “Fox & Friends” replayed past video interviews with Biden — the first with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, who asked, “To gun owners out there who say, ‘Well, a Biden administration means they’re going to come for my guns’?”

“Bingo,” Biden replied. “You’re right — if you have an assault weapon. The fact of the matter is they should be illegal. Period. Look, the Second Amendment doesn’t say you can’t restrict the kinds of weapons people can own.”

The second clip replayed was during a recent campaign rally, where Biden said Beto O’Rourke would be mobilized to “take care” of America’s gun situation — and O’Rourke already had infamously declared, “Hell, yes, we’re going to take away your AR-15s.”

And at the rally, Biden told O’Rourke onstage, “I wanna make something clear … you’re gonna take care of the gun problem with me. You’re gonna be the one who leads this effort. I’m counting on you.”

Share