Stonewalling The Inspectors

On Friday, NewsMax posted an article about the ongoing aid America is giving to Afghanistan. Some Americans can’t afford to heat their homes, and we are giving aid to Afghanistan?

The article reports:

Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, on Thursday accused the Biden administration of stonewalling his committee’s oversight efforts into the United States’ reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan.

“The State Department, Treasury and USAID’s refusal to comply with SIGAR’s requests is unlawful and unacceptable,” McCaul, the top Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, wrote in a letter to the State Department, Treasury Department and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) for refusing to comply with the Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR).

“I urge you in the strongest terms to promptly ensure that the entities which you lead end this obstruction and return to full compliance with SIGAR’s oversight before congressional action becomes necessary.”

John Sopko, the special inspector general for SIGAR, in November issued a report saying several federal agencies including the State Department, USAID and the Treasury Department weren’t fully cooperating with his information requests about $1.1 billion in humanitarian aid spent to “support the Afghan people since the Taliban’s takeover.”

USAID and the State Department maintained that the aid is “humanitarian and development assistance” and not part of the funding that Sopko oversees, according to his report.

I hope when the Republicans take over the House of Representatives in January that they deal with both the incredible corruption that has been rampant in recent years and also with the runaway spending. We need to hold the people carelessly giving American taxpayer dollars to foreign countries accountable.

Does Anyone Else See The Irony In This?

It is no secret that the Democrats almost unanimously support abortion. They consider it health care. In many states the Democrats are fighting for abortion rights right up until the delivery of the baby. The Democrats are also the party of illegal immigration. They are entirely comfortable with the idea of letting people just come here and become citizens. Well, Senator Schumer just brought those two ideas together.

On Wednesday, NewsMax reported the following:

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Wednesday that America needs new immigrants “now more than ever” to combat declining reproduction rates and the lowest population growth in the country’s history.

“Now more than ever, we’re short of workers. We have a population that is not reproducing on its own with the same level that it used to,” Schumer said during a press conference Wednesday. “The only way we’re going to have a great future in America is if we welcome and embrace immigrants. The ‘Dreamers,’ and all of them.”

He said the “ultimate goal” is to help not only the Dreamers, but to “get a path to citizenship for all 11 million [illegal immigrants].”

Has it occurred to the Senator that the low population growth might be somewhat related to the fact that we are aborting the future generations.

Live Action reported the following in June 2022:

  • Abortions in 2020 (930,160) showed an increase of nearly 8% from 2017 — an increase of 67,840 lives lost.
  • The abortion rate in 2020 (abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44) climbed by 7% (from 13.5 in 2017  to 14.4  in 2020).
  • The abortion increase was accompanied by a 6% decline in births between 2017 and 2020.

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that abortion might be one factor in
America’s declining reproduction rate.

 

I’m A Little Concerned About This

On Wednesday, NewsMax posted an article about the coming diesel crisis in America.

The article reports:

Diesel fuel inventories in the East Coast are at their lowest level ever heading into the winter, prompting some areas in the Northeast to ration fuel.

According to one estimate, the U.S. has only 25 days of diesel fuel — the lowest since 2008.

One supplier, calling “conditions rapidly devolving,” is requiring customers to give 72 hours’ notice to secure fuel and freight, Bloomberg reports.

“At times, carriers are having to visit multiple terminals to find supply, which delays deliveries and strains local trucking capacity,” said the supplier, Mansfield Energy, in a note to clients.

In areas of the country where diesel fuel is tightest, prices are 30-80 cents higher than the market average, according to Mansfield.

The article notes:

The shortage, which is also spreading to Europe, is due to underinvestment in refining capacity and refinery closures, according to Goldman Sachs.

The Biden administration’s war on fossil fuels has discouraged the investments needed to grow the industry enough to keep up with the demand. Banks are not going to lend to an industry that the government is trying to shut down–they are smarter than that. Until we get either enough sensible people in Congress to promote sensible energy policies or elect a new President in 2024, we will have fuel shortages of various kinds and the American people will pay a price for electing our current leaders. The thing to remember here is that it is the ‘little guy’ (who prospered under President Trump) who is suffering. Congress does not personally pay for their gasoline (the taxpayers do), and most Congressmen have somehow earned enough to pay for heating their Washington residences and their homes. The war on fossil fuels is simply more of the Biden administration’s war on the middle class.

Preparing For Emergencies

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is one of many items America has to keep us safe in times of emergency. Unfortunately, the Biden administration has been very quick to tap into that reserve to lover gasoline prices and save Americans money at their local gas statios

However, actions have consequences.

On September 7th, Forbes reported:

What is the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR)? What are the implications of depleting the SPR, which the U.S. has been doing now since 2016? Further, what has been the impact of the rapid drawdown of the SPR that has taken place this year? Let’s discuss.

In December 1975, with memories of gas lines fresh on the minds of Americans as a result of the 1973 OPEC oil embargo, Congress established the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). The law was designed “to reduce the impact of severe energy supply interruptions” such as that caused by the embargo.

Over time the U.S. government began to fill the reserve. At its high point in 2010, the level reach 726.6 million barrels. Since December 1984, the level has never been lower than 450 million barrels — until now.

That is disturbing.

The article includes the following chart:

Meanwhile, on Tuesday, NewsMax reported:

The United States plans to release an additional 10 million to 15 million barrels of oil from the country’s emergency stockpile in a bid to balance markets and keep gasoline prices from climbing, a Bloomberg reporter tweeted late on Monday.

The White House also plans to replenish the U.S. strategic petroleum reserve, the tweet said.

The Biden administration also has beeen speaking with energy companies as it considers its strategy to use the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to both push down oil prices for consumers and support longer-term demand for producers, two sources familiar with the matter told Reuters.

If the Biden administration wants to lower gasoline prices, all they have to do is open America to drilling. However, the green energy lobby would no longer support them if they did that. It’s time to do what is right for the American people.

