Categories
Back Door Power Grab Corruption Crime How sick is this? Politics

Bill introduced to side step budgets, fund CDC to conduct anti-gun research

Views: 24

By John Petrolino | Feb 08, 2022 

 

Ed. NOTE: I  am not a rabid gun-freak. For many years the only gun I owed was an heirloom .22 revolver that had belonged to my grandfather. That changed several years ago when a lunatic with a felony record, and who knew where I lived, threatened to kill me — and several others. I now have a 9mm. I generally don’t carry, although I do have a CCW.  This article drew my ire. And it should yours, too. TPR

One of the fun myths we keep getting fed is that the gun industry is the only industry that cannot be sued for damages. Those of us who are keenly aware of what the law is and how it reads, knows that’s not true. Firearm manufacturers can’t be sued for the misuse of their products, just as Ford can’t be sued if their vehicle was involved in a drunk driving incident (or Johnnie Walker for that matter). Another fantastic false fact that flies out of the mouths of the anti-freedom caucus members is that the CDC is cut off from funding on studying so-called “gun violence”. This is a little prestidigitation being  played with words, as the facts get shoved up the pinko sleeves’ of our “honest” congresscritters. A newly reintroduced bill seeks to address this “problem”. On February 2, 2022 H.R. 6575: Protecting Americans from Gun Violence Act of 2022 was reintroduced by Congresswoman Nydia Velázquez from New York.

What does the bill aim to do? In essence it will levy a one dollar fee for every NICS check completed, with the first $10,000,000 going directly to the CDC for the purposes of “…carrying out subsection (a), the Secretary shall conduct or support research described in such subsection relating to gun violence.”

From the bill text:

(1)When, pursuant to section 922(t) of this title, a licensee under this chapter is first required to contact the national instant criminal background check system established under section 103 of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act about a person with respect to a transaction involving one or more firearms, but before contacting the system, the licensee shall—

(A)charge and collect from the person a fee in an amount equal to $1, regardless of the number of firearms involved in the transaction;

(B)provide the person with a timestamped receipt acknowledging receipt of the fee from the person; and

(C)maintain a written or electronic record of the transaction and the timestamped receipt for 3 years.

(2)Not later than the end of the calendar quarter in which a licensee collects a fee under paragraph (1), the licensee shall transmit the amount of the fee to the Attorney General, who shall remit the amount to the Secretary of the Treasury.

 

[…]

 

(1)The first $10,000,000 shall be available, without further appropriation, to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to carry out section 391(c) of the Public Health Service Act, as added by section 3.

(2)The next $5,000,000 shall be available, without further appropriation, to the Attorney General, for the operation and maintenance of the national instant criminal background check system established under section 103 of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act.

(3)The remainder shall be available, without further appropriation, to the Attorney General for such activities of the Office for Victim Assistance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation as the Attorney General deems appropriate.

There’s also a section with further enhanced penalties involving lost or stolen firearms involved in interstate commerce etc. People will be subjected to the following penalty:

…shall be fined $10,000, imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both, with respect to each firearm involved in the violation.

There was not a whole lot of information on this bill being newly reintroduced. A prior version of it was introduced by Velázquez  on November 7, 2017. From that press release:

“The repeated lack of action on sensible gun control following mass shootings is unconscionable,” said Velázquez. “Last month, a deranged gunman in Las Vegas stole the lives from 59 innocent concert goers and injured hundreds of others. This weekend, 26 of our fellow citizens – ranging from children to seniors – lost their lives. Our collective outrage cannot be lost in the days following these shootings. Instead, we must take real, concrete action to crack down on illegal sales of guns. For this reason, I have introduced two new bills that take modest but meaningful steps to reduce the scourge of gun violence.”

Velázquez’s first bill, the Protecting Americans from Gun Violence Act of 2017, establishes a new fee on gun sales. The Act requires that a $1 fee be collected following every registered background check. In turn, revenue from this tax will help fund research to prevent gun violence and to preserve the operation of background checks. Specifically, the first $10 million collected through the tax would go to fund gun research at the Center for Disease Control (CDC).

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is a vital part of preventing those that should not have access to guns from obtaining them. However, as seen in the recent Texas shooting, there are gaps in the system. In Texas, the gunman’s past criminal record should have prohibited him from passing a background check. To help address these gaps, the Act would provide $5 million to explore these deficiencies and strengthen the NICS system.

“For two decades, the NRA and their weapons manufacturing patrons have suppressed funding to study gun violence like the public health epidemic that it is,” said Velázquez. “While much more is needed beyond studies, closing the gap in data on gun violence will be an important step toward addressing the overarching problem. Equally important, under this bill, the research will be funded by the purchasers and sellers of firearms.  Those who buy and sell these instruments of death should pay for the research examining their impact.”

The press release is oozing with that quality bogeyman allegations casting the NRA as an enemy of the state. What Velázquez and the other lying ilk in her camp continually leave out is that the subject of so-called “gun violence” can be studied by the CDC, however that research is not to be used to enact any freedom squishing “gun control” laws. The progressives are kind of tipping their hand on this one. They’re basically saying “We don’t want the money unless we can use it to strip away peoples’ rights.” The NRA advocating for this would be like a turkey donating resources to someone finding the best Thanksgiving day recipe to use.

