Leftism is an Ideology of Convenience

ACLU attorney Omar Jackoff Jadwat shows just how “principled” ACLU attorneys are

NTK – ACLU Lawyer Omar Jadwat, arguing against President Trump’s travel ban before the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday, admitted that the same exact travel ban “could be” constitutional if it were enacted by Hillary Clinton.

Jadwat argued that Trump’s campaign animus motivated the order, making it illegitimate. This claim was challenged by the Fourth Circuit’s Judge Paul Niemeyer.

“If a different candidate had won the election and then issued this order, I gather you wouldn’t have any problem with that?” Niemeyer asked.

Jadwat dodged on directly answering the question at first, but Niemeyer persisted, asking the question again.

Jadwat again tried to avoid the question, asking for clarification on the hypothetical, but Niemeyer once again demanded an answer.

“We have a candidate who won the presidency, some candidate other than President Trump won the presidency and then chose to issue this particular order, with whatever counsel he took,” Niemeyer said. “Do I understand that just in that circumstance, the executive order should be honored?”

“Yes, your honor, I think in that case, it could be constitutional,” Jadwat admitted.

Jadwat also denied that presidents’ actions should be nullified by campaign statements, despite the fact that his entire argument seemed to rest on that claim.

What a weasel! I wonder if it ever bothers Omar that he has no principles? Everything is ideological with him, and that ideology is Left of Lenin, which should not surprise anyone given that he works for the ACLU 

*VIDEO* David Horowitz: Big Agenda – President Trump’s Plan To Save America

.
Click HERE to purchase Mr. Horowitz’s newest book Big Agenda.

.

.

This year’s Super Bowl is a big moment for the NFL

Yes, it is the Super Bowl, an NFL champion will be crowned, but that is not the biggest thing at stake. The NFL is the biggest sports draw in the country, it is wildly successful, but, the popularity of the NFL took some hits this season. Some of those hits were self-inflicted. Referees that do not know the rules, and make obviously bad calls seemingly every game. A continued campaign to stamp out the fun in the game with silly penalties, and of course “Deflategate” which drug on and on and on. But the biggest hit was the players who took a knee during the national anthem during too many games. That, together with the sports media injecting “social justice” into much of its reporting hurt the NFL. The message to players was they needed to speak out, get involved. Well, as long as they spoke out on the “correct side” of course.

Certainly NFL fans consist of a broad spectrum of ideological views. But the NFL put a thumb in the eye of Conservative fans, and any other fan that might actually just want to watch the game free of ideology. Football fans do not watch games to be sermonized, or talked at. They watch because they enjoy the game. And this years Super Bowl will tell us how much respect the NFL has for its fans. And the halftime show, featuring Lady Gaga will show how non-political the NFL wants to be.

If we go back to last year’s halftime performance with Beyonce, we recall how very political she got, with the NFL’s blessing. Her song “Formation” was anti-cop, and pro Black Panthers. And that performance rubbed many the wrong way. Now, this year Lady Gaga has been asked by the NFL to not get political. Such a request is the right move, but, if that request was given with a wink and a nod……….

Gaga held a press conference on Thursday in Houston. During the Q&A session, a reporter asked Gaga, “I know you spoke about kinda taking this moment to unify America a little bit. Are you going to do that at all? Are you going to make any kind of statements during the performance?”

The pop star responded, “Well, I don’t know if I will succeed in unifying America. You’ll have to ask America when it’s over. But the only statements that I’ll be making during the halftime show are the ones that I’ve been consistently making throughout my career.

“I believe in a passion for inclusion. I believe in the spirit of equality, and the spirit of this country as one of love and compassion and kindness. So my performance will have both those philosophies.”

Well, that is not the best sign for anyone hoping to have a politics-free Super Bowl is it? Gaga has a history of making very political statements, and when liberals start throwing words like equality around, well, we know where that usually leads. It leads to a Liberal preaching to us, usually about things they are vastly misinformed about. And we have seen this year the NBA cave in to a noted social justice warrior

So, we will wait, until tomorrow. We will root for the Pats, or the Falcons, or maybe against one of those teams, we will hope that maybe advertisers will bring us some funny spots, like they used to before they were bitten by the “do not offend anyone” bug, and we will watch Lady Gaga to see if the NFL gets it or not. We will see if lower ratings this season woke the NFL up. We will see if the NFL execs are bright enough to realize that left wing activism during the Super Bowl is not a way to keep its fans. This should seem obvious but, Liberals are blind to the fact that not everyone agrees with them.

So, all there is to add is Go Falcons, and Lady Gaga, just sing!

Houston store sells Confederate memorabilia, Offendeditis outbreak ensues

Here is the story

Several Houstonians are calling for customers to boycott a store inside The Shops at Houston Center because the store owner sells confederate flag merchandise.

Dorothea Harris is the owner of Designs by Dorli. She said she has been selling confederate-themed items for years. Recently, she has received backlash from some customers.

Ashton Woods with the Houston chapter of Black Lives Matter said he does not support the sale of confederate flag merchandise.

“A lot of people would like to say that Houston is a welcoming and diverse city, but Houston is a fractured, segregated city,” Woods said, “And we’re working on coming together, I think that’s something that should happen, but when a display like that is seen, we should see the good with the ugly.”

Segregated? No, no American city is segregated. And what racial divisions there are created by people like Woods and the BLM groups. If you want to see and hear hate, listen to the rhetoric of BLM. This is the type of divisive and false rhetoric the Left uses to divide people and further their agenda. What is that agenda?

Let me say, I have studied the War Between the States for many years, and had many ancestors who fought in the war. I am proud of their sacrifice, and gallantry, and I always will be. I have never, and will never stop defending both their honor, and history as it happened. The story of the war is about as complex as you could imagine, and those that seek to make the entire war entirely about slavery are deeply ignorant. Those that would try to remove slavery as any cause would also be mistaken. Likewise, those that would allow the Left to erase all vestiges of the Confederacy, and the rest of American history are fools. The cultural Stalinism that has been waged against all things Southern, is also being waged against all things American. 

Every “sin” the Left can accuse the Confederacy of they can accuse America of. I said years ago that when the Left was done demonizing Lee, Jackson, Davis, and Confederate soldiers they would do the same to Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, etc. Make no mistake that the cultural Stalinism we are fighting today is not about sensitivity, or racial harmony, or coming together. Rather, it is about destroying American history, heritage and culture. It is simply another front in the Left’s insidious and evil campaign to destroy America. Consider the assaults on our right to be a sovereign nation, our right to set our immigration standards, the right to self-defense, on individualism, parental rights, religious liberties, property rights, freedom of association and freedom of speech. Simply put, the Left is seeking to destroy every last vestige of American greatness.

Shakespeare portrait removed to promote diversity

Because exclusion is the new inclusion

Students at the University of Pennsylvania have removed a portrait of Shakespeare from its Fisher-Bennett Hall and have replaced it with a picture of a black lesbian poet Audre Lorde in the name of “diversity.”

The most obvious question is this. Why not add the portrait of Lorde, rather than replacing Shakespeare? I mean Shakespeare is one of the most important literary figures in history after all. The answer, of course, is that this is not about diversity at all. It is about payback for all those “oppressed” students who are bitter, angry, and bigoted. It is also about racism. Shakespeare was White, so he is bad. Really these students are no different than any other bunch of racist buffoons are they? They are ignorant, hateful, and wish to force their views on others.

Perhaps more upsetting is the reaction of fellow students at UPenn and an English professor, who were all thrilled at this act of “inclusion”

Penn English professor and Department Chair Jed Esty was surprised to find a large portrait of William Shakespeare waiting in his office.

Now imagine, imagine an English professor reacting with apparent glee that Shakespeare is outta there!

“Students removed the Shakespeare portrait and delivered it to my office as a way of affirming their commitment to a more inclusive mission for the English department,” Esty wrote in the email. He added that the image of Lorde will remain until the department reaches a decision about what to do with the space.

Good Grief! There is nothing “inclusive” about their action. Adding a portrait, picture, whatever of Lorde and keeping the Shakespeare portrait would be inclusive. Now, consider what some students said

College sophomore and English major Katherine Kvellestad commended the students’ action. She said the choice of replacing the original portrait with one of Audre Lorde sends a positive message.

“You don’t necessarily need to have a portrait of Shakespeare up,” Kvellestad said. “He’s pretty iconic.”

Well, thanks for those deep thoughts Katherine. I wonder if she ever considers if simply removing Shakespeare might not be the last step. Perhaps his writing ought to be removed too? After all, diversity!

College junior Mike Benz, also an English major, agreed. He said that he thought the students’ action was bold and admirable, adding that the students acted in a positive way by taking matters into their own hands.

“It is a cool example of culture jamming,” Benz said.

Bold? Admirable? What planet is this buffoon residing on? What is bold about removing a literary legend? But, Shakespeare was like Western dudes, and all European, so, he has to go because CULTURE JAMMING! And, yes, by the way culture jamming is, of course, more of the social justice warrior garbage

a form of political and social activism which, by means of fake adverts,hoax news stories, pastiches of company logos and product labels,computer hacking, etc, draws attention to and at the same time subverts the power of the media, governments, and large corporations to control and distort the information that they give to the public in order to promote consumerism, militarism, etc

Yes, that is so much more important than educating English majors. What is next? Perhaps those majoring in music should stop studying Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, and other composers? After all, those were a bunch of White Europeans right? Certainly they should be excluded too!

Yes, Virginia, there is a war on Christmas

It is starting to look a lot like Christmas

Lots selling Christmas Trees? Check!

Christmas lights going up? Check!

Christmas specials on TV? Check!

Fascists trying to stamp out all  vestiges of Christmas? Check!

With Christmas approaching, universities are cracking down on potentially offensive religious decorations, all but banning displays of the “Nativity Scene” and images of the “crucifixion.”

At Missouri State University, for example, a list of “holiday decoration guidelines” warns that it would “generally be inappropriate” to display items such as “a cross,” “drawings of Jesus or Mohammed,” “the Nativity Scene,” and “the Bible or Koran” in common areas of the university

Similarly, the College at Brockport, State University of New York encourages students and faculty members to select “culturally sensitive holiday decorations” that are “general and non-specific to any religion.

“Create a winter theme with lights and color rather than religious icons, or include decorations from all the cultural traditions represented in your department,” the guidelines suggest, adding that academic departments should “consider a grab bag instead of a ‘Secret Santa’ gift exchange.”

The school asserts that the suggestions “are not meant as rules, but as a starting point for cross-cultural dialog,” warning that “displays that feature exclusively single-themed decorations may be well intentioned, but they can marginalize those who celebrate other religious and cultural beliefs during this season.”

Meanwhile, Oregon State University has published a set of “inclusive strategies” for holiday decorations on its website, which warns students and faculty to “focus decorations on the winter season by using images that are not associated with religious traditions,” identifying “snowflakes, snow, sculptures, [and] sleds” as acceptable alternatives.

Or, how about people who do not celebrate Christmas leave those that do the fuck alone? Heck, most folks who do not celebrate it already do that. Now let’s see the radical Atheists and other whining panty waists do the same? In short, if you want tolerance, then practice it!

A question for the CEO of Grubhub

Moonbattery points out that the CEO of Grubhub is backpedalling after sending out this email I am giving it to you in full context

SUBJECT: So… that happened… what’s next?

I’m still trying to reconcile my own worldview with the overwhelming message that was delivered last night. Clearly there are a lot of people angry and scared as the antithesis of every modern presidential candidate won and will be our next president. 

While demeaning, insulting and ridiculing minorities, immigrants and the physically/mentally disabled worked for Mr. Trump, I want to be clear that this behavior – and these views, have no place at Grubhub. Had he worked here, many of his comments would have resulted in his immediate termination. 

We have worked for years cultivating a culture of support and inclusiveness. I firmly believe that we must bring together different perspectives to continue innovating – including all genders, races, ethnicities and sexual, cultural or ideological preferences. We are better, faster and stronger together. 

Further I absolutely reject the nationalist, anti-immigrant and hateful politics of Donald Trump and will work to shield our community from this movement as best as I can. As we all try to understand what this vote means to us, I want to affirm to anyone on our team that is scared or feels personally exposed, that I and everyone else here at Grubhub will fight for your dignity and your right to make a better life for yourself and your family here in the United States. 

If you do not agree with this statement then please reply to this email with your resignation because you have no place here. We do not tolerate hateful attitudes on our team.I want to repeat what Hillary said this morning, that the new administration deserves our open minds and a chance to lead, but never stop believing that the fight for what’s right is worth it. 

Stay strong,

Matt

Forget, for a moment, that this clown is guilty of bullying his employees. And yes, when the CEO of your company sends that message, he is threatening people’s jobs if they hold views that he finds offensive. Forget the hypocrisy of Trump’s behavior, which, at times deserved criticism. I would ask only one question of Matt Maloney. Would he have sent a similar email had Hillary Clinton won Tuesday? Does her corruption, gross negligence handling classified, and top secret emails? Would he dress her down for her repeated lies about Benghazi? Or about her smearing half of Trump supporters as “deplorable”. Does he find such rhetoric respectful and tolerant? Would his moral outrage meter be as pegged over Clinton’s behaviors as they are over Trump’s?

I guess it is easy to have a clear conscience if you have no conscience

What else do we expect from a political hack like Donna Brazile

Donna Brazile says she has no regrets about her interactions with Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign while working as a CNN contributor.

CNN last week cut ties with Brazile, who is currently the interim chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), amid reports she tipped off Clinton’s team about debate question

“My conscience, as an activist, as a strategist, my conscience is very clear,” she told host Joe Madison on his Sirius XM broadcast Monday. “When I said what I said, I said it, and I’m not going back on it.”

It is easy for her, the truth means nothing to the Left

Rumors confirmed, Lena Dunham is still a talentless, man-hating weirdo who should never EVER be naked

As Jerry Seinfeld once said, quite correctly, there is good naked, and bad naked. Lena Dunham is in the latter, even though she cannot manage to keep her clothes on which is good for folks who sell eye bleach I suppose. But, her looks are not really important, Her wacked out brand of Feminutism, however, i

Just when you thought Lena Dunham couldn’t get any more ridiculous, she suggests white straight men should go extinct, adding that it’s not about “the end of men” but rather just “the evolution of men into better men.” How nice of her.

Last night, she tweeted a video featuring her voice asking a man how he feels “about the extinction of white men”:

Wow, just wow. This is proof that we now celebrate and honor morons who have no ability to think, none at all

Liberals used to fight discrimination. Now, they perpetuate it

I ran across this piece at Campus Reform where Christina Hoff Sommers notes how the Left is killing free speech, debate, and critical thinking with their safe spaces, and “check your privilege” nonsense

Suppression of free speech, whether it’s designated free speech zones, safe spaces censoring speech, or students disrupting events, has become commonplace on college campuses.

At a Heritage Foundation panel discussion Thursday examining modern-day violations of the First Amendment, panelist Christina Hoff Sommers put the violations of free speech on campuses at the forefront of her discussion, saying that she has witnessed a marked deterioration in academic discourse over the years she has spent touring college campuses.

Now, of course, no one is allowed to dissent with any Leftist talking point. If they do they are demonized as some sort of “ist” or “phobe” racist, sexist, Islamaphobe, Homophobe. And, any attempt at honest, open debate? Not on the Neo-Marxists watch!

Sommers said many of the problems stem from “intersectional feminism,” a concept that she claimed began as an attempt to address the ill-treatment of minority groups within the feminist movement, but has since devolved into tribalism and the bullying of whites and males.

Instead of encouraging discussion and the formation of logical arguments, she pointed out, whites and males are now told to “check their privilege” and reflexively concede any position advanced by marginalized groups.

If you are not a woman or a minority, your opinions are discredited, not on their merit, but on your race or sex, which Sommers claimed is dividing people rather than bringing them together, because individuals are encouraged to identify with a specific race or gender, rather than simply identifying with all people.

Of course! The Left is dividing people, making them believe that everything about them is defined by their skin color, gender, or their “identity”. Their next step is to make everyone feel like a victim of mistreatment, and discrimination. In short, the Left, which used to rant against discrimination, is now creating it and using it for power. Everything has been flipped on its head.

Once being color blind was championed, but now, it is vilified as bigotry. Once, judging people by their skin color was, rightfully called out as bigotry. Now? Now everyone’s entire worth, or worthlessness is determine solely by their pigmentation. Once, Liberals spoke of open-mindedness, and dialogue, now?  Now such things will get you in deep trouble. In short, the Left is allowing their true colors to show.

Tolerance? Diversity? Ha! These are values the Left abhors. Instead the Left demands complete and total submission to their ideology. Anyone, even Liberals who oppose the Left’s goals are to be destroyed by any means necessary.

Sally Kohn earns herself a place in the Marxist Moron Hall of Shame

It takes a special kind of stupid, yes, I know stupid is a harsh word, but in this case it applies, to be Sally Kohn, who truly believes that silencing certain opinions is somehow diversity!

At a University of Missouri free speech symposium, CNN commentator Sally Kohn said conservatives fighting for free speech on college campuses are afraid of multiculturalism.

Kohn added that because conservatives can no longer criticize multiculturalism while remaining socially acceptable, they have taken on the campus speech fight because it is a way to “attack diverse principles.”

When Kirsten Powers countered Kohn with reason, and facts, Kohn went full blown propagandist

Powers countered by citing examples of liberal bias on college campuses, such as the uproar that is often encountered by both liberal and conservative students who diverge from the liberal orthodoxy, and specifically mentioned Christina Hoff Sommers, an American Enterprise Institute scholar whosespeech at Oberlin College was disrupted by numerous protesters, some of whom set up a makeshift “safe space.”

Powers also cited the case of a feminist professor at the University of California-Santa Barbara attacking a pro-life demonstrator because she felt threatened by the display, as well as that of a libertarian Muslim student at the University of Michigan whose satirical newspaper article led to demands for his firing because people felt “unsafe.”

Kohn retorted that both her and Powers’ white, upper-middle-class upbringings cloud their vision on the issue, claiming that speech that may not be threatening to them may nonetheless be threatening to someone else.

“Feelings are valid,” she mused. “I’m never going to argue with people’s feelings.”

Unless it is a Conservative’s feelings of course. Powers tried to use reason again, and again, Kohn let her true Statist show

Powers next spoke of the chilling effect that occurs when unpopular viewpoints are silent, arguing that people do not learn when everybody is like them.

Kohn, however, believes this is largely a good thing, especially in the case of conservatives who do not hold progressive social views, saying, “If they feel like they can no longer speak against positive social change, good.”

Well, there we are folks. Kohn is so worried about “feelings” except those that she disagrees with

Once again, Powers insisted that diversity of thought and diversity of ideas are just as important as any other type of diversity, but Kohn refused to concede the point, arguing that some ideas are less deserving of protection than others.

“They think [diversity] is dumbing down humanity, or the greatness and exceptionalism of America,” Kohn said. “I’m happy that’s under assault.”

Ah, yes, drink in that diversity and tolerance folks. the fact is Kohn advocates for forced silence of diverse views. She envisions herself as educated, and smart, yet she is so foolish as to not be able to grasp that she pushes for a climate that crushed liberty and squashes diversity.

Special Sunflower Stricken with Offendeditis over Trump Hat

Awww she is offended by a hat, free speech is too tough for her. Note that the girl in this video is seriously uninformed, and highly bigoted and thinks nothing of trying to punish a fellow student for simply expressing views she disagrees with. This is what Liberalism, which once was how Jefferson Madison, and other founders were properly called, has degenerated into. This buffoon actually represents the things she thinks she fears

Noted Gun Control Cultists do what they do best, lie

Gabby Giffords and her husband, Mark Kelly are still trying to milk their gun control crusade for all the publicity it is worth. They recently put on their shocked faces and blasted Donald Trump for demanding that Hillary Clinton ask her body guards to disarm since she is so anti-gun

Former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-Ariz.) and her husband Mark Kelly lashed out at Donald Trump on Friday for saying that Hillary Clinton’s bodyguards should be “disarmed.”

“Tonight we have even more evidence of just how dangerously unfit Donald Trump is to be president of this great country,” Giffords and Kelly, both Clinton supporters, said in a statement.

“He is reckless, irresponsible and unworthy of the office he seeks

To be clear, Trump has suggested, and I believe rightfully so, that Hillary Clinton would do everything she could to erase the right to keep and bear arms. His suggestion at his rally was that if Hillary is so vehemently anti-gun, then she should ask her security to disarm. In other words, Trump was asking for consistency from Clinton. Imagine that! Consistency from a Leftist? Never gonna happen. Leftism is an ideology of inconsistency, consistency being highly inconvenient to the Left. 

The Cult of Gun Control, of which Giffords and Kelly are prominent members, lie on a regular  basis about guns, “gun violence”, and self-defense with guns. The fact is that over the last quarter century, Americans have been buying firearms. Millions of Americans carry firearms for self-defense, and during this time, violent crime, homicides, homicide by firearms, and accidental gun deaths have all steadily decreased. These facts are not up for debate. Yet the Giffords, Kellys and Clintons of the world berate us with lies about the number of mass shootings, which they grossly over inflate, and the dangers of “assault rifles” “high-capacity magazines”, and “weapons of war”. The media, of course, exploits any mass shooting, and ignores the hundreds of thousands of times Americans use firearms in self-defense every year.

It is not that they do not know the truth, they do. It is that they believe lying to get their ends, is OK.  Again, the Left does not value truth. The Cult of Gun Control, is most decidedly of the Left, so telling lies, or manufacturing false statistics to panic uniformed Americans is perfectly OK with Michael Bloomberg and Moms Demand Action mouthpieces like Shannon Watts. So, I would say bravo to Trump for actually demanding Clinton put her money where her mouth is. Hillary Clinton is guarded by armed men and women, and she should be. Nothing wrong with security. I would find no issue with Hillary herself packing heat for her own protection. But she should stop demanding steps that would make it harder for Americans to own or carry firearms for their own security. Until she does that, then she is simply another gun control hypocrite. A hypocrite who recognizes the importance of armed protection yet seeks to deny it for average Americans.

*VIDEO* Hillary Clinton Vs. Black Trump Supporters

.

.

*VIDEO* Hillary Clinton’s Alt-Right Speech In A Nutshell

.

.

Why yes, Matt Damon is an idiot

And a full fledged member of the Cult of Gun Control

Awww,Matt says it is so “personal” Yes, yes my ability and right to protect my life and those of my loved ones ARE damn personal to me. Nothing any gun control advocate, including you Matt Damon, has ever sought would do anything to reduce crime. The only thing the laws you advocate would do is create more gun free zones, and defenseless people. And yes crime would rise Mr. Damon

It would probably pain the not-so-talented Mr. Damon to discover that gun crime has exploded in Australia since they passed gun laws that were ignored by 80-percent of the population, and that the population is nowmore at risk because of excessive gun laws.

Australians may be more at risk from gun crime than ever before with the country’s underground market for firearms ballooning in the past decade.

Previously unseen police statistics show that the number of pistol-related offences doubled in Victoria and rose by 300 per cent in New South Wales. At least two other states also saw a massive jump in firearms-related offences during the same period.

An investigation by The New Daily unearthed previously unpublished data for firearms offences collected from police and crime statistics agencies in four states – Victoria, NSW, South Australia and Tasmania.

The statistics detail the types of firearms offences police have pursued in the courts in the past decade and show some concerning findings, including a massive 83 per cent increase in firearms offences in NSW between 2005/06 and 2014/15, and an even bigger jump in Victoria over the same period.

So, are “Under The Gun” producer and director felons, or just liars?

Here is the story from Ammoland

In February, The Lip TV  interviewed the film’s director, Stephanie Soechtig, prior to the film’s release. During this interview, Ms. Soechtig openly discussed how she sent a producer of the film (most likely producer and LAWYER Joshua A. Kunau), who resides in Colorado, to Arizona to purchase firearms (including three pistols) privately. [original video marker 1.27]

According to Ms. Soechtig, the producer met a private seller in a parking lot of a local Wendy’s, and in less than four hours and without a background check, obtained a Bushmaster rifle and three handguns. ( AmmoLand News has highlighted the exact video portion in question below, see the entire video on The Lip TV link above. https:// youtu.be/DSHJSfHsvmw )

Ms. Soechtig incredulously states in her interview how such a private party transfer was legal, but, in fact, under existing federal law, it was illegal.

It is unknown what happened to these firearms and whether or not they returned with the producer to Colorado. Presumably, this crime was committed in order to highlight what the film’s proponents believe to be current inadequacies federal firearm laws, and to educate viewers on the process for obtaining a firearm. As Ms. Soechtig stated, all of the film’s content was “news to me.” Apparently, existing federal law prohibiting private interstate firearms transfers is also something that will also come as “news” to Ms. Soechtig and her staff.

Under current federal law it is a violation for any person to transfer, sell, trade, give, transport, or deliver any firearm to any person who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in the state in which the transferor resides. (18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(5).) Thus, by asking a private party in Arizona to sell the Colorado producer firearms, Ms. Soechtig and her staff induced an otherwise law abiding citizen to commit a federal crime.  There was nothing legal about what Ms. Soechtig and her staff did, despite their slanted attempt to portray in their documentary the private sale of firearms as unregulated and legal.

It is also unlawful for any person other than a dealer to transport into or receive in the state where they reside any firearm purchased or otherwise obtained outside that State. (18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(3).) Violations of these laws can result in a hefty fine and a felony conviction of up to five years. (18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(1)(D).)  Further, if two or more persons conspire to commit any offense, and at least one person commits an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy, each party to the conspiracy can also face an additional fine and imprisonment for up to five years. (18 U.S.C. § 371.)

In other words, in nakedly advocating for more gun control laws in a one-sided and deceptive piece of propaganda, Ms. Soechtig and her staff likely violated existing federal laws by apparently conspiring to unlawfully import firearms from Arizona into Colorado, and by failing to properly conduct an interstate firearms transfer through a dealer.

It is clear from the fraudulent way in which gun rights supporters were portrayed in the documentary, and the unlawful way in which firearms were obtained to support the documentary’s gun control theme, that neither truth nor the law were concerns of Ms. Soechtig or her staff in creating the film.

Of course, I would be willing to wager that said transaction NEVER happened at all. I would surmise that this was simply a lie, manufactured to scare people, and support the Cult of Gun Control’s repeated lies about a “need for background checks”. This is what the left does after all, they lie, over and again. So, color me as skeptical that such a private sale ever went down. If the shows producer is a lawyer, he likely knows such a transaction would be a federal crime. It is doubtful he would risk so much to actually engage in this activity. He would rather produce a fakeumentary than risk prison time. It is most likely a lie that is crafted to fit the lunatic narrative of the Cult of Gun Control.

If I am wrong, and I am not ALWAYS right, then these FEDERAL CRIMES need to be prosecuted!

Democrat Prosecutor Known For Fighting Prostitution Charged With Paying For Sex Hundreds Of Times

Prosecutor Known For Fighting Prostitution Charged With Paying For Sex Hundreds Of Times – Washington Post

.

.
When it came to hiring prostitutes for sex, Stuart Dunnings III preferred escort websites such as Escort Vault and Backpage.com.

Most of the time, police say, Dunnings would meet the women at motels. Occasionally, they’d meet at a pimp’s house.

His was a ferocious habit, one that led the 63-year-old to shell out hundreds of dollars three or four times a week for a revolving cast of heroin-addled sex workers.

By the time he was arrested Monday outside a Lansing, Mich., coffee shop, Dunnings had racked up hundreds of illegal encounters in three Michigan counties between 2010 and 2015, according to an arrest affidavit.

But Dunnings wasn’t just any John, authorities say.

For the past 20 years, he’s been the top prosecutor for Ingham County, a man who put sex traffickers in jail and built a reputation as “an outspoken advocate for ending human trafficking and prostitution,” according to a statement released by Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette (R).

“This is not a going into Barnes and Noble and buying something as a client or a customer,” Schuette said. “This is an instance where an officer of the law, an officer of the court, the prosecutor in the capital city of Michigan has a responsibility to enforce the law, report crimes, but he did just the opposite. He was a participant in commercial sex activity.”

Dunnings faces 15 criminal charges across three counties, including willful neglect of duty and pandering. The latter charge stems from the prosecutor paying for sex with a woman who was seeking help resolving a child custody dispute, according to the affidavit.

He was also charged with 10 counts of engaging in the services of prostitutes, a misdemeanor, in Ingham, Clinton and Ionia counties.

After being processed in the Ingham County jail, Dunnings was arraigned and released on bond.

If convicted, he could spend more than 20 years behind bars, authorities told The Washington Post.

The prosecutor’s arrest was preceded by a year-long investigation by the Ingham County Sheriff’s Office, assisted by the FBI and the state attorney general’s office, authorities said.

“I’ve known Stuart for a long time,” Ingham County Sheriff Gene Wriggelsworth said at a news conference. “We’ve done some campaigning together. This was a huge betrayal of his trust, his oath of office, his service to the people of this county.”

Dunnings is a Democrat who was first elected in 1996. He is now the highest-paid elected official in Ingham County, with a salary of $132,000, according to the Lansing State Journal.

For much of his career as a prosecutor, he appeared to be an unlikely candidate for engaging in illegal activity.

In 2001, according to the Journal, Dunnings began prosecuting the city’s prostitution-related crimes. Chief among the prosecutor’s goals, the paper reported, was imposing harsher penalties on lawbreakers.

He took an aggressive approach to his job and quickly cracked down, impounding Johns’ vehicles and smacking prostitutes and their clients with felonies after three offenses, according to the Journal.

“In the first two years alone, his prosecutors charged 19 people with felonies and impounded 53 vehicles,” the paper reported.

Only seven years later, Dunnings had adopted the illegal behavior of the very people he was putting behind bars, according to the affidavit.

He met most of the sex workers online. Over time, he became increasingly involved with them, taking them to dinner, paying their bills, buying them groceries, and even revealing his identity as a prosecutor, according to the arrest affidavit.

He paid one woman’s YMCA membership and spent $80 a week for methodone treatments for her heroin addiction, the affidavit states.

Dunnings also shared a prostitute with his brother, Steven Dunnings, a Lansing attorney who is facing two charges of engaging in the services of a prostitute, according to the affidavit.

The prosecutor became involved with another woman in 2010 after she told him she had been the victim of domestic violence and sought assistance in a “custody matter,” the affidavit states.

Dunnings invited the woman to lunch on two occasions. During their second meeting, the affidavit states, Dunnings said he knew she was struggling financially and had a proposition: money for sex.

After initially declining his offer, the woman told investigators that she eventually felt she had no choice but to accept, fearing he might “cause her problems” if she backed out, according to the affidavit.

The woman – who estimated that the district attorney paid her $600 every two weeks – told investigators that “she would not have gone along with the commercial sex if Dunnings had not been the prosecutor,” the affidavit states.

Wriggelsworth, the sheriff, told the Journal that authorities were aware of “chatter” about Dunnings’s activities, but they lacked proof. A 2015 FBI investigation into an alleged trafficker eventually led authorities to Dunnings.

Before Dunnings was arraigned Monday, his lawyer, Michael Hocking, declined to comment, according to the Journal.

The paper reported that Hocking was overheard outside the courtroom telling one of Dunnings’s relatives that the attorney general’s motivations were political in nature. He repeated a variation of that line in court, the Journal reported, telling Magistrate Laura Millmore that the charges against his client were “somewhat of a political case” full of “titillating-type accusations.”

Schuette has called on Dunnings to resign, according to the Journal.

“We live in a time where people wonder if government actually works,” the attorney general said. “People wonder if the system is rigged. People wonder whether we have a ‘wink and a nod’ justice system where the chosen few skate and escape punishment because of who they know or because they hold an important position in government.”

“Well, let me be very direct and crystal clear,” he added. “The system in Michigan is not rigged. Not on my watch.”

.

.

Right On Cue, President Asshat Uses Kalamazoo Murders To Push More Neo-Nazi Gun Control Measures

Obama On Kalamazoo: More Needs To Be Done On Gun Control – The Hill

.

.
President Obama on Monday condemned a weekend shooting rampage in Kalamazoo, Mich., calling it a stark example that more needs to be done to prevent gun violence in America.

The president said he phoned the mayor, police chief and sheriff in Kalamazoo to offer federal assistance in the investigation.

“Their local officials and first responders did an outstanding job in apprehending the individual very quickly,” he told a meeting of the National Governors Association at the White House. “But you’ve got families who are shattered today.”

Obama cited a series of executive actions he took last month designed to expand background checks on gun purchases, but he added that “it’s clear we’re going to need to do more to keep innocent Americans safe.”

An Über driver allegedly killed six people and injured two others during a Saturday shooting spree in Kalamazoo. The man, identified as police as Jason Brian Dalton, reportedly picked up passengers between shootings.

Obama cited last year’s mass shooting in San Bernardino, Calif., by Islamic State in Iraq and Syria sympathizers as an incident that terrorized the nation, adding “here’s a hard truth, we probably lost even more Americans than that this weekend alone.”

“I’ve got to assume that all of your are just as tired as I am of seeing this stuff happen in your states,” the president continued.

“So that’s an area where we need to partner and think about what we can do in a common-sense way, in a bipartisan way, without some of the ideological rhetoric that so often surrounds that issue.”

The shooting in Kalamazoo was just the latest mass incident of gun violence that has occured in Obama’s presidency.

Obama has delivered forceful, emotional calls for new gun laws after shootings in Newtown, Conn., in 2012 and Charleston, S.C. in 2015.

But the president has repeatedly been stymied by Republicans in Congress in passing new gun laws, such as universal background checks and an assault weapons ban.

In January, Obama issued a new executive actions clarifying which gun sellers are required to conduct background checks on buyers.

.

.