Ignoring The History

On Tuesday, NewsMax reported that Australia has changed its position on recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

The article reports”

Australia has reversed a previous government’s recognition of West Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, the foreign minister said Tuesday.

The center-left Labor Party government Cabinet agreed to again recognize Tel Aviv as the capital and reaffirmed that Jerusalem’s status must be resolved in peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, Foreign Minister Penny Wong said.

Australia remained committed to a two-party solution to the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, and “we will not support an approach that undermines this prospect,” Wong said.

A two-state solution is a wonderful idea, but there is a problem.

“PA presents the PLO Charter as currently calling for Israel’s destruction,” by Itamar Marcus and Maurice Hirsch, Palestinian Media Watch, March 16, 2021:

As part of a TV series entitled “Lexicon of the Revolution” official PA TV broadcast a filler about the 1964 Charter of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).

While presenting the historical overview of the Charter, the PA chose to cite the Charter’s declarations denying Israel’s right to exist and the PLO’s goal of destroying Israel, even claiming that it is supported by the UN. For example:

“The Palestinian Arab people is the one with the legitimate right to its homeland”

“The 16th clause [of the Charter] states that the liberation of Palestine, from an international perspective, is a defensive operation necessitated by self-defense, as determined by the UN Charter.”

[Official PA TV, Aug. 10, 2018; March 6 (twice) 2021]

This second message is stated both by the narrator and reinforced by a slide on the screen.

Text: “Clause 16 states that the liberation of Palestine, from an international perspective, is a defensive operation necessitated by self-defense, as determined by the UN Charter” alongside the old Fatah logo that includes crossed rifles and the map of “Palestine” that includes all of Israel, together with this text: “Al-Asifa – the Palestinian National Liberation Movement”

What was left out of the PA TV broadcast is just as significant as what was included. Most specifically, there is no reference to the fact that the PA obligated itself to cancel all the clauses of the PLO Charter calling for Israel’s destruction, under the terms of the Oslo Accords.

The narrator’s introductory explanation likewise denies Israel’s right to exist – saying Israel exists on Arab “stolen homeland” and therefore “returning it” is an act of “self-defense”:

It’s hard to form a two-state solution with people who want to annihilate you.

Guard Your Parents’ Rights

On Friday, NewsMax reported that Democrat Virginia Delegate Elizabeth Guzman has proposed a bill that would add parents who refuse to affirm their child’s gender identity or sexual orientation to the state’s definition of child abuse and neglect. What is the world? Frankly, I think that any parent who allows their under-eighteen child to undergo any medical treatment that delays puberty or any surgical procedure that will have permanent consequences should be charged with child abuse.

The article reports:

“If the child shares with those mandated reporters, what they are going through, we are talking about not only physical abuse or mental abuse, what the job of that mandated reporter is to inform Child Protective Services,” Guzman said. “And then that’s how everybody gets involved.

“There’s also an investigation in place that is not only from a social worker but there’s also a police investigation before we make the decision that there is going to be a CPS charge.”

When asked what consequences parents could face, Guzman said, “Well, we first have to complete an investigation. It could be a felony, it could be a misdemeanor, but we know that CPS charge could harm your employment, could harm their education, because nowadays many people do a CPS database search before offering employment.”

She also denied potential accusations that the legislation “is criminalizing parents,” saying, “No, it’s not. It’s educating parents because the law tells you the do’s and don’ts. So this law is telling you do not abuse your children because they are LGBTQ.”

I guess this comes down to the definition of abuse. If my child comes to me and tells me that she is a cat and I refuse to provide a litter box, is that abuse? Wouldn’t it be better to provide psychiatric counseling?

Ms. Guzman concludes:

“You know, we all have a commitment to God and for those believers out there, we know that there’s life after life, and there is going to be a conversation between that person and God and that’s what we’re after — to go by what the Bible says. It is not my job to judge anyone. It is my job to help people.”

The Bible calls us to love one another, but it also has some pretty harsh words for some of the practices Ms. Guzman is trying to protect. If you are going to use the Bible as a justification for what you are doing, you might want to read the entire book.

UPDATE:

On Saturday, The Epoch Times reported:

A Democrat Virginia state delegate has backed down from introducing a bill to expand the definition of child abuse to include inflicting “physical or mental injury” on children due to their gender identity or sexual orientation.

…On the same day, Virginia House Minority Leader Don Scott Jr. (D-Portsmouth) said that he spoke to Guzman, and she had assured him that she wouldn’t introduce the reported bill. In addition, he called the bill “unnecessary” and “a distraction” to key Congressional races in Virginia.

Stacy Langton, a Fairfax County mother of six and a Republican, has been fighting to remove obscene books in the county school libraries. She told The Epoch Times, “I would like to take this moment to thank Delegate Guzman for committing the Terry McAuliffe gaffe for the 2022 midterm elections.”

When you shine sunlight on some of the radical ideas of the Democrats, they tend to back down. We need to keep doing that.

A Vulnerable Home Front

On Monday, NewsMax reported that in providing massive amounts of aid to Ukraine, America has seriously depleted its own weapons stockpiles.

The article reports:

President Joe Biden has used drawdowns – which allow the president to withdraw existing weapons, ammunitions, and material from existing U.S. military stocks to assist other nations – to aid Ukraine in its war against Russia.

A Bank of America Securities report obtained by Newsmax’s Logan Ratick said that presidential drawdowns have reduced U.S. weapons stockpiles to levels not seen in decades.

The report said the U.S. had committed nearly $8.4 billion through presidential drawdowns – more than half of the overall $16.2 in security aid – since Russian President Vladimir Putin began his unprovoked attack on Feb. 24.

“As the U.S. continues to provide security assistance to Ukraine, defense primes have been tasked with both meeting newfound demand throughout Europe and restocking U.S. inventories that have dwindled as a result of 20 presidential drawdowns since August 2021,” the report said.

