The Glendon Commission

David Carlin: We are witnessing a cultural revolution as atheists and liberals work to destroy Christianity and replace it with a God-less worldview.


In July, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo created something called the “Commission on Unalienable Rights,” the purpose of which is to “provide the Secretary of State advice and recommendations concerning international human rights matters” along with “fresh thinking about human rights discourse where such discourse has departed from our nation’s founding principles of natural law and natural rights.”

The chair of the commission is Mary Ann Glendon, one of America’s leading Catholic intellectuals.  She is the Learned Hand Professor of Law at Harvard Law School and former U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican.  What’s more, she was Pompeo’s mentor when he was a student at Harvard Law School.

Many people on the political left have objected to the creation of this commission.  The expression “natural law” makes them nervous, as does the fact that an out-and-out Catholic like Glendon is its chair.

I myself am very pleased, because I hope it may serve, at least in some small way, to check the astonishing proliferation of “fundamental human rights” that we have seen in the United States in recent decades.  The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized a right to abortion (Roe v. Wade), a right to homosexual sodomy (Lawrence v. Texas), and a right to same-sex “marriage” (Obergefell v. Hodges).  In the future, if this trend continues, it will probably recognize a right to euthanasia.  And God only knows what else.

Those on the political Left have figured out a way of enacting their agenda while bypassing the democratic process.  You like X and you want it to be the law of the land.  But you can’t get X through Congress or state legislatures.  So you decide that X is a fundamental human right, a right that cannot be negated by popular majorities.

And then you go to the U.S. Supreme Court. And if you’re lucky the Court will have a majority of liberal justices on it, and they will agree with you.  And since, according to the liberal view, all fundamental human rights are implicitly contained in the U.S. Constitution (they are alluded to in the Ninth Amendment), X now becomes a Constitutional right.

If you object that you cannot find X in the Constitution, despite having read that document very carefully, you will be told that we have a “living Constitution” and that only out-of-date right-wingers read the Constitution literally.

If you reply that Justice Antonin Scalia once said, “The Constitution says what it says, and it doesn’t say something else,” you will be told that while Scalia was a fine fellow (since he was a friend of the saintly Ruth Bader Ginsburg), he was nonetheless an out-of-date right-winger whose originalism was as worthwhile as Confederate money.

The Declaration of Independence not only had a list of natural rights (equality, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness).  It also had an epistemology of moral knowledge. It held that the reality of these rights was self-evident.

Now if this is our standard (let’s call it the Jefferson standard), if we say that if X is to count as a fundamental human right, X will have to be self-evidently such, then our newer rights – the “rights” to abortion, to homosexual sodomy, to same-sex “marriage,” or to euthanasia – are not rights at all; for they are far, far from self-evident.  If they were self-evident rights, there would be an almost universal consensus on them.

If we were to use the Jefferson standard, only if almost every American agreed that X is a fundamental human right would the Supreme Court declare that X, despite not being mentioned in the Constitution, is one of those unenumerated rights alluded to in the Ninth Amendment.

But if we are not to use the Jefferson standard when deciding what is, and what is not, a fundamental human right, what standard are we to use?  Apparently, nothing better than a majority vote of the Supreme Court.  If five justices say that X is a fundamental right, X is a fundamental human right.

Now that’s just fine for many people on the political Left.  For they can then multiply “fundamental human rights” and hope that their multiplications will be ratified by at least five “living Constitution” members of the Supreme Court.  But for the rest of us, for people who like to think that we are living in a democratic republic that operates within the framework of a Constitution that was intended by its makers to be read literally, this potentially unlimited multiplication of fundamental rights is a disaster.

And for Christians too it’s a disaster – at least for old-fashioned Christians, who subscribe to the faith and morals of the early Church, e.g., orthodox Catholics and Evangelical Protestants.  For the leftist list of fundamental human rights contains items that are quite incompatible with Christianity.

And so, when the Supreme Court declares that, for example, abortion, homosexual sodomy, same-sex “marriage,” and euthanasia are fundamental rights, it is by very clear implication also declaring that Christianity is the enemy of human rights.

We are, as I see things, in the middle of a great but slow-moving cultural revolution in the United States, as atheists and their near-atheist fellow-travelers (including religiously liberal Protestants and Catholics) attempt to destroy the traditional Christian ethic and worldview and replace it with a God-less ethic and worldview.

So far, the atheist coalition seems to be winning. Their advance, supported by the mainstream media, the entertainment industry, our leading universities, and the Democratic Party, looks unstoppable.  And one of the great instruments of this advance is the idea that the leftist agenda can be enacted by the un-democratic “discovery” of more and more fundamental human rights.

Can the Glendon commission stop this advance?  Probably not.  But perhaps it can slow it down, giving Christians more time in which to rally their troops and fight back.  In any case, the work of the commission, and the atheistic reaction to it, will be absolutely essential to watch.

COLUMN BY

David Carlin

David Carlin is a professor of sociology and philosophy at the Community College of Rhode Island, and the author of The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America.

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2019 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Nigerians Arrested by FBI for Scamming Millions from Elderly and Vulnerable Women

“We believe this is one of the largest cases of its kind in U.S. history.” – US Attorney Nick Hanna

The FBI announced this week that over a dozen were under arrest in the U.S. and efforts were being made to find additional co-conspirators around the world in fraud schemes  involving at least 32 victims.

Here is The Hill on this good news,

Justice charges 80 in massive online fraud case linked to Nigerian defendants

The Department of Justice on Thursday unsealed a 252-count federal indictment charging 80 defendants, many of whom are Nigerian nationals, with conspiring to steal millions of dollars through online scams.

The indictment was unsealed by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California and was made public shortly afterauthorities arrested 14 of the defendants across the United States, with 11 of these defendants apprehended in the Los Angeles region. The majority of the defendants are outside the country, with many likely in Nigeria.

The defendants involved in the case were charged with attempting to defraud individuals of millions of dollars through the use of business email compromise (BEC) and online romance scams, in addition to other schemes meant to target the elderly.

The investigation is being led by the FBI, with each of the defendants charged with “conspiracy to commit fraud, conspiracy to launder money, and aggravated identity theft,” according to Justice Department. Some defendants also face fraud and money laundering charges.

U.S. Attorney Nick Hanna described the scams used by the defendants during a press conference on Thursday, saying that “fraud networks now target individuals and businesses alike.”

“In the BEC scams, the fraudsters will often hack a company’s email system, impersonate company personnel, and direct payments to bank accounts that funnel money back to the fraudsters in Nigeria,” Hanna said. “In the romance scams, victims think they are developing a dating relationship, when in fact they are just being tricked into sending money to the fraudsters.”

Hanna added that “we believe this is one of the largest cases of its kind in U.S. history.”

Paul Delacourt, the assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles field office, said during the same press conference that losses involved in this case for victims total around $10 million. He said defendants attempted to obtain $40 million from victims.

There were at least 32 victims in the case, from the United States and other countries including Japan, the United Kingdom, Lebanon, Ukraine, China, Mexico, Germany, Indonesia, the United Arab Emirates, and Trinidad and Tobago.

Delacourt said the case began in 2016 after one individual was victimized by the defendants. The two main defendants in the case are Nigerian citizens Valentine Iro and Chukwudi Christogunus Igbokwe.

More here.

And, don’t miss the  Stars and Stripes story about how some of the crooks pretended to be US military personnel when they scammed hundreds of thousands from lonely women.

I know you are shaking your head and wondering who in their right mind would be so foolish to send money to a stranger they met on the internet.  Well, as we have heard in previous posts on Nigerian romance scammers, these Nigerian creeps are skilled actors and preying on vulnerable and lonely people seems to come naturally to them.

Keep an eye on your elderly friends and family members and don’t let them fall for these despicable scams.

RELATED ARTICLES:

64% Of Federal Arrests Were Of Non-Citizens In 2018, DOJ Finds

Just 20 Miles From White House, Illegal Immigrant Rape Cases Keep Piling Up

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Judicial Watch Major Court Victory: Montgomery County, Maryland Must Clean up Voter Rolls!

Since we are on the subject of sanctuary county—Montgomery County, MD (see my previous post)—here is a bit of good news for a change!  (Hat tip: Cathy)

Thank God for Judicial Watch!  Note that it took TWO full years before the county is being forced to comply.

From JW’s press release:

JUDICIAL WATCH VICTORY: FEDERAL COURT ORDERS MARYLAND TO PRODUCE VOTER REGISTRATION LIST DATA TO JUDICIAL WATCH

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that a federal court has ordered the State of Maryland to produce voter list data for Montgomery County, the state’s biggest county. The court ruling comes in the Judicial Watch lawsuit filed July 18, 2017, against Montgomery County and the Maryland State Boards of Elections under the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA).

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, Baltimore Division (Judicial Watch vs. Linda H. Lamone, et al. (No. 1:17-cv-02006)). The decision follows NVRA-related Judicial Watch successes in California and Kentucky that could lead to removal of up to 1.85 million inactive voters from voter registration lists. The NVRA requires states to take reasonable steps to clean up its voting rolls and to make documents about its voter list maintenance practices available to anyone who asks.

Judicial Watch had sought the Maryland voter list data after discovering that there were more registered voters in Montgomery County than citizens over the age of 18 who could register.

[….]

The dispute over the voter registration list arose from an April 11, 2017, notice letter sent to Maryland election officials, in which Judicial Watch explained Montgomery County had an impossibly high registration rate. The letter threatened a lawsuit if the problems with Montgomery County’s voter rolls were not fixed. The letter also requested access to Montgomery County voter registration lists in order to evaluate the efficacy of any “programs and activities conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and currency of Maryland’s official eligible voter lists during the past 2 years.”

Democrat Maryland officials, in response, attacked and smeared Judicial Watch by suggesting it was an agent of Russia.

More here.

Just a reminder!  Maryland is run by the Dems even as it has a Republican (never Trumper!) governor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

4 Things to Know About Trump’s New Voter Fraud Claim

Another Rape in Montgomery County, MD, Sanctuary to Illegals

Trump Administration to Close Loophole Blocking Immigration Enforcement

The New York Times Works for the Left, and Now Everyone Should Know It

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

His Name Was Seth Rich! [Videos]

Posted by Eeyore

Seth Rich Murder Update: FBI Claims They Didn’t Investigate but NSA Claims Can’t Disclose Files Due to Matter of National Security

We first reported in late July that Texas businessman Ed Butowsky filed a lawsuit where he outed reporter Ellen Ratner as his source for information on Seth Rich. The DNC operative was murdered in the summer of 2016 in Washington DC. His murder was never solved. According to the lawsuit Seth Rich provided WikiLeaks the DNC emails before the 2016 election, not Russia.

This totally destroys the FBI and Mueller’s claims that Russians hacked the DNC to obtain these emails.

Butowsky claims in his lawsuit:

Ms. Rattner said Mr. Assange told her that Seth Rich and his brother, Aaron, were responsible for releasing the DNC emails to Wikileaks. Ms. Rattner said Mr. Assange wanted the information relayed to Seth’s parents, as it might explain the motive for Seth’s murder.

On November 9 2016 Ellen Ratner admitted publicly that she met with Julian Assange for three hours the Saturday before the 2016 election. According to Ratner, Julian Assange told her the leaks were not from the Russians, they were from an internal source from the Hillary Campaign.


Please read the rest at GW linked at the top.

Also, the clip of Assange talking to Hannity about the reward pretty much nails it for me.

I have somewhere the interview with Assange by Hannity, where Julian specifically states that he is offering reward for information leading to the killer of Seth Rich by name, because he wants to protect his sources. But he does not directly say Seth Rich was his source on the DNC email leaks. Seth Rich did have access to that material however.

Once I find that clip, and I know I have it somewhere, I will restore it and add it to this post.

Congress’s Behavior Police To Register Potential Future Criminals

By KrisAnne Hall.

The TAPS Act is not the solution to gun violence many members of Congress are professing it to be. The unlimited and arbitrary authority this Act bestows upon an unaccountable bureaucracy of 24 people, combined with the language of double-speak and contradictions creating loopholes allowing completely unsupervised and unchecked authority, is reminiscent of the Sedition Act of 1798.

The TAPS Act will create a brand new bureaucracy under the authority of the Department of Homeland Security. A non-elected bureaucrat will be authorized by Congress to appoint 23 other non-elected bureaucrats to “identify individuals who are exhibiting patterns of concerning behavior” and then to “manage” those Americans.

The sole purpose of this bureaucracy of 24 will be to create State and federal behavioral policing body ruling over the perceived behavior of the American people — a KGB-style agency not only monitoring the behavior of Americans, but also functioning as judge, jury, and executioner.

This Act mandates the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish a Joint Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management Task Force: a 24 member bureaucracy consisting of one government employee (level GS-15 or above) and 23 people from non-governmental organizations of the Secretary’s choosing. Not a single member of this 24 person bureaucracy will be elected by the people, therefore the people will retain no control whatsoever over the actions or activity of this newly created bureaucracy that will possess, by Congressional consent, an enormous amount of arbitrary and unchecked power over the people (see §4(a)).

The sole purpose of this task force is “identifying individuals who are exhibiting patterns of concerning behavior” and create a power to control those people on a federal and local level (§3(2)). This Act contains no clear definition of “concerning behavior.” As a matter of fact, the Act relies upon the Task Force (24 non-elected bureaucrats) to first define “concerning behavior” and then empower the “monitors” tasked with “identifying individuals” that exhibit that behavior.

According to (§3(2)(a)) no actual criminal act must take place to invoke the power this bureaucracy creates. A Federal or State agent must only believe an individual is “interested” in committing their definition of “concerning behavior” to summon this new and undefined power to action.  The DHS will then be “empowered” to implement these arbitrary rules with no acknowledgement of any of the rights of the people.

To take the legal-eeze off it, this is intended to create a registry of people who may commit crimes at some unspecified and unknown time in the future. This registry will then be used to begin a step-by-step usurpation of their individual rights, from the assumption of innocence and due process to the 1st and 2nd Amendments and more.

Once a State or federal gent has identified an American believed to be interested in some kind of concerning behavior, §3(2)(b) authorizes the bureaucracy to empower these agents to investigate and gather information from multiple sources (sources remain undefined in this Act) on this individual American to find “articulable facts” supporting whether this person is truly exhibiting an “interest” in committing “concerning behavior.”

The 4th Amendment requires the government to obtain a warrant based upon probable cause (not articulable facts), supported by oath or affirmation, particularly describing the places to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. Under the 4 th Amendment, it is impossible for this Task Force to empower any government agent to do what Congress has authorized it to do. But the Act makes no mention of the 4 th Amendment or the government’s requirement to respect and secure the rights of the people.  According to §3(2)(c) of this Act, after the bureaucracy has compiled its “articulable facts” by circumventing the 4th Amendment’s requirements on government, the bureaucracy is now empower an government agent to “manage” the threat of “concerning behavior.” There is no definition within the Act for the word “manage.” However, the “Powers of the Task Force” are defined in §4(f) as follows:

“Any member of the Task Force may, if authorized by the Task Force, take any action which the Task Force is authorized to take by this section.”

While there are no guidelines created by Congress on how this bureaucracy is supposed to define “manage” or “identify” the behavior of Americans, §2 of the Act establishes that the Task Force will create its own “guidelines and best practices” in order to devise a “national standard” of action.  Therefore, it seems indisputable through §2 and §4(f) that any member of the Task Force can take any action it chooses as long the Task Force will establish the guidelines and practices for such action. The only limit of a government agent and the agency as a whole, rests solely upon the whim of the individual bureaucrat and the bureaucracy to limit itself.  There’s not a lot of history suggesting that would happen.

No Real Congressional Oversight

Congress retains no real authority to check, balance, limit, modify, or control the exercise of power created by this bureaucracy.  The only requirement for this new bureaucracy is to operate as the behavioral police in America and after one year the Secretary (the GS-15 government employee) will submit a report to Congress telling Congress what they have been doing for the past year. The Act then requires DHS to report to Congress once a year every subsequent year on how the guidelines are working, not as a check and balance.

A deceived member of Congress may attempt to assert that the only authority of the bureaucracy is to make “suggestions to Congress” as to what the proper course of action should be. However, that assertion can be seen as pure error by reading §3(2)(c) of this Act.

A deceived member of Congress may believe that this federal bureaucracy will have no power over the State and local police powers. However §8 of this Act establishes that federal grant money will be given to local jurisdictions which will undeniably establish the power for this Bureaucracy to control local and State authorities once they accept that money. So just as with the Department of Education and so many other federal agencies, if the States submit to federal authority, they’ll get the money. Most to all States will. (Surely the American people recognize this sleight of hand by now!)

A deceived Supreme Court, upon legal challenge, will likely fail to recognize this Act to be vague and full of self-defining authority for a non-elected bureaucracy. SCOTUS has long held great deference to federal agencies and their agents to define their own authority and procedures when Congress leaves holes in the laws.

The Constitution delegates no authority to Congress to fund, recommend, or create a behavioral police for the people. The writing of this Act and the Act’s website proves that every co-sponsor of this Bill knows this as fact! First, the Act makes no mention of due process, the rights of the people, nor any reliance upon or limit established by the Constitution of the United States.

Secondly, if you go to the Bill’s website and click on the hyperlink “Constitutional Authority Statement” the link takes you back to a copy of the Bill text, with no statement of authority whatsoever. The Constitution is not what the foundation for this Act, but fear of guns on the left and fear of terrorists on the right.

So, with the passage of this Act, Congress will create a new bureaucracy who will be empowered to create its own guidelines and procedures on how it will operate; and to define, identify, and enforce government control upon its self-defined “concerning behavior” of individuals in America — complete autonomous, arbitrary, self-defined authority resting in the hands of bureaucrats elected by no one, and controlled by no one.

This Act, on its face, violates the 4th , 5th , 6th , and 8th Amendments. But as in every arbitrary law, the whole truth of its offense to the rights of the people cannot be fully known until the law is put into action. If this Act is used as some members of Congress profess, it is highly likely that execution of this Act will violate large swaths of the Constitution — including the 1st , 2nd , 4th , 5th , 6th , 7th , 8th , 9th , and 10th Amendments. Constitution and the rights of the people be damned, the bureaucrats will have their power under the illusion of keeping people safe — always the justification for taking away rights.

Members of Congress are championing this Bill as the “be all and end all” solution to gun violence in America, yet the Bill does not even once mention the words “gun” or “ammunition.” It should be clear now that the TAPS Act is not about gun control at all, it is about people control. It will target any American who voices, types, or indicates a thought toward questioning government policy, people, or power. (See the FBI Memo defining and identifying the “new” standard for domestic terrorist.)

How any politician who professes a knowledge of the Constitution or professes a love for America, her people, and their rights could ever back this insidious piece of legislation is completely beyond my comprehension. And as Patrick Henry said in 1788: “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel.”

It’s time for the American people to hold these pretend patriots suspect and tell them to change their vote or change their vocation.

If any person, including members of Congress would like to discuss this with me, my door is open. My website: KrisAnneHall.com.

ABOUT KRISANNE HALL

KrisAnne Hall is a former biochemist, Russian linguist for the US Army, and former prosecutor for the State of Florida. KrisAnne also practiced First Amendment Law for a prominent Florida non-profit Law firm. KrisAnne now travels the country teaching the foundational principles of Liberty and our Constitutional Republic. KrisAnne is the author of 6 books on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, she also has an internationally popular radio and television show and her books and classes have been featured on C-SPAN TV. KrisAnne can be found at www.KrisAnneHall.com.

VIDEO: Red Flag Red Flags

Confiscating guns from legal owners who have done no wrong violates everything the USA stands for!

To learn more about “Red Flag” laws please click here.

RELATED ARTICLE: Florida Man Lost His 2A Rights, Thanks To Red Flag Laws And Mistaken Identity 

VIDEO: How We Can Safeguard Our Election Process

In the freest nation in the world, our system of government and our very liberty depend on free and fair elections. Whether they’re selecting a mayor or the president of the United States, every American must be able to trust the process, or the democratic system itself breaks down.

When someone commits voter fraud, the process is no longer fair, everyone’s vote gets diluted, and in some cases, election results are changed.

Contrary to the claims of many on the left, voter fraud is a very real problem. As the Supreme Court noted when it upheld Indiana’s voter ID law, flagrant examples of voter fraud have been documented throughout this nation’s history.

The National Commission on Federal Election Reform has said that in many close elections, fraud can absolutely change the outcome. Cases of local elections getting overturned because of fraud have occurred in New Jersey, Indiana, and other states.

Although hundreds of people have been convicted in recent years, voter fraud often goes undetected. And even when it’s discovered, overburdened prosecutors rarely prioritize these cases.

Fraudsters can steal votes and change election outcomes in several ways, including: voting in someone else’s name, registering in multiple locations to vote multiple times in the same election, voting even though they’re not eligible because they’re felons or noncitizens, or paying or intimidating people to vote for certain candidates.

Unfortunately, many on the left are attempting to make election fraud easier by fighting laws that require an ID to vote. They’ve pushed to get noncitizens and jailed inmates to vote. And they’ve sued states that have tried to purge their voter rolls of people registered in multiple states.

How can we fix the problem?

Since states control much of the electoral process, they must pass laws requiring government-issued IDs to vote. That ensures people aren’t stealing others’ identities and their right to vote.

States should join voter registration cross-check programs to identify voters registered in multiple places. One cross-check program has identified hundreds of thousands of potential duplicate registrations across 30 states as well as evidence of illegal double voting.

States should also compare voter rolls with government records to identify convicted felons and noncitizens who should be removed from the rolls. And the federal government should cooperate with these efforts and make Department of Homeland Security and other databases available to state officials.

Preserving this great experiment that is America depends on having free and fair elections where all Americans can trust the process and the results.

Something as critical as election integrity can’t be left to a simple honor system. One of the most important roles of government is to safeguard the electoral process and ensure that every voter’s right to cast a ballot is protected. That not only protects our right to vote; that’s how we protect the future of our very republic.

COMMENTARY BY

Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide range of issues—including civil rights, civil justice, the First Amendment, immigration, the rule of law and government reform—as a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and manager of the think tank’s Election Law Reform Initiative. Read his research. Twitter: .


Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column with video is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

The Vortex — The Day of Reckoning Has Arrived

TRANSCRIPT

It’s been brewing for a while now, and yesterday, the sins of the homosexualist hierarchy officially caught up to them.

In New York state, the Child Victim’s Act went into effect, and the vultures have now swept in to begin picking over the dying body of the Church as hundreds of lawsuits worth hundreds of millions of dollars — perhaps even billions — were filed throughout the state’s seven dioceses.

Church Militant, you will recall, led all Catholic media last year during the “Summer of Shame” saying this was bound to happen — and now it has.

States all over the country are now suspending their statutes of limitations and opening up a one-year window for any victims of past sexual abuse to sue the Church, and on the very first day, literally hundreds of lawsuits were filed; and yesterday was just day one of the year — 364 more to go.

In courthouses all over the state, lawyers lined up in the halls beginning at midnight to get their clients’ lawsuits filed. In many places, the atmosphere was almost circus-like.

And why wouldn’t it be? From the attorneys’ perspectives, a massive, huge payday is waiting down the road and potential bankruptcy for multiple dioceses, as Buffalo’s lying bishop, Richard Malone, even stated publicly days before.

The bishops in New York fought like hell to prevent this law from being passed, with Cdl. Timothy Dolan leading the way.

In fact, the flashpoint of the story yesterday happened right on the steps of his cathedral, St. Patrick’s on 5th Avenue, which was fitting since it was here where it was all concentrated last year as news broke that former Cdl. Theodore McCarrick had been accused of sexually abusing a minor right inside this very cathedral.

That case then caused James Grein to come public, and at the Silence Stops Now rally last November in Baltimore, which Church Militant was proud to be a sponsor of, Grein step forward into the glare of cameras and announced that he had been an 18-year sexual abuse victim of the corrupt cleric.

In a moment of poetic justice, Grein stood with his lawyer right in front of the cathedral and together they began a process which may very well bring the archdiocese of New York to its knees.

It was a moment of vindication for Grein and hundreds if not thousands of victims of abuse — mostly male — at the hands of corrupt clergy.

And Grein’s point about this now presents a moment to get to the bottom of how all this came to be is what has corrupt homosexual members of the hierarchy most concerned — and if not, it should.

So many of the bishops and members of the establishment, for decades, have covered up this filth for so long and used the mechanism and machinery of the Church to hide behind and even destroy victims — that open court is now the only way to force the truth into the light of day.

This is the moment that the weak, head-in-the-sand Catholics can no longer deny, as the secular press has grabbed hold of this story and is now running with it, much like they did with the original story back in 2002 in Boston.

This has come about because of the infiltration of homosexual men into the Catholic priesthood, some of whom, certainly not all, but some of whom raped altar boys, thousands and thousands of altar boys.

Their homosexual buddies who had moved up the ranks to become bishops covered up and lied for them, bullied and intimidated victims and sat by with false platitudes as many young men killed themselves, unable to bear the psychological torture.

Lying prelates like Blase Cupich and Joseph Tobin continue to deny that homosexuality had anything to do with it, with Cupich even manipulating last February’s sex summit in Rome to deliberately avoid the discussion.

When all this became much more public last summer, many Catholics somewhat naively hoped that this would finally be the moment where the Church could be cleaned up, the hierarchy held to account for their sins and gross negligence.

But in the intervening year, what has become blindingly clear is that the gay corrupt mafia, as archbishop Viganò calls them, has dug its heels in even further and doubled down on the lies and cover-up, some bishops shredding documents at a furious pace.

The rampant homosexuality in the Church among clergy is now completely exposed, and still, the hierarchy does nothing about it.

Look at these pictures from an exclusive Church Militant report from just yesterday, two former priests from New England who recently left their vocations and moved to Minnesota where they were civilly married. These are their own social media postings.

Their respective dioceses simply avoid the entire affair saying once they left, there’s nothing they could do.

How about conducting some deep-dive forensic analysis of how this could happen — what was their formation, what’s the current formation? But no, that won’t happen because the men in charge support all this.

Homosexualist clerical kingpin himself James Martin is protected and promoted all over the country by dozens of these wicked men in miters, the same men who lied and covered up all this sin, and a couple hundred others of the mitered class say nothing, implicating themselves in the sin.

Here in Detroit, a disgraced archbishop who had to step down in St. Paul-Minneapolis is allowed to return to his home archdiocese and concelebrate Mass at the seminary as though nothing happened — the same seminary, as rector, former seminarians report he used to hit on them.

These are but a tiny, tiny sampling of what has become the status quo in the clerical ranks, something Abp. Viganò last year himself said, and has been proven true point by point.

And yet, the greedy homosexualist prelates still do not learn, as Dolan and his archdiocese have actually sued their 32 insurance companies who refuse to pay any settlements these hundreds of lawsuits are going to produce.

Their position: You liars and cover-up artists are the ones who let this go on for decades, and you even lied to us about what you did. We are not paying for your sins.

That’s a tough case to argue against.

Dolan and other bishops around the country are now in a position to have to begin doling out millions in legal fees to force their insurance companies to pay what will likely be hundreds and hundreds of millions in settlements.

After their final years are spent in all these civil courts, they very well will find themselves moving down the hall to the bankruptcy courts.

And yet, in the midst of this scandalous turn of affairs, not one, not a single sitting ordinary has stepped forward and owned this filth, saying we are guilty of now laying bare the entire patrimony of the Church, in addition to participation in what may very well be the largest sexual abuse cover-up in the world — not one.

And yet, they will put on the happy face of willing participants and wanting to see justice done and victims protected — blah blah blah.

Don’t believe them — not for a single minute.

They are products of decades-old system, a system which rewarded and advanced lying, thieving homosexual men.

They played the game their entire careers; they danced to this music as they climbed their way up the ladders, but now, the music has come to a screeching halt.

What a horrible legacy these men will have left when their corpses are rotting their graves in a few short years: tens of millions of souls having abandoned the one true faith; 7 out of every 10 rejecting the central teaching of the Real Presence; thousands and thousands of altar boys raped and abused; thousands of vocations destroyed; liturgy made into a side-show.

And now, the very patrimony of the Church, what millions of poor immigrant Catholics scraped and saved for decades to hand over for the work of the Church, all to be gobbled in court judgments and scattered to the four winds.

The lying, corrupt hierarchy, never missing a chance to virtue signal, can’t stop babbling on about immigrants.

What about the millions of immigrants who came here and used their sweat and toil and money to build up the Church in Her work of holiness?

Since they will not bow to the will of God and correct their ways, God is now forcing the situation, as He has always done when the leaders go astray.

In a couple of months, the state of New Jersey Child Victim’s Act goes into effect. The rampage through the Church is about to shift into high gear.

Pray for the restoration; pray that these wicked, lying prelates repent, that they have their eyes opened or that God will close them forever.

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

VIDEO ON RED FLAG LAWS: An Open Letter to our Legislators, Judges and Lawmen

LibertyFellowshipMT published an outstanding 18 minute video (below) of an open letter delivered by Dr. Chuck Baldwin the leader of Liberty Fellowship located in Montana on Sunday, March 17, 2019 during a service. You know he is a good guy because the ultra leftist Southern Poverty Law Center has labeled him a “God and Guns” pastor and leader of an “apocalyptic mission” and “anti-government Patriot movement”.

Note: SPLC is infamous for placing many conservative and tea party affiliated groups on their domestic terrorist list and providing it to govt. agencies including the DOD’s Center for Counter Terrorism. Is it any wonder that POTUS and his supporters were targets for the left leaning intelligence community under Obama.

The video/open letter addresses the great dangers of “Red Flag” gun confiscation law Senate Bill 7 (Extreme Risk Protection Order and Violence Prevention Act of 2019) sponsored by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and co-sponsored by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Senator Dick Blumenthal (D-Conn).

Senate Bill 7 violates every American’s right to Due Process under the 5th and 14th Amendments.

Red Flag ex parte orders are not based on probable cause but the absurdly low standard of “reasonable cause” for obtaining an ex parte order which can result in a seizure on the same day the Court issues followed by a Hearing within 14 days. Not only that it is based on the low standard of “preponderance of evidence or reasonable suspicion” and not “beyond reasonable doubt.” Among the many loosely defined criteria for issuance includes reckless storage – (which could mean a gun on night stand or at bedside). It also shifts the burden of proof to gun owner  (e.g. gun owner must prove he is not a threat) which ignores the legal precedent of innocent until proven guilty.

If you don’t have time to listen to whole thing (which I recommend) then skip to middle and listen from 9 minute mark on.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Conservatives Mobilize to Stop “Red Flag” Gun Confiscation Laws.

Media notices Trump cooling to more gun laws

Studies Find No Evidence That Assault Weapon Bans Reduce Homicide Rates

Levi’s loves to take Middle America’s money…and use it to take your guns

Levi Strauss ( 1 – Liberal)  is the world’s largest seller of jeans. They make billions of dollars off of Middle America’s desire to wear comfortable, affordable jeans in many walks of life – and this past March, they made even more money when they used Middle America’s jean purchases to become publicly traded.

However, they hate Middle America’s values. Their July 2019 investor report bragged about promoting left-leaning LGBT values, climate change activism, and gun control. They rank a paltry “1” on the 2ndVote scale, indicating that they are a full-tilt liberal activist organization.

This is especially true on guns. In September 2018, Levi’s donated one million dollars to gun control, partnered with former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown Business Leaders for Gun Safety, doubled employee matches to Levi’s new Safer Tomorrow Fund, and paid employees for up to five hours per month of gun control activism. They also launched a Get Out The Vote campaign in 2018.

It’s time to show Levi’s who’s in charge – not Wall Street, but Main Street. Middle America giveth, and Middle America taketh away. You can and must show Levi’s that their violation of customer values and shareholder ethics is unacceptable.

First, we urge you to buy at companies which focus on serving customers – Eddie BauerCarhartt , Land’s End, and Tommy Hilfiger are all neutral (3) in 2ndVote’s rankings.

Second, contact Levi’s CEO Chip Bergh through LinkedIn or email him at cbergh@levi.com. Let him know that you’ll be sending your jeans money to any firm but Levi’s.

Third, spread the word on social media. Our friends at the National Center for Public Policy Research’s Free Enterprise Project held Levi’s accountable at their shareholders’ meeting this summer. The National Rifle Association is likewise not backing down from this leftist pressure. Tell your social media audience that 2ndVote, the National Center, and the National Rifle Association won’t stop fighting for your Second Amendment rights, and neither will you.

Fourth, please donate to 2ndVote. We are sending a letter to Bergh on September 1, a year after he led Levi’s into the gun control activism camp. We plan to include all donors who want their names in the letter. If you would like to personally tell Bergh about your decision to shop elsewhere, send us an email at info@2ndVote.com.

For almost a year, Levi’s has dedicated itself to using your money to violate your values. Let them know you’re watching.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Company Contrast – Levi Strauss

This Week’s Scores At-A-Glance

Studies Find No Evidence That Assault Weapon Bans Reduce Homicide Rates

EDITORS NOTE: This 2nd Vote column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

7 Reasons to Oppose Red Flag Guns Laws

The Associated Press reports Congress is seriously considering red flag gun laws.

These laws, also called “extreme risk protection orders,” allow courts to issue orders allowing law enforcement to seize firearms from people who’ve committed no crime but are believed to be a danger to themselves or others.

President Trump has signaled his backing of bipartisan Senate legislation sponsored by Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.

“We must make sure that those judged to pose a grave risk to public safety do not have access to firearms and that if they do those firearms can be taken through rapid due process,” Trump said in a White House speech.

Red flag laws have garnered support from several conservative intellectuals, as well, including David French of National Review and Ben Shapiro.

Here are seven reasons red flag laws should be opposed, particularly at the federal level.

Most people haven’t heard of red flag laws until recently—if they have at all—but they aren’t new.

Connecticut enacted the nation’s first red flag law in 1999, followed by Indiana (2005). This means social scientists have had decades to analyze the effectiveness of these laws. And what did they find?

“The evidence,” The New York Times recently reported, “for whether extreme risk protection orders work to prevent gun violence is inconclusive, according to a study by the RAND Corporation on the effectiveness of gun safety measures.”

The Washington Post reports that California’s red flag went basically unused for two years after its passage in 2016. Washington, D.C.’s law has gone entirely unused. Other states, such as Florida and Maryland, have gone the other direction, seizing hundreds of firearms from gun-owners. Yet it’s unclear if these actions stopped a shooting.

With additional states passing red flag laws, researchers will soon have much more data to analyze. But before passing expansive federal legislation that infringes on civil liberties, lawmakers should have clear and compelling empirical evidence that red flag laws actually do what they are intended to do.

The Founding Fathers clearly enumerated the powers of the federal government in the Constitution. Among the powers granted in Article I, Section 8 are “the power to coin money, to regulate commerce, to declare war, to raise and maintain armed forces, and to establish a Post Office.”

Regulating firearms is not among the powers listed in the Constitution (though this has not always stopped lawmakers from regulating them). In fact, the document expressly forbids the federal government from doing so, stating in the Second Amendment that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Unlike the federal government, whose powers, James Madison noted, are “few and defined,” states possess powers that “are numerous and indefinite.”

Indeed, 17 states and the District of Columbia already have red flag laws, and many more states are in the process of adding them. This shows that the people and their representatives are fully capable of passing such laws if they choose. If red flag laws are deemed desirable, this is the appropriate place to pursue such laws, assuming they pass constitutional muster. But do they?

The Constitution mandates that no one shall be “deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.”

Seizing the property of individuals who have been convicted of no crime violates this provision. Gun control advocates claim due process is not violated because people whose firearms are taken can appeal to courts to reclaim their property. However, as economist Raheem Williams has observed, “this backward process would imply that the Second Amendment is a privilege, not a right.”

Depriving individuals of a clearly established, constitutionally-guaranteed right in the absence of criminal charges or trial is an affront to civil liberties.

In 2018, two Maryland police officers shot and killed 61-year-old Gary Willis in his own house after waking him at 5:17 a.m. The officers, who were not harmed during the shooting, had been ordered to remove guns from his home under the state’s red flag law, which had gone into effect one month prior to the shooting.

While red flag laws are designed to reduce violence, it’s possible they could do the opposite by creating confrontations between law enforcement and gun owners like Willis, especially as the enforcement of red flag laws expands.

In theory, red flag laws are supposed to target individuals who pose a threat to themselves or others. In practice, they can work quite differently.

In a 14-page analysis, the American Civil Liberties Union of Rhode Island explained that few people understand just how expansive the state’s red flag law is.

“It is worth emphasizing that while a seeming urgent need for [the law] derives from recent egregious and deadly mass shootings, [the law’s] reach goes far beyond any efforts to address such extraordinary incidents,” the authors said.

“As written, a person could be subject to an extreme risk protective order (ERPO) without ever having committed, or even having threatened to commit, an act of violence with a firearm.”Though comprehensive information is thin, and laws differ from state to state, anecdotal evidence suggests Rhode Island’s law is not unique. A University of Central Florida student, for example, was hauled into proceedings and received a year-long RPO (risk protection order) for saying “stupid” things on Reddit following a mass shooting, even though the student had no criminal history and didn’t own a firearm. (The student also was falsely portrayed as a “ticking time bomb” by police, Jacub Sullum reports.) Another man, Reason reports, was slapped with an RPO for criticizing teenage gun control activists online and sharing a picture of an AR-15 rifle he had built.

Individuals who find themselves involved in these proceedings often have no clear constitutional right to counsel, civil libertarians point out.

As I’ve previously observed, red flag laws are essentially a form of pre-crime, a theme explored in the 2002 Steven Spielberg movie Minority Report, based on a 1956 Philip K. Dick novel.

I’m not the only writer to make the connection. In an article that appeared in Salon, Travis Dunn linked red flag laws “to the science fiction scenario of The Minority Report, in which precognitive police try to stop crimes before they’re committed.”

If this sounds far-fetched, consider that the president recently called upon social media companies to collaborate with the Department of Justice to catch “red flags” using algorithmic technology.

The idea that governments can prevent crimes before they occur may sound like sci-fi fantasy (which it is), but the threat such ideas pose to civil liberties is quite real.

Compromising civil liberties and property rights to prevent acts of violence that have yet to occur are policies more suited for dystopian thrillers⁠—and police states⁠—than a free society.

It’s clear that laws of this magnitude should not be passed as an emotional or political response to an event, even a tragic one.

COLUMN BY

Jon Miltimore

Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has appeared in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Washington Times. 

RELATED ARTICLES:

What You Need to Know About ‘Red Flag’ Gun Laws

Studies Find No Evidence That Assault Weapon Bans Reduce Homicide Rates

RELATED VIDEO: Authorities say 3 potential mass shootings were foiled in recent days.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Socialists Chip Away at the Second Amendment

“The Constitution shall never be construed… to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” – Samuel Adams

“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Thomas Jefferson

“The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.” – Noah Webster

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed.”  Noah Webster


We’ve all heard it before: the Second Amendment was never meant for citizens to have the sort of guns available today – it was just for hunting! Bull hockey, it was written to protect the right to shoot at tyrants and their agents when they have stolen liberty or property from the people. By that same logic the First Amendment doesn’t apply to the internet (which didn’t exist at the time) so kiss your free speech rights online goodbye!  We’ve already seen massive censorship.

Then there’s the “it was only implied for a militia” argument.  Another crock.

There’s a certain level of irony in liberals claiming that the second amendment was only implied for a militia. Any time a militia group does spring up they’re quickly denounced by the left including much of the neo-con establishment right.

Even National Review has had at least nine articles supporting various gun control laws. They advocated everything from universal background checks to Red Flag laws.  By now people should understand that William F. Buckley and Irving Kristol were the two men who changed the old right conservative Republican Party into this new neo-con Trotskyite left leaning cabal who will not stand up for our God given rights in the Constitution.

They tell us we don’t need guns, and I say, “The hell we don’t!”

El Paso, Texas – Dayton, Ohio

Call me cynical, or donning a tinfoil hat, but these shootings seem planned and coincidentally appear just at the right time for use by politicians who go to the extremes against firearms, including President Trump and his closest “advisors.” Let’s pray he backs away from all of this and keeps his promises to the American people.

Notice that after Congressman Steve Scalise was shot and nearly died at a Republican baseball game, there was not a scintilla of outrage for gun control by the left.

Interesting, is it not…The suspect in the congressional baseball practice shooting, James Hodgkinson, was a fierce Trump opponent who called him a traitor.  The left ignored it.

The manifesto written by the 21-year-old El Paso shooter who killed 20 and injured 26, was a leftist screed.  Patrick Crusius’s “My Life Page” was changed by progressive pinkos from Democrat to Republican as reported by Jim Hoft of the Gateway Pundit.  Crusius was a soulless video game player, just as President Trump stated.   His crime might be described as one of nihilism, the rejection of all religious and moral principles, in the belief that life is meaningless, an ideology of despair that has motivated rootless young men toward violent crimes throughout human history.

Dayton shooter, 24-year-old Connor Betz, was shot dead by police but not before he killed nine innocent people.  Betz had satanic patches on his clothing and was a registered democrat and a supporter of Elizabeth Warren.  The NY Post snagged over 3,000 of his tweets which included embraces of far-left stances and politicians — including presidential-hopeful senators Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Bernie Sanders of Vermont — as well as Antifa, anti-fascist protesters known to resort to violent tactics.  “I want socialism, and I’ll not wait for the idiots to finally come round to understanding,” reads one tweet from the Betz account, according to Newsweek.

A person willing to kill innocents and be killed by the police while doing so surely would have no qualms about violating a state or federal law that prohibited the general ownership of the weapon he was about to use.

New Laws Are Lies

There are enough laws on the books.  There’s not a single new law that would change anything.  First Trump agreed to ban bump stocks, a stupid argument if there ever was one.  By labeling bump stocks “machine guns,” the ATF effectively changed their classification under the 1934 National Firearms Act (NFA) and made them illegal under the 1968 Gun Control Act (GCA), a move which retroactively criminalizes their purchase and ownership.  By the way, the 1968 GCA was taken from Adolph Hitler’s gun ban.

If Trump signs any new laws, this will drive a huge wedge between him and his supporters.  True, there is no one else to vote for, but Trump supporters will not go out in droves as they did in 2016, which could give the election to the Democratic Socialists. If the President backs down on his promises, he will lose…and the left wants our guns, they want them out of our hands, and when the movie, The Hunt, becomes reality even though it’s now been pulled, we won’t have any way of firing back.

Our God given freedoms are codified by our Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution.  Pressures are being applied on all Republican politicians to again bend to the socialists’ desires to eliminate firearms, especially by Ivanka Trump.  Stupid deals with these enemies of freedom have been made in the past, and every single time, Republicans have lost.  Why?  Because most of them do not represent us or Constitutional conservatism; they are part of the same globalist establishment as the Democratic Socialists.

Gun Free Zones and Joe Biden

Gun Free Zones are killing fields.  Whenever there is a shooting, the socialist democrats propose gun control; but when someone is raped or murdered by an illegal alien, the same people never demand border control!  This law has effectively turned schools into shooting galleries for deranged lunatics.

Research from the Crime Prevention Research Center shows that 98 percent of all public mass shootings that occurred between 1950 and July 10, 2016, happened in gun-free zones.  Responding to this research, USA Today contributor Erich Pratt recently opined, “No wonder that 81% of police officers support arming teachers and principals, so that the real first responders — the potential victims — can protect the children.”

As of early 2018, educators in 33 states may not arm themselves to protect their students. Nor may schools in these 33 states even hire armed security guards.  Our children are literally sitting ducks.  This in turn means one and only one thing, as recently noted by conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh, “Everybody that wants to shoot up a school knows that they are going to be the only one armed.”

Exactly. And if you scroll back through history, you’ll find that the reason this situation exists is because of Joe Biden who introduced the Gun-Free School Zones Act in 1990. Out of fairness, though, it should be noted that then New World Order President George H.W. Bush signed it into law after it passed the Democrat-led House and Senate.

Bush, a Republican, was no Second Amendment champion throughout his time in office. When he could have stood up for gun rights, Bush kowtowed to anti-gun pressure and signed this bill into law.

Nearly three decades later, Republican governors have made up ground by passing pro-gun legislation like Constitutional Carry.

However, this case is another reminder that just because a politician is a Republican does not guarantee that they will be a pro-gun champion.

Assault Weapon Bans

John Lott, President of Crime Prevention Research Center was interviewed on Mark Levin’s radio program and explained the three gun control bills now up by both Democratic Socialists and neo-con Trotskyite Republicans.  They are Assault Weapon Bans, Universal Background Checks and Red Flag Laws.

John Lott says they’re banning guns based on how they look rather than how they function.  The idiots in Congress have no clue of what they’re doing.  So, you can have a semi-automatic hunting rifle, which fires the same bullets with the same rapidity doing the same damage as a gun that looks like an M-16, but it’s not a weapon that militaries around the world would use.  The inside guts of it, which civilians have, is the same as any small caliber hunting rifle.  The vast majority of semi-automatic rifles in the United States are owned by people who own guns.  Banning guns on their looks when other guns operate the same way is pure stupidity.

The original assault weapons ban which Senator Feinstein and her staff got passed, was by flipping through pages of catalogues on assault weapons and marking off different names of guns simply by how they looked.  Even people paid by the Clinton administration couldn’t find any benefit of this insane law.  There was actually a small drop in the states where the assault weapon ban was dropped versus the states where it was not.  The original Feinstein ban expired in 2004.

Universal Background Checks

Now they want background checks on the private transfer of firearms, which means going to a licensed dealer and having them do the background check.  In Washington DC you’d have to pay the dealer $125.00 to do the background check, and that’s per firearm.  Another monetary leeching of the gun owners.  According to John Lott of Crime Prevention Research Center, there have been no mass murders this century by anyone who privately purchased a firearm.  The vast majority of firearms are purchased through dealers where there is already a background check via the National Instant Background Check Systems (NICS).

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 was launched by the FBI on November 30, 1998 and mandated NICS. It is used by Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) to instantly determine whether a prospective buyer is eligible to buy firearms. Before ringing up the sale, cashiers call in a check to the FBI or to other designated agencies to ensure that each customer does not have a criminal record or isn’t otherwise ineligible to make a purchase. More than 230 million such checks have been made, leading to more than 1.3 million denials.  NICS is located at the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services Division in Clarksburg, West Virginia.

Red Flag Laws

A red flag law is a politically divided gun control law that permits police or family members to petition a state court to order the temporary removal of firearms from a person who may present a danger to others or themselves without due process and facing their accusers in a court of law.

Again, these laws, also called “extreme risk protection orders,” allow courts to issue orders allowing law enforcement to seize firearms from people who’ve committed no crime but are believed to be a danger to themselves or others.

President Trump has signaled his backing of bipartisan Senate legislation sponsored by Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT).  This is very dangerous.  Any extreme leftist neighbor who decides they don’t like you, can report that you own firearms and are acting in a way that could harm someone.  Whether true or not, you could lose your ability to own firearms.  President Trump in one tweet shows why ‘red flag’ laws are so very dangerous.

The Red Flag Laws virtually have nothing to do with mental health.  There are 17 states which have this law now and only one of them even mentions the term “mental health” in it.  The basic notion is that they’re trying to predict whether someone will commit a crime or harm themselves.  This reminds me of the Tom Cruise movie, Minority Report where the government would predict someone’s future crimes and arrest the person before the behavior.

Already on the books is a 72-hour hold (Baker Act) on someone who has psychiatric problems and has been reported.  However, what the Red Flag law wants to do is to get rid of some of the restrictions from the Baker Act.  With the Baker Act, you have psychiatric experts evaluate the person and make a decision, but with Red Flag laws there are no psychiatric experts making a decision.

First you have a complaint and it varies across states, some states friends can do it, some states relatives can do it…police, or in Colorado, anyone can do it.  A judge basically looks at a piece of paper that summarizes the complaint, then in a short period of time depending on the state, the police will go in and take the firearms.  They’ll have a hearing in a couple weeks, but the problem is there’s no legal representation automatically provided to the targeted person.  The prosecutors basically act as lawyers for the person making the complaint.

Red Flag laws are totally unconstitutional, the very presumption of innocence and the due process of law requirement of demonstrable fault as a precondition to punishment or sanctions prohibits the loss of liberty.  Recently we’ve seen the presumption of innocence turned upside down with Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation and the spurious investigation of our President for nearly three years.

Nevertheless, the American left has diligently tried to punish people and deprive us of liberty on the basis of what might happen in the future.  The Soviets used psychiatric testimony to predict criminal behavior which we condemned in the 80s, but now our President seems to want it here.  In America, we do not punish a person or deprive anyone of liberty on the basis of a fear of what the person might do.

This is a “turn in your conservative neighbor” law, and is a massive danger to freedom.

Conclusion

Kentucky Governor Matt Bevin said, “In a nation where over the last 50 years we’ve aborted 60 million unborn babies, and we have multiple states with medically assisted suicide being provided by physicians at both ends of the life spectrum, we’re losing the value for life that we once historically had.  Firearms are not the problem; the problem is our culture of death.”

Fifty years ago, children didn’t walk into schools with firearms and shoot their fellow classmates.  In fact, the high school I went to in Park Ridge, Illinois had an underground shooting range and a Rifle Club.  There were pickup trucks in the parking lot with gun racks on the back and the rifles in plain view.  Kids brought their rifles on the bus with them, they kept them in their cars, most of which were unlocked.  We were never exposed to what today’s children are exposed to at a very young age.  The problems with our culture are systemic, and day by day they are growing worse.

It’s easy to blame the tools used in these killings so as to part American citizens from their own self-defense, but the real cultural issues are far more complex and are rarely discussed. It’s the morality, and what’s the cause of this morality? We have driven God out of the public arena.

George Washington said in his Farewell Address that it is religion that sustains morality. If you undermine religion, you’ll undermine morality.

That is precisely what has happened to America. Beginning with a whole series of misguided Supreme Court decisions, religious influence in society, especially Christian, was restricted more and more. By the 1960s, God was effectively kicked out of the public schools along with prayer and the Ten Commandments.

When we had God in the classrooms, there was no need for armed guards in the hallways.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Studies Find No Evidence That Assault Weapon Bans Reduce Homicide Rates

Kamala Harris’s Poorly Thought Out Gun Control Proposals

The Date For The Democrats’ Anti-Gun Push On The Hill Is Set 

The Grim Consequences Of Democratic Socialism

© All rights reserved.

Philadelphia: Maurice Hill, who wounded six cops in shootout, is devout Muslim who attended jihadi mosque

You can see from the impressive zebiba on Maurice Hill’s forehead that he is a devout Muslim; the zebiba is a bruise that forms from the fact that Muslims in their five daily prayers perform numerous prostrations, pressing their foreheads to the ground. The zebiba is seen as a mark of intense piety. That in itself doesn’t make this a jihad attack, but the teachings of the mosque, from the looks of this report, are clearly suspect; the mosque should be investigated. If Maurice Hill were a white supremacist neo-Nazi, would the establishment media be as indifferent to that detail as it is to Hill’s mosque membership? What do you think?

Clarion Intel Exclusive: Philadelphia Shooter Attended Radical Mosque,” Clarion Project, August 16, 2019:

Maurice Hill, the criminal who wounded six police officers in a shootout in Philadelphia and was arrested after a seven-hour standoff, attended a radical mosque.

The mosque, called Masjid Ahlil Hadith Wal Athar, is known for preaching the Islamist ideology promoted by Saudi Arabia referred to as “Wahhabism.”

Clarion Intelligence Network has been aware through its sources that the area where the shootings took place is known for trafficking in guns, drugs and counterfeit items. This criminal market has a strong Islamist element that includes extremist gangs.

Hill’s older sister said he “occasionally attended” an unnamed mosque, confirming initial reports from our sources that Hill is a Muslim. The sources do not yet have first-hand evidence of the shooter being personally involved in Islamist extremism.

Clarion Intel’s sources report that Masjid Ahlil Hadith Wal Athar is a Salafi mosque which follows the theocratic teachings of Saudi Arabia’s top Wahhabist scholars.

At this point, there is no indication that Hill’s shooting of police officers was motivated by Islamism or anything other than a desire to resist arrest.

However, Islamism’s inherent hostility towards Western governments and values fuels anti-police bigotry that can justify violence against law enforcement. Clarion’s sources stated that many of the mosque’s attendees view the police as oppressors of Muslims….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Utah: Nigerian Man Charged in Killing of College Coed had Child Pornography in his Home

One Fact About Shooter Crushes Dems’ Gun Control Narrative After Police Mass Shooting

A Rundown of the Radical Thugs Who Surround Ilhan Omar

Abortive Tlaib/Omar Israel trip sponsored by jihad-linked org that claimed Jews used Christian blood for Passover

Requesting manual review of blocks on social media can work

Hilarious: Here’s Who Trump Says Is The ‘Only Real Winner’ In Rashida Tlaib’s Israel Setup 

Islamic Terrorism: The Group Sponsoring Tlaib and Omar’s Trip Celebrates Suicide Bombings, the Murder of Israeli Children 

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

ICE Field Operation Helps American Workers

When will compassion apply to beleaguered Americans?

On August 7, 2019 ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) issued a press release that announced, ICE executes federal search warrants at multiple Mississippi locations.  Fox News also reported on that massive field operation in its report, ICE raids on Mississippi food processing plants result in 680 arrests.

The mainstream media, in reporting on the ICE field operation, immediately sought to paint the most disturbing picture it could about the nature of the ICE operation and along the way, the children of illegal aliens who had been arrested were interviewed on camera, hysterically crying that they wanted their mother/father or both to come home to take care of them.

However, I doubt the media will show the lines of American workers lining up to take the jobs that have been liberated by the ICE agents.

While it is admittedly heart-wrenching to see a child in distress, it is remarkable that the media totally ignores that children are frequently separated from the parents whenever their parents are arrested for a wide spectrum of violations of law that include administrative motor vehicle violations.

Every year as the dreaded “Tax Day” approaches, the IRS frequently arrests tax cheats and fraudsters and publicizes their law enforcement actions to remind tax payers that they should not defraud the IRS.  This is a clear tactic of intimidation that creates a “climate of fear.”  Yet Nancy Pelosi who frequently lambasted immigration law enforcement efforts for creating such a climate of fear, I have never seen her or any other politician complaining about the tactics of the IRS.

When taxpayers are arrested for not paying their taxes, it is likely that their children will have to be cared for by other family members, friends of the family or, as a last resort, child welfare.

However, when was the last time you saw a reporter interview a child who parent was carted off by the IRS or other law enforcement agency?

As a former INS special agent, my goal today is to set the record straight.

I was an INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) special agent for 26 of my 30 year career with the INS.  Having rotated through all of the squads within the Investigations Branch of the New York District Office I participate in many similar “raids” to locate and arrest aliens working illegally in the United States.  Therefore my comments are not based on speculation but real-world experiences.

To begin with, since the passage of the massive immigration amnesty legislation in 1986 known as IRCA (Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986) employers who can be shown to have knowingly hired illegal aliens can be fined and even criminally prosecuted for such hiring practices.  This is important because until passage of IRCA employers were essentially shielded from any adverse consequences for hiring illegal aliens unless they were involved in smuggling such aliens into the United States and/or harboring them.

Employers could also be punished for failing to meet labor standards or committing tax fraud, but there were no penalties for knowingly hiring illegal aliens.  Most illegal aliens violate our immigration laws to work illegally and it was believed that punishing unscrupulous employers who intentionally hire exploitable illegal aliens would deter their crooked hiring practices, thereby turning off the “jobs magnet.”

Of course there has always been an abject lack of immigration law enforcement personnel for this to work effectively.

Prior to World War II the Labor Department bore the primary responsibility for enforcing and administering our immigration laws.  The concern was that illegal alien workers would displace American workers and, adversely impact wages and working conditions for American workers.

That mission is now one of many assumed by ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement).

I began my career with the INS as an Immigration Inspector assigned to John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York.  While we were concerned about preventing fugitives, criminals and spies from entering the United States and worked closely with other federal as well as state and local law enforcement agencies, our most frequent concern was that aliens we admitted might disappear and take jobs that they were not authorized to take.

You would imagine that all Americans would be happy that our goal as immigration law enforcement agents was to protect the jobs and wages of American and lawful immigrant workers and that all politicians from both parties would support that vital mission.

But today, we live in a time that only George Orwell could have predicted where up is down and good is evil!

This past April I wrote an article about another massive field operation to locate and apprehend aliens working illegally while also seeking to punish the employer, Ice Field Operation Liberates Hundreds Of Jobs.  In that article I noted that such interior enforcement of our  immigration laws helps American workers.

The meatpacking industry used to provide decent-paying jobs for Americans.  The work was always filthy and dangerous but the wages were essentially commensurate with the nature of those jobs.  In the mid 1980s such workers generally earned roughly $20 per hour.

Today those jobs frequently pay approximately half that amount, but when taking inflation into account, in reality, the purchasing power that the wages provide is far less than half of what the wages had been before illegal aliens flooded into that industry.

Wikipedia posted an insightful article under the title, Labor rights in American meatpacking industry.  This excerpt was published under the heading of “Meatpacker Demographics”

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that in 2000, 148,100 people worked in meatpacking and over 250,000 worked in poultry processing. Despite the growth of the meat production industry, slaughterhouse workers’ wages have been decreasing rapidly. Slaughterhouse workers’ wages were historically higher than the average manufacturing wage. This trend reversed in 1983 when slaughterhouse worker wages fell below the average manufacturing wage. By 2002, slaughterhouse workers’ wages were 24% below the average manufacturing wage. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 2006, the median wage for slaughterhouse workers was $10.43 per hour which comes out to $21,690 per year.

Isn’t it remarkable that the Democrats insist that they want to establish a minimum wage of $15.00 per hour today while years ago workers in slaughterhouses were earning more than $20.00 per hour until illegal aliens displaced American workers.  Yet today the Democrats want to import an endless supply of exploitable illegal alien workers, figuratively and literally, at the expense of hardworking American and lawful immigrant workers.

Frequently illegal aliens who take jobs in the United States have violate more than our immigration laws.  Many such aliens also have committed identity theft, hardly a “victimless crime” and some of these aliens may also have criminal histories and may be fugitives in their home countries.

As an INS special agent I frequently arrested aliens from countries around the world who we found working illegally in various jobs who had extensive criminal backgrounds.  This placed their coworkers at risk.

However, one case in particular stands out.  I remember in the early 1980’s encountering a man in his mid-thirties from Honduras working at a glass factory in Brooklyn.  He claimed that he had become a naturalized United States citizen.  I took down his name, date of birth and other relevant information and his boss approached me and told me that this guy had worked for him for a few years and was extremely trust worthy- so much so that he had given him the keys to the factory so that he could open the factory if he was late and lock up at night if he had to leave early.

I checked in with my office but they could find no record of this individual.  The only solution was to bring him down to our office.  It turned out that he was a citizen of Honduras but that he had not only lied about his name and date of birth but he had left out some additional information.  He had pleaded guilty to homicide and had been sentenced to jail time.  Upon his release he had been deported from the United States, only to return illegally.  Because of his criminal conviction he was arrested and prosecuted for unlawful reentry after deportation and escaped from a federal penitentiary where he was serving his sentence.

You should have seen the look on his employer’s face when I briefed him on his “loyal employee’s” extensive criminal “resume!”

If you believe that employers who intentionally hire illegal aliens are being compassionate, then you would likely believe that the person who puts cheese on a mousetrap is simply trying to feed hungry mice!

Employers who intentionally hire illegal aliens are not demonstrating compassion but greed.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Church World Service on the Sanctuary Bandwagon; Cut Their Federal Funding!

Everyday Americans Shoulder The Burden Of The Immigration Crisis

What Democrats Say Happens At The Border Vs. What Actually Happens

EDITORS NOTE: This FrontPage Magazine column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Missouri: Somali Day Care Owner Sentenced for Ripping Off Taxpayers in Lucrative Fraud Scheme

Thanks to reader Joanne for alerting me to this news from a week ago about the sentencing of a Somali ‘new American’ in a day care fraud scheme that cheated taxpayers out of a half a million dollars.

I’m posting almost the entire Justice Department press release because it is chock full of information about how he operated the scam and how the feds nabbed him.

(Emphasis below is mine!)

KC Day Care Owner Sentenced for $556,000 Fraud Scheme

KANSAS CITY, Mo. – The owner of a Kansas City, Missouri, day care center was sentenced in federal court today for his role in a conspiracy to fraudulently receive more than $556,000 in federal benefits.

Sharif Karie, 41, of Olathe, Kan., was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Brian C. Wimes to four years and 10 months in federal prison without parole.

On Jan. 11, 2019, Karie was convicted at trial of participating in a conspiracy to steal government property, theft of government property, three counts of aggravated identity theft, three counts of wire fraud, 15 counts of money laundering, and six counts of mail fraud.

Can you believe it!  The feds are not making us play the secret decoder ring game and have actually said where the crook is from!

Karie, a naturalized U.S. citizen from Somalia, was the owner and CEO of a day care center established under two businesses and two names for the same location, with the same key employees: KARIE Day Care Center, LLC, and Tima Child Care Center, LLC, at 1019 Admiral Blvd., Kansas City, Mo. Tima Child Care Center was established under false pretense with a straw owner, according to court documents, apparently to circumvent the state’s oversight efforts.

Co-defendant Sheri Beamon, 48, of Kansas City, Missouri, was the director of KARIE/Tima Childcare Center. Beamon pleaded guilty on Sept. 10, 2018, to her role in the conspiracy and will be sentenced on Aug. 15, 2019.

The day care centers submitted false childcare claims to the state of Missouri that fraudulently inflated the number of hours and children who actually attended the childcare centers. The conspiracy, which lasted from October 2013 to June 2016, resulted in a loss of $536,833 to the Missouri Department of Health and Social Services.The Child Care and Development Fund provides daycare subsidies for low-income families where the parents are employed or engaged in job training. Providers contract with the Children’s Division of the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services and submit claims electronically.

Additionally, Karie committed fraud by misleading the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) when he understated his income and assets. Karie received Section 8 assistance, which is funded by HUD. The fraud scheme resulted in a loss of more than $40,000 to the Housing Authority.

You will be happy to see this next bit of information:

This case was the result of a nationwide sweep that targeted child care center fraud schemes. The national law enforcement operation in Missouri and six other states was the result of separate, but related, federal investigations into childcare center fraud that resulted in a loss of more than $1 million to the government.

Clever feds!  I love this:

Pole cameras, which were installed near the day care center, captured footage of the entrances and exits of the building during two time periods in 2015 and in 2016.

Timesheets and billing records were reviewed and compared to the children seen on the pole cameras being dropped off and picked up from the daycare center during that time. There were significant discrepancies between the timesheets, claims submitted, and the pole camera footage. According to court documents, even the fire evacuation records were falsified indicating a fire drill was performed on a date when pole cameras were capturing footage of the entrance/exit of the day care and the planned evacuation route as provided to the state. The drill never took place.

At no time during its operation, according to court documents, did Karie Day Care Center meet the minimum health and safety standards for operation as established by Missouri statute and agreed to by contract. Tima Child Care Center was conceived as the state was in process of shutting down Karie Day Care Center for failure to comply with standards for health, safety, and record keeping. Had the state known that Karie was actually operating the business, according to court documents, a license would not have been approved.

Parents were being paid to care for their own kids on the taxpayers’ dime:

The state conducted a compliance review of the daycare center’s billing for May 2014 and July 2014. The review found several attendance records missing. The review also identified 14 out of the 15 families with children at the center who had a parent employed there. With only two classrooms, it is improbable that parents were not caring for their own children. One of these parents reported that her job was contingent on having all of her children placed in care at KARIE Day Care Center so her child care would be paid by the state. According to court records, nearly all children enrolled for services were those of employees, in violation of state regulations.This same 2014 audit found several discrepancies on the time sheets submitted to the state.

Subsequent unannounced inspections at KARIE Day Care Center found the facility in violation of state regulations pertaining to child care licensing rules, including health and safety, staff ratios, and the maintaining of attendance records. Each of the inspections resulted in violation findings.

LOL!  Just another example of how immigrant (new American!) entrepreneurs benefit the US economy (NOT!). 

This is a story worth spreading far and wide!

This post is filed in my ‘Daycare fraud’ category, here.