What will come of this bill? Probably not a whole lot. However, we can see the workarounds that those in power are willing to utilize in order to disarm Americans.

Loading

219
Categories
Corruption How sick is this? Politics

Here we go again: Biden DHS Declares Heightened Terrorism Threat

Views: 33

FILE PHOTO: U.S. Department of Homeland Security emblem is pictured at the National Cybersecurity & Communications Integration Center (NCCIC) located just outside Washington in Arlington, Virginia September 24, 2010. REUTERS/Hyungwon Kang
By Jack Phillips for EPOCH TIMES  February 8, 2022

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on Feb. 7 declared a heightened terrorism threat due to “false and misleading narratives,” misinformation, and “conspiracy theories.”

“The United States remains in a heightened threat environment fueled by several factors, including an online environment filled with false or misleading narratives and conspiracy theories, and other forms of mis- dis- and mal-information introduced and/or amplified by foreign and domestic threat actors,” the DHS bulletin said.

The agency did not say what foreign or domestic actors are responsible for the alleged proliferation of misinformation or disinformation.

“Mass casualty attacks and other acts of targeted violence conducted by lone offenders and small groups acting in furtherance of ideological beliefs and/or personal grievances pose an ongoing threat to the nation,” the DHS continued, adding that some individuals are seeking to “sow discord or undermine public trust in U.S. government institutions.”

Some individuals, the bulletin alleged, are calling for violence against critical infrastructure, faith-based institutions like churches or synagogues, colleges, government personnel or facilities, and other targets.

As an example of key factors that allegedly contribute to the heightened threat environment, the DHS said there are misleading narratives surrounding COVID-19 and claimed that some individuals have used COVID-19 mandates or vaccines to carry out attacks since 2020. The agency did not elaborate or provide additional evidence for its allegations. The DHS also listed online claims of election fraud as a contributor, and it also did not provide additional details or evidence.

The agency said that “foreign terrorist organizations and domestic threat actors continue to amplify pre-existing false or misleading narratives online to sow discord and undermine public trust in government institutions. It said violent extremists, including the individual who recently launched an attack against the synagogue in Texas, highlight “the continuing threat of violence based upon racial or religious motivations, as well as threats against faith-based organizations.”

The ISIS terrorist group and its affiliates “may issue public calls for retaliation due to the strike that recently killed ISIS leader Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi,” the bulletin said. The Biden administration announced last week that al-Qurayshi was killed during a raid in northern Syria.

The bulletin also made note of alleged recent threats to black colleges and universities across the United States.

“Domestic violent extremists have also viewed attacks against U.S. critical infrastructure as a means to create chaos and advance ideological goals, and have recently aspired to disrupt U.S. electric and communications critical infrastructure, including by spreading false or misleading narratives about 5G cellular technology,” the bulletin continued.

The DHS said the heightened threat alert will expire on June 7, 2022.

Loading

204
Categories
Politics Economy Stupid things people say or do.

California State Lawmaker Proposes Universal Basic Income Test Program for Poor College Students

Views: 25

California state Democrat senator Dave Cortese. (California State Senate)
By Matthew Vadum for Epoch Times  February 6, 2022

A California state lawmaker wants the government to give $500 a month to impoverished college students as a test for a controversial kind of social program known as universal basic income (UBI).

Legislation that would create the program may be introduced later this month by Democrat Dave Cortese, a state senator who represents part of Silicon Valley.

The measure would “establish a UBI pilot program at 3-5 [California State University campuses],” according to a summary Cortese provided to reporters.

The pilot program would cover about “9,500-14,000 eligible student participants,” and “the total cost for the proposal would range between $57 million and $84 million, excluding minimal administrative costs.”

“College students are couch surfing and sleeping in their cars. This could be enough money to rent a room, and if you don’t need a room, by all means, use it for what you do need it for,” Cortese told The Los Angeles Times.

“It’s like a booster shot. It could help get them off of this treadmill and stop them from dropping out, being on the streets, and becoming homeless long term.”

Cortese could not be reached over the weekend to elaborate on his proposal.

George Kamel, of Ramsey Solutions, a financial consultancy, told The College Fix that Cortese’s proposal was “not a solution to the actual problem.”

“Giving up to 14,000 students $500 a month is not going to change what caused the problem. In fact, costing the state $57-84 million over 3-5 years will add to the problem,” he said, adding that UBI “only works when the people receiving the money actually use the income to lift themselves out of poverty.”

“All students, not just low-income students, should avoid the traps of student loans and the outrageous cost of higher education,” he said.

Support for UBI programs, in which a simple cash payment is made to every citizen without other requirements or restrictions, surfaces periodically in the United States, a country that is traditionally more hostile to government-funded welfare programs than European nations.