Department of Defense officials have indicated that ammunition stocks with several ground systems have dwindled to levels that would be considered problematic during wartime, the report said.

The article also notes:

The report also said that doubt previously had been cast on some ground-based defense programs due to the DoD’s shift in focus to the Pacific – with concern about China – and away from ground conflicts in the Middle East.

In fact, Raytheon Technologies almost ended High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) production in 2021. However, efforts to ramp up the manufacturing of HIMARS now are being made.

The Pentagon said that roughly $1.2 billion in contracts already were being processed in order to replenish stockpiles, especially for Stinger missiles ($624 million), Javelin missiles ($352 million), and HIMARS systems ($33 million).

Keeping America safe should not be a political issue–it should be an issue that all Americans and their representatives in Congress are concerned about. When is Congress going to take a good look at the impact of what we are doing in Ukraine on the security of America and the American economy?

How The Cover-Up Worked


On September 2, NewsMax posted an article about the FBI’s handling of the Hunter Biden laptop case. It seems as though there were some serious conflicts of interest in the investigation.

The article reports:

A former FBI official accused of running interference in the investigation into Hunter Biden was ”running point” on the bureau’s handling of Tony Bobulinski, Hunter Biden’s former business associate who was tasked with setting up the family’s joint venture with the Chinese firm CEFC, the Washington Examiner reports.

Timothy Thibault, who has been accused of bias in handling the investigation into Hunter Biden’s laptop, resigned from the bureau abruptly last weekend.  

Bobulinski, who in 2020 accused Joe Biden of lying about his involvement in his family’s overseas dealings, was also a key witness in the Hunter Biden laptop saga. He has said Thibault suppressed the evidence he gave to the FBI about the Biden family.

The Hunter Biden laptop case was an important investigation that could have easily influenced the 2020 election. The fact that the case was squelched by the FBI does not say good things about the FBI.

The article concludes:

In a July letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray and Attorney General Merrick Garland, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said whistleblowers reported that Thibault had sought to close ”an avenue of additional derogatory Hunter Biden reporting” and sought to prevent it from being reopened.

”Mr. Thibault’s statement fails to address the allegations brought forth by whistleblowers who provided specific and credible allegations of political bias and his failure to comply with Department and FBI guidelines and standards.”

”Political bias should have no place at the FBI. We need accountability, which is why Congress must continue investigating and the inspector general must fully investigate as I’ve requested,” Grassley continued.

I am not convinced this case is going to be widely reported or have consequences even with all of the evidence that has come out. Americans need to find news sources that are reliable and report things of this nature. Otherwise, we will continue to elect politicians that use their office to get rich and totally ignore the interests of the American people who sent them to Washington.

The Open Border Threatens Our Children

The amount of fentanyl coming across our porous southern border is enough to kill millions of Americans. Now there is a new variant of fentanyl that could easily be used to kill our children.

NewsMax reported on Wednesday:

Sheriff’s deputies in Multnomah County, Oregon, recently executed a search warrant at an apartment in Northeast Portland and seized four grams of the “dangerous and more potent” multi-colored “rainbow” fentanyl powder, which could especially threaten children, the office said in a press release.

In addition to the powder, which deputies are concerned children could believe is candy or a toy, officers also recovered 800 pills of fentanyl, heroin, meth, body armor, guns, and $5,000 in cash, police said.

“We are partnering with Multnomah County health departments to sound the alarm,” Multnomah County Special Investigative Unit Sgt. Matt Ferguson said in a news release. “The public needs to be aware of the rising use of powdered fentanyl. We believe this is going to be the new trend seen on the streets of Portland.”

The article concludes:

The CDC reports that as many as 150 die from a fentanyl overdose in the country each day, and it is almost impossible to tell if other drugs are laced with it unless you have a test strip to see if it is present.

The powdered “rainbow” variety was also found by Monterey, California, police in July, and is believed to be coming up from Mexico.

In a post on social media, that police department advised parents to talk to their children about the potential dangers that even a small dose could mean.

“Sadly, we are now seeing Fentanyl in rainbow/candy coloring,” the post from July 9 said. “We encourage parents to speak with their children about the dangers of this deadly drug. Just one use can be fatal.”

An open southern border is a threat to every American.

Refusing An Impartial Observer?

On Monday, NewsMax reported that former President Trump’s attorneys requested an independent special master to review records that were seized from his Mar-a-Lago estate.

The article quotes one of the former President’s attorneys, Alina Habba:

“In these types of situations what happens is the attorney handling it will ask that there be an independent special master, which is an attorney that gets appointed to oversee and to make sure everything is done correctly,” Habba said on Newsmax’s “Wake Up America,” explaining that the master would be independent of both Trump’s side and that of the DOJ.”

“It’s a neutral party,” Habba said. “Think of it much like a mediator. They just make sure that the t’s are being crossed, the i’s are being dotted, and there’s no funny business.”

A decision will be made soon, she added, but “optically, it’s a good idea,” said Habba. “I think that you need to look impartial, especially given the negative impact that this has had on the country right now. I would try and look as open to having as much transparency as possible.”

…”Just understand, he was cooperating,” said Habba. “They had been on-premises prior. He had had a subpoena that they coordinated an effort with his team to come in. They told us to lock it up. They locked it up. So why? Why did you need after two months to have this insane raid?”

I believe the FBI had two goals in this raid. The first was to make sure President Trump did not have documents proving the FBI role in RussiaGate. Evidently there are documents that show the FBI continued the investigation after knowing that there was no basis for it. The FBI wanted to put on a political show to end President Trump’s presidency. If former President Trump has those documents and chooses at some time in the future to reveal them, the FBI would lose a lot of credibility. The other reason is to find some way to prevent former President Trump from running for office again. The Democrats are not sure they can cheat enough to beat him again.

Meanwhile, America is easing gently toward become a place where the party in power in Washington can use the FBI and the Department of Justice to target their political enemies. That is not a good thing.

Policies Have Consequences

On Sunday, NewsMax reported that New York City Police Department officers are leaving the force in droves.

The article reports:

It is a flashing alarm on how bad it is to be a New York City police officer amid rising crime after years of social unrest and calls to defund the police, the New York Post reported.

There have been 2,465 NYPD officers leaving this year to date, a 42% increase from the 1,731 that left by August last year, pension fund data shows.

More alarmingly, those leaving before reaching full pension at 20 years is up 71% (1,098) from this time last year (just 641).

Lynch took exception with the NYPD Chief of Department Kenneth Corey claiming the exodus is due to a large graduating class from the police academy.

“We have had retirement waves caused by large academy classes before — they were nothing like this,” Lynch told the post. “This exodus is the result of cops in the prime of their careers deciding they have had enough.

“The NYPD should stop trying to explain this staffing crisis away, admit there’s a problem and help us fix it.”

The New York Post article cited “anti-cop hostility, bail reform, rising crime,” and the now-paused vaccine mandate as the reasons for the mass resignations.

In July 2021, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis was quoted as inviting all policemen from other cities and states to come to Florida and work.

The Western Journal reported:

Republican Florida Gov. Ronald DeSantis welcomed police officers from other states to come and work in Florida on Monday, saying his state has a healthier work culture for law enforcement than others and will back the blue.

“If you have a chance to do law enforcement in Florida versus some of these other jurisdictions, you’re much better off in Florida because we’ll actually stand by law enforcement,” DeSantis said during a speech at Green Cove Springs, according to Florida Politics.

At some point, law and order in the cities where the police are not supported is going to disappear. That is already happening in some cities. Policies matter, and bad policies can negatively impact the quality of life for American citizens.

Common Sense From The Judiciary

On Tuesday, NewsMax reported that San Francisco Superior Court Judge Richard Ulmer struck down a law that allowed non-U.S. citizens to vote in school board elections in San Francisco.

The article reports:

The law permitting noncitizen parents of school-age children to vote in school board races was approved in 2016, took effect in 2018 and was extended indefinitely last year 

The law was challenged by California attorney James Lacy in March of this year, with numerous groups joining the lawsuit, including the California Public Policy Foundation and the U.S. Justice Foundation.

The plaintiffs argued: ”The State of California has a long-standing requirement that voters must be United States citizens. This requirement applies to every election in the state, even those conducted by charter cities, because determining voter qualifications is a matter of statewide concern where state law supersedes conflicting charter city ordinances.”

The suit also argued that since the San Francisco Unified School District receives money from state taxpayers, the whole state has an interest in its voters’ qualifications and that the board is elected in accordance with California law. In addition, it argued that the city does not have the authority to redefine who is eligible to vote, which would override the California Constitution.

In June, a New York City court struck down a law allowing noncitizens to vote in city elections (article here).

As more illegal aliens enter the country, there will be a move by Democrats to allow these non-citizens to vote. Hopefully the courts will continue to uphold voting rights for citizens. Are there any countries in the world today that allow non-citizens to vote in their elections?

The Kill-Joys Are At It Again

On Tuesday, NewsMax reported that the Biden administration has denied the request of South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem to celebrating the Fourth of July with fireworks at Mount Rushmore.

The article reports:

After the administration rejected Noem’s permit request for fireworks last year, the state in September applied to hold fireworks at the national memorial this year. The request was denied.

“We are not going to be able to host those fireworks this year at Mount Rushmore. I am suing [President] Joe Biden and the White House over not allowing us to move forward with that. The fact is that they’re violating federal law by not letting South Dakota celebrate our independence over that great monument,” Noem said on “The Chad Prather Show.”

“One of the reasons that they are doing that, I think, is specific to punishing South Dakota, but they claim lots of other reasons but they’re ignoring federal law by denying us that permit.”

Noem added that the state’s tourism business, South Dakota’s second largest industry, will suffer because of the administration’s decision.

…The National Park Service (NPS) — citing the COVID-19 pandemic, wildfire risks, opposition from tribal partners, environmental concerns, and ongoing construction at the federal landmark — denied Noem’s permit request for 2021.

NPS in March denied Noem’s permit application for 2022 fireworks, the Sioux Falls Argus Leader reported.

The state’s permit application was submitted through the South Dakota Department of Tourism and requested a “special event” to occur at Mount Rushmore from between June 15 to July 10, according to the rejection letter.

The article concludes:

The NPS letter also cited conflicting schedules, as the agency plans to host a “patriotic Independence Day celebration in 2022,” unreasonable interference with visitor services – basically, the closing to the public of the Memorial and possible damages to the park because of the increased fire threat, according to the newspaper.

Basically we are only allowed to celebrate July Fourth at Mount Rushmore when we have a Republican President. That should give everyone cause for thought.

And So It Begins…

On Saturday, NewsMax reported that President Biden signed the gun control bill recently passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate.

The article reports:

The legislation will toughen background checks for the youngest gun buyers, keep firearms from more domestic violence offenders and help states put in place red flag laws that make it easier for authorities to take weapons from people adjudged to be dangerous.

Most of its $13 billion cost will help bolster mental health programs and aid schools, which have been targeted in Newtown, Connecticut, and Parkland, Florida, and elsewhere in mass shootings.

Biden said the compromise hammered out by a bipartisan group of senators “doesn’t do everything I want” but “it does include actions I’ve long called for that are going to save lives.”

“I know there’s much more work to do, and I’m never going to give up, but this is a monumental day,” said the president, who was joined by his wife, Jill, a teacher, for the signing.

…Biden signed the measure two days after the Supreme Court’s ruling Thursday striking down a New York law that restricted peoples’ ability to carry concealed weapons.

While the new law does not include tougher restrictions long championed by Democrats, such as a ban on assault-style weapons and background checks for all gun transactions, it is the most impactful firearms violence measure produced by Congress since enactment a long-expired assault weapons ban in 1993.

Pay attention to the words used here–the President is signaling that he is going to push for further limitations on the Second Amendment rights of Americans. Red flag laws are unconstitutional and can be easily misused by a politicized Justice Department (or local police department or angry neighbor or angry ex-wife or angry ex-girlfriend). They deny due process to the person whose guns are being seized. Notice also that the language has changed from assault weapons ban to assault-style weapons ban. That gives the people who plan to pass a law in the future to seize these guns more latitude in the guns they seize.

We need some good court challenges to red flag laws to make their way through the courts.

 

This Sounds Good, But It Is A Mistake

If a camel’s nose gets under the tent, the rest of the camel will soon follow. That is actually a good warning. It’s a shame our Republican legislators in Washington have either not heard it or choose to ignore it. They are also choosing to ignore the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which states that ‘the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.’

On Sunday, NewsMax reported the following:

A bipartisan group of U.S. senators, including enough Republicans to overcome the chamber’s “filibuster” rule, on Sunday announced an agreement on a framework for potential gun safety legislation.

The bill included support for state “red flag” laws, tougher background checks for firearms buyers under 21 and a crackdown on a practice called “straw purchases” but not other limits Democrats and President Joe Biden had advocated such as raising the age for buying semiautomatic rifles to 21 or new limits on assault-style rifles.

Ten Republicans signaled their support for the preliminary deal, indicating the measure potentially could advance to a vote on passage and overcome roadblocks by other Republicans who oppose most gun control measures.

The talks that led to the framework followed a series of high-profile mass shootings in the United States, including one at a school in Uvalde, Texas, last month that killed 19 young children and one also in May in a Buffalo, New York, supermarket that killed 10 Black victims.

What the Senators do not seem to realize is that people who are intent on breaking the law (murder is, after all, against the law), do not follow gun laws. All that will happen as a result of this bill (assuming it will be passed) is that it will be more difficult for law-abiding citizens to get guns. That is the scenario the Second Amendment was passed to prevent. Red flag laws are unconstitutional because they do not allow for due process. They are also very easily abused. This is a bad bill.

The article continues:

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, a Democrat, issued a statement calling the plan “a good first step” and one that would “limit the ability of potential mass shooters to quickly obtain assault rifles by establishing an enhanced background check process for gun purchasers under age 21.”

Schumer said that he wanted to move a bill quickly to a Senate vote once legislative details are worked out.

The United States has the highest rate of firearms deaths among the world’s wealthy nations. But it is a country where many cherish gun rights and its Constitution’s Second Amendment protects the right to “keep and bear arms.”

According to a Politifact post of March 20, 2018:

The main study of intentional homicides is performed by the United Nations’ Office of Drug Control. The UN warns against cross-national comparisons because of the differences in legal definitions of intentional homicides and recording practices.

Our count of the UN’s data placed the United States ninth in intentional homicides. We used the most up-to-date count for each country and territory, which included data anywhere from 2007 to 2015.

As the country with the third-highest population size, however, experts told us the number of people killed is not a very useful metric.

Controlling for population size, most criminologists use the per 100,000 metric. By that standard, we found the United States ranked 94th.

When we counted only the countries for which the UN had 2015 data, the United States ranked 73rd. That’s still far from the top ten.

Lied to again.

 

Some Takeaways From Thursday Night’s Hearing

Carefully edited quotes and voice-overs over video that was not related were the order of the day.

After the hearing ended on Thursday, NewsMax posted the following:

Here is a contemporary report on Trump’s condemning the attack on the Capitol published by Newsmax on Jan. 6, which was headlined “Trump Urges Peace, Protesters to ‘Go Home'”:

“‘I know your pain. I know you’re hurt,’ Trump said to begin a 62-second video on Twitter from what appeared to be the Rose Garden at the White House. ‘We had an election that was stolen from us. It was a landslide election … But you have to go home now. We have to have peace. We have to have law and order. We have to respect our great people in law and order. We don’t want anybody hurt.’

Twitter has since taken down the video and locked Trump’s account for 12 hours.

“The video, which Twitter first slapped with a warning that it could not be retweeted or liked due to a ‘risk of violence,’ followed about an hour after Trump posted a similar message.

“‘Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement,’ the first of two posts read. ‘They are truly on the side of our country. Stay peaceful!’

“Trump added: ‘I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No violence! Remember, WE are the party of law & order – respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue. Thank you!'”

Twitter made sure that President Trump’s message of peace did not get out. When President Trump’s remarks at his rally were quoted, the committee somehow omitted the sentence “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

President Trump’s statement that those attending the rally were good people was superimposed over the rioters to give the impression that he supported the riots. It’s interesting that the committee chose to do that after Democrats bailed out some of the more destructive rioters from the summer of 2020. It seems to me that posting bail for rioters might actually be supporting their actions.

It is amazing to me that members of the news media, who are paying the same prices at the gas pump and the supermarket as the rest of us, are working so hard to keep President Trump from regaining the Presidency. I guess they know that he is on to them and will find ways to go around them. The crooks in Washington are afraid he will expose their crimes and hold them accountable. It’s not a good situation.

Priorities, People

On Tuesday, NewsMax posted an article about the Congressional hearings concerning January 6th that will begin on Thursday night. This will be a dog and pony show the likes of which we have not seen for a long time.

The article reports:

Sen Marco Rubio, R-Fla., blasted the Jan. 6 House panel for hiring a network executive to produce its prime-time hearing set for Thursday night.

Axios reported Monday that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s partisan select committee — comprised of Democrats and two anti-Trump Republicans — had employed former ABC News President James Goldston to produce the prime-time hearing.

“Instead of focusing on $5 gas, 6000 illegal immigrants a day, record fentanyl deaths, or the violent criminals terrorizing America democrats use taxpayer money on a TV producer for the prime time political infomercial from the Jan 6th circus,” Rubio tweeted Monday morning.

…Rubio earlier this year ripped into liberals’ “ridiculous and shameless hypocrisy” for their outrage over the Capitol attack while they “downplayed” riots across the U.S. in 2020.

“Get ready to witness the shameless hypocrisy of the far left politicians & liberal activists masquerading as journalists who downplayed & excused riots & looting during the summer of 2020,” Rubio tweeted with a video on the one-year anniversary of the attack.

Rubio previously broke with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who described the Jan. 6, 2021, events as a “violent insurrection.”

It’s really hard to describe something as a violent insurrection when the only people who had guns were the police. There were two protesters killed by the police. Contrast that with the fact that during the summer of 2020, protesters weren’t killed–innocent civilians were. Yet, Congress is focusing on January 6th.

The article notes:

“There was no way they were going to overthrow the government of the United States,” Rubio told NewsNation in early February.

“I​​t was a riot. It was a dangerous riot. It was a violent one. It should have never happened, and it should never happen again. But I also do not think people should be misled to think this somehow was on the verge of overthrowing the government.”

The House select committee has employed Goldston partly because it wants the prime-time hearing to draw the attention of Americans who haven’t followed its probe in hopes that the Jan. 6 events resonate in voters’ minds as the November midterm elections approach.

As has been said by people smarter than I, the sole purpose of this production on Thursday night is to try to prevent President Trump from becoming President again. The fear is that now that he has some idea whom he can trust, he might actually be able to begin to drain the swamp that Washington has become.

Let The Charges Begin

Yesterday, NewsMax reported that an Arizona woman has been found guilty in a ballot collecting scheme in Arizona.

The article reports:

An Arizona woman accused of illegally collecting early ballots in the 2020 primary election pleaded guilty Thursday in an agreement with state prosecutors that saw the more serious forgery and conspiracy charges dismissed and limited any potential for a lengthy prison sentence.

Guillermina Fuentes, 66, could get probation for running what Arizona attorney general’s office investigators said was a sophisticated operation using her status as a well-known Democrat operative in the border city of San Luis to persuade voters to let her gather and in some cases fill out their ballots.

Prosecutors were apparently unable to prove the most serious charges, dropping three felony counts alleging that Fuentes filled out one voter’s ballot and forged signatures on some of the four ballots she illegally returned for people who were not family members.

Admittedly, the prosecutors did not prove the more serious charges, but the question remains as to exactly how many ballots she legally returned versus how many ballots she illegally returned.

The article notes:

Attorney general’s office investigation records obtained by The Associated Press through a public records request show that fewer than a dozen ballots could be linked to Fuentes, not enough to make a difference in all but the tightest local races.

The office of Attorney General Mark Brnovich, a Republican seeking his party’s U.S. Senate nomination, provided the records after delays of more than 15 months.

It is the only case ever brought by the attorney general under the 2016 “ballot harvesting” law, which was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court last year.

Investigators wrote that it appeared Fuentes used her position as a powerful figure in the heavily Mexican American community to get people to give her or others their ballots to return to the polls. Fuentes and her co-defendant were seen with several mail-in envelopes outside a cultural center in San Luis on the day of the 2020 primary election, the reports show. The ballots were taken inside and dropped in a ballot box.

She was videotaped by a write-in candidate who called the Yuma County sheriff. The reports said the video showed her marking at least one ballot, but that charge was among those dropped.

I am more than a little skeptical of some of the details provided in this article. If they had films of her marking a ballot, why did they drop the charges? My feeling is that this is simply the tip of the iceberg and our fearless leaders are reluctant to pursue it too aggressively for fear of what they might uncover. The good news is that there are a few non-political private groups that are working toward uncovering the fraud in the 2020 election.

Is Anyone Surprised?

On Tuesday, NewsMax reported that a federal jury in Washington, D.C. has found Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann not guilty of lying to the FBI.

As I noted on May 22nd:

JONATHAN TURLEY: Durham faces a lot of challenges in this trial. The judge in the trial has hit the prosecution with limiting orders. This jury pool is a nightmare for the prosecutors. There are three Clinton donors on the jury. In the last 24 hours, the judge turned down a motion to dismiss a juror whose daughter is actually playing on the same team with the daughter of Sussmann. So I think for the prosecutors, it seems like the only thing that is missing on the jury is Chelsea Clinton. A jury of your peers is not supposed to mean other Clinton people. And so, I think that the prosecutors have quite a challenge with this pool.

Unfortunately we have reached the place as a country where equal justice under the law is a myth. Considering the people involved in his wrongdoing, there was no way Michael Sussman was going to be found guilty.

The article at NewsMax reports:

The trial focused on whether Sussmann, a cybersecurity attorney and former federal prosecutor, concealed from the FBI that he was representing Clinton’s campaign when he presented computer data that he said showed a possible secret backchannel between Russia-based Alfa Bank and Trump’s business company, the Trump Organization. The FBI investigated but quickly determined that there was no suspicious contact.

The bureau’s then-general counsel and the government’s star witness, James Baker, testified that he was “100% confident” that Sussmann had told him that he was not representing any client during the meeting. Prosecutors say he was actually acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign and another client, and that he hid that information so as to make it seem more credible and to boost the chances of getting the FBI to investigate.

Lawyers for Sussmann deny that he lied, saying that it was impossible to know with certainty what he told Baker since they were the only participants in the meeting and neither of them took notes.

They argued that if Sussmann said he wasn’t acting on the Clinton campaign’s behalf that that was technically accurate since he didn’t ask the FBI to take any particular action. And they said that even if he did make a false statement, it was ultimately irrelevant since the FBI was already investigating Russia and the Trump campaign and would have looked into the Alfa Bank data no matter the source.

Read that last paragraph again. Then consider what would happen to an ordinary citizen if he lied to the FBI. The defense is saying that even if he lied to the FBI, it really isn’t important.

Has America become a banana republic where justice is determined by political affiliation?

The Impact Of The Leak

On Saturday, NewsMax posted an article featuring Justice Clarence Thomas’ comments about the leak of the Supreme Court draft of the abortion decision. Notice that somehow the leaker has not yet been identified.

The article reports:

Justice Clarence Thomas says the Supreme Court has been changed by the shocking leak of a draft opinion earlier this month. The opinion suggests the court is poised to overturn the right to an abortion recognized nearly 50 years ago in Roe v. Wade.

The conservative Thomas, who joined the court in 1991 and has long called for Roe v. Wade to be overturned, described the leak as an unthinkable breach of trust.

“When you lose that trust, especially in the institution that I’m in, it changes the institution fundamentally. You begin to look over your shoulder. It’s like kind of an infidelity that you can explain it, but you can’t undo it,” he said while speaking at a conference Friday evening in Dallas.

…Thomas, a nominee of President George H.W. Bush, said it was beyond “anyone’s imagination” before the May 2 leak of the opinion to Politico that even a line of a draft opinion would be released in advance, much less an entire draft that runs nearly 100 pages. Politico has also reported that in addition to Thomas, conservative justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett had voted with the draft opinion’s author, Samuel Alito, to overrule Roe v. Wade and a 1992 decision, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, that affirmed Roe’s finding of a constitutional right to abortion.

Thomas said that previously, “if someone said that one line of one opinion” would be leaked, the response would have been: “Oh, that’s impossible. No one would ever do that.”

“Now that trust or that belief is gone forever,” Thomas said at the Old Parkland Conference, which describes itself as a conference “to discuss alternative proven approaches to tackling the challenges facing Black Americans today.”

There is a need for confidentiality in Supreme Court negotiations and drafts. Justices need to be free to offer opinions, popular or unpopular, to reach a consensus on a decision. Knowing that drafts or notes from these deliberations are subject to being leaked could seriously impact the debates needed to rule on an issue. It bothers me that no one has yet been held responsible for the leak (only a small number of people had access to the draft), and the news reports do not see to be interested in finding out who the leaker is. This leak needs to be dealt with quickly and strongly in order to prevent future leaks.

A New Future For Twitter


On Monday, NewsMax reported that Twitter is planning on accepting Elon Musk’s final offer for $43 billion to buy the company.

The article reports:

Twitter may announce the $54.20-per-share deal later Monday, once its board has met to recommend the transaction to Twitter shareholders, the sources said, adding it was still possible the deal could collapse at the last minute.

Musk, the world’s richest person according to Forbes, is negotiating to buy Twitter in a personal capacity and Tesla is not involved in the deal.

The article concludes:

The deal, if it happens, would come just four days after Musk unveiled a financing package to back the acquisition.

This led Twitter’s board to take his offer more seriously and many shareholders to ask the company not to let the opportunity for a deal slip away, Reuters reported on Sunday. Before Musk revealed the financing package, Twitter’s board was expected to reject the bid, sources had said.

The sale would represent an admission by Twitter that Agrawal is not making enough traction in making the company more profitable, despite being on track to meet ambitious financial goals the company set for 2023. Twitter’s shares were trading higher than Musk’s offer price as recently as November.

Musk unveiled his intention to buy Twitter on April 14 and take it private via a financing package comprised of equity and debt. Wall Street’s biggest lenders, except those advising Twitter, have all committed to provide debt financing.

Musk’s negotiating tactics — making one offer and sticking with it — resembles how another billionaire, Warren Buffett, negotiates acquisitions. Musk did not provide any financing details when he first disclosed his offer for Twitter, making the market skeptical about its prospects.

This could be very interesting. It would be nice to bring free speech back to Twitter. I am on Truth Social as rwg@Right Wing Granny. Truth Social is unfiltered and I wouldn’t use it as a reliable source, but it is a place where people can express their ideas and opinions freely. It would be nice if Twitter also became a place where free speech is welcomed.

UPDATE: The purchase is complete. The reaction of the political left is totally entertaining!

 

 

Is This An Indication Of Things To Come?

On Wednesday, NewsMax reported that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives acting Director Marvin Richardson is being demoted.

The article reports:

U.S. Attorney Gary Restaino will replace Richardson, multiple sources told The Reload.

…”The news that he was being replaced came as a shock to most of us within the agency,” one ATF official told The Reload.

Sources told The Reload that Richardson’s demotion likely resulted from perceptions inside the administration that he was too friendly toward the gun industry.

“This administration has some very strong opinions on guns,” a source told The Reload. “They may have some distaste with that. So, bringing in [Restaino] kind of negates that.”

The move comes after a recent New York Times article featured complaints from gun-control activists that Richardson was “an industry-friendly subordinate pumping the brakes” on President Joe Biden’s progressive gun-control initiatives.

Richardson, a veteran of more than 30 years with ATF, is being moved out of the acting director position months before a permanent director might be confirmed.

On April 11, Biden announced he was nominating former federal prosecutor Steve Dettelbach to run ATF. Administration officials acknowledge Dettelbach faces long odds in the Senate largely because gun-rights groups routinely oppose any nominee for the agency who regulates guns, CNN reported.

The article concludes:

“A lot of the tips that we would get on illegal firearms activity from straw purchasers to traffickers came from dealers,” the source told The Reload. “The reality is just a very, very small percentage of gun dealers are bad. So, those partnerships are important, and Marvin really did a great job at nurturing those relationships.

“The fact that he has those relationships may not have sat well with the current administration. And I’m sure that that might’ve helped them push him out.”

While one ATF source told The Reload that Richardson’s demotion was met with disappointment by many of the staff, another source said, “As a person, he was very well-liked. Marvin is a nice guy, but he’s not a strong leader.”

Restaino spent 18 years as an assistant U.S. attorney before being confirmed as the U.S. attorney for the District of Arizona.

The impact of this decision will be less tips from dealers about illegal firearms activity. This will result in a further uptick in gun violence which the administration will use to justify attempts to disarm Americans. Stay tuned.

Two More Weeks Of Masks For Public Transportation

The government does not like to give up control–even when that control is not based on science. To review a few basic facts–the corona virus is smaller than the spaces in the cloth mask–it easily gets through. Wearing a mask to protect you from Covid is like putting up a chain-link fence to protect you from mosquitoes. There is also the fact that wearing a mask has a negative impact on your immune system (my husband and I were recently told this by a pulmonary specialist). The pulmonary specialist is expecting a spike in pneumonia when the masks are permanently gone. At any rate, the Biden administration has extended the requirement for masks on public transportation for two weeks.

On April 13th, NewsMax reported:

The Biden administration will extend for two weeks the nationwide mask requirement for public transit as it monitors an uptick in COVID-19 cases, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was set to extend the order, which was to expire on April 18, by two weeks to monitor for any observable increase in severe virus outcomes as cases rise in parts of the country. The move was being made out of abundance of caution, the person said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to preview the CDC’s action.

When the Transportation Security Administration, which enforces the rule for planes, buses, trains and transit hubs, extended the requirement last month, it said the CDC had been hoping to roll out a more flexible masking strategy that would have replaced the nationwide requirement. 

Meanwhile, on April 12th, Hot Air reported:

We’re still waiting to find out if President Joe Biden will allow the mask mandate for public travel to expire on April 18th or if he will extend it yet again. While he’s making his decision, he might want to take a peek at a new Axios/Ipsos poll that was just released this week. They asked Americans a variety of questions about how serious the threat from COVID was at this point and if the pandemic was still a major driving concern. While it may come as a great surprise to some people, particularly inside the White House and among cable news hosts, people really aren’t seeing this as a crisis requiring any extravagant government intervention at this point. In fact, it sounds like a large majority of Americans crossing party lines and every other demographic are done with the pandemic. (Daily Caller)

Just 9% of Americans believe COVID-19 is a serious crisis, signaling Americans are ready to move past the pandemic, according to a new Axios/Ipsos poll released Tuesday.

The poll asked Republicans and Democrats to characterize the state of the coronavirus in the U.S. Only 16% of Democrats called it a “serious crisis” compared to just 3% of Republicans. Sixty-six percent of Republicans called it a “problem, but manageable,” compared to 81% of Democrats. Overall, 73% of those polled said it was a “problem, but manageable.”

Meanwhile, 31% of Republicans said it was “not a problem at all” while just three percent of Democrats said the same, according to the poll.

The article at Hot Air also notes:

Another interesting recent finding mentioned in the linked report is the reality that the states which took a more “eased” approach to masking and other mandates had better outcomes than those with the harshest restrictions in terms of deaths, hospitalizations, and all the rest. The lowest grades were given to blue states such as New York, New Jersey and California. Utah, Vermont and Nebraska fared the best.

I don’t know exactly how Covid became political, but it is becoming obvious that very few of the decisions made in the last two years were based on science. Unfortunately, I expect that trend to continue.

Taxing Those That Keep The Economy Growing

On Sunday, NewsMax posted an article about President Biden’s tax proposal.

The article included some comments by former President Donald Trump’s White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow.

The article reports:

“Why would Joe Biden put out a budget that raises taxes 36 times?” Kudlow lamented to Sunday’s “The Cats Roundtable” WABC 770 AM-N.Y., adding a rebuke of Biden’s proposed “confiscation of wealth by taxing unrealized capital gains.”

“He is attacking the businesses that hire the workers, and he’s attacking the investors who come up with the new technologies and innovations that make America great, and he’s also attacking the fossil fuel companies that would get us out of this oil mess,” Kudlow continued to host John Catsimatidis. “I don’t understand the budget.”

“Why do you want to undermine the prosperity by jacking up taxes on everything that moves?”

And all this comes as Biden is burning the strategic oil reserve for “political price-fixing,” according to Kudlow.

“He is depleting a third of the strategic reserve for political price-fixing,” he said. “That’s all it is. It’s not going to work.”

It is merely a temporary solution to a system problem Biden energy policy has created – predictably – Kudlow said.

“It’s a drop in the bucket,” he said. “The strategic reserve is there in case you have a national emergency such as a hurricane blowing up Texas oil fields.”

Biden’s war on energy is bad policy for economics and the environment, Kudlow concluded.

“We could supply the whole bloody world with liquefied natural gas and stop the dirty coal in China and India,” he said, “if we had a sensible policy.”

Larry Kudlow is asking some very good questions and has some very good solutions to some of the problems we are currently facing.

We Were Hoodwinked

How many Democrats came out and declared that the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation designed to help President Trump win reelection? How many news outlets refused to report on the laptop? How many media outlets have still not apologized for their mistake? On Friday, NewsMax reported the results of a recent Rasmussen Poll that reveals why the Democrats and their media supporters reported the laptop story (or didn’t report it) the way they did.

The article reports:

More than half — 66% — of likely voters in the U.S. say they believe the story of Hunter Biden’s laptop is important, according to a new Rasmussen Reports poll.

The New York Post said the laptop — apparently abandoned at a Delaware repair shop — contained emails, text messages, and financial documents exchanged between Hunter Biden, his family, and business associates.

…Here are how the poll results break down:

    • 48% say if the media had fully reported the laptop story prior to the 2020 elections, it is unlikely Joe Biden would have been elected president. Almost half — 45%— don’t believe the story would have impacted the results.
    • 69% says they have closely followed news reports about Hunter Biden.
    • 65% believe Joe Biden was consulted about and perhaps profited for his son’s overseas business deals.
    • 73% of Republicans  believe it is very likely that Joe Biden was consulted about or perhaps profited from his son’s foreign business deals.
    • 23% of Democrats say it is very likely that Joe Biden was consulted or even profited from the deals.
    • 51% of independents believes it is very likely that Joe Biden was consulted or even profited from the deals.

The poll, conducted March 21-22, surveyed 1,000 likely voters in the U.S. The margin of error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.