Liberals have been pushing the idea of giving people money for doing nothing for years and the idea has popped up recently on the campaign trail as Democratic candidates compete for their party’s 2020 presidential nomination. Republican President Richard Nixon flirted with the idea in 1969, supporting legislation that would have paid $1,600 annually to a family of four, but the bill never made it out of Congress. In the 1960s and early 1970s, New Jersey and Pennsylvania experimented with such income maintenance programs.

Last year Oakland, Calif., launched Oakland Resilient Families, which it described as one of the largest guaranteed income pilot programs in the United States. The pilot, a collaborative effort between Oakland-based nonprofit UpTogether and the national organization, Mayors for a Guaranteed Income, will provide 600 low-income families with $500 per month for an 18-month period.

“Poverty is not a personal failure, it is a policy failure,” Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf, a Democrat, said at the time. “Guaranteed income presents one of the most promising tools for systems change, racial equity, and economic mobility we’ve seen in decades,” she said, adding evidence is growing to justify a federally guaranteed income program.

According to the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for Guaranteed Income Research, various UBI programs have been tested or are currently being tested or planned in: New Orleans; Ulster County and New York City, N.Y.; Stockton and Los Angeles, Calif.; St. Paul, Minn.; Richmond, Va.; Columbia, S.C.; Gary, Ind.; Paterson, N.J.; and Cambridge, Mass. The center is participating in creating some of the programs.

UBI programs don’t work well in the real world, according to a 2019 study by a left-wing global trade union federation that The Epoch Times previously reported on.

The report by the France-based global trade union federation Public Services International and U.K.-based New Economics Foundation think tank, concluded “making cash payments to individuals to increase their purchasing power in a free-market economy is not a viable route to solving problems caused or exacerbated by neoliberal market economics.”

Pressing for UBI, which some claim is a “silver bullet,” wastes political energies that could be better used on “more important causes,” stated the report, which also found there was no evidence that UBI has achieved durable improvements in well-being anywhere it has been tried. There is no evidence that such programs “can be affordable, inclusive, sufficient and sustainable at the same time.”

Loading

219
Categories
Crime Politics Progressive Racism

OUTRAGE! GoFundMe Seizes C$10 Million of Trucker Protest Fundraising, Will Give to “Charities” Instead

Views: 42

GoFundMe says it won’t be giving the C$10 million ($8 million USD) raised to support the truckers protesting COVID-19 mandates to the organizers anymore, saying it will instead work with the organizers to send the funds to “established charities verified by GoFundMe.”

“To ensure GoFundMe remains a trusted platform, we work with local authorities to ensure we have a detailed, factual understanding of events taking place on the ground,” the fundraising platform said in a statement on Feb. 4.

“Following a review of relevant facts and multiple discussions with local law enforcement and city officials, this fundraiser is now in violation of our Terms of Service (Term 8, which prohibits the promotion of violence and harassment) and has been removed from the platform.”

GoFundMe added that it has “evidence from law enforcement that the previously peaceful demonstration has become an occupation, with police reports of violence and other unlawful activity.”

John Carpay, president of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) which is providing legal representation for the organizers, told The Epoch Times that the linking of protesters to violent or unlawful activity is unfounded.

“I would like to see what evidence there is,” Carpay said. “That’s political spin.”

Carpay said the organizers have maintained that the protests are peaceful.

“It’s a constitutional freedom to protest peacefully,” Carpay said.

He also said that it’s his understanding from people on the ground that people can move freely in Ottawa, and for example in a recent case an emergency vehicle was able to “rapidly race through the streets because the trucks were neatly parked off to the side.”

“They’re not obstructing the daily lives of people in Ottawa, and they’re committed to peace and non-violence,” he said.

The Epoch Times reached out to GoFundMe for comment but didn’t immediately hear back.

Epoch Times Photo
Trucks parked in downtown Ottawa as demonstrators continue to protest COVID-19 mandates and restrictions on Feb. 2, 2022. (Jonathan Ren/The Epoch Times)

GoFundMe had earlier put a freeze in withdrawal of the funds as it undertook a review “to ensure it complies with our terms of service and applicable laws and regulations.”

Keith Wilson, a lawyer from JCCF representing the organizers, had said earlier at a Feb. 3 press conference that GoFundMe has been “bombarded with an orchestrated social media and other campaigns to try and shut [the fundraiser] down.”

Ottawa police have made a few arrests while the protesters remain in Ottawa. On Feb. 1, the Ottawa Police Service announced that it had charged one man with mischief under $5,000 and another man with carrying a weapon to a meeting. Police charged another man from Quebec while in Ottawa on Feb. 2 in relation to “threats and comments made on social media.” Police say there have been no injuries or riots during the protests.

“I have it on very reliable information that people from the movement were not associated, and that offences related to property damage, and just an assault this morning, committed by agitators were witnessed and reported by a trucker and one of our volunteer security personnel, which was reported to the police and handled by the Ottawa Police Service,” said Daniel Bulford, a former RCMP officer who worked as a sniper to protect the prime minister and is now helping the protest organizers, at the Feb. 3 press conference.

Preliminary data shows there has been a decline in police-reported street crime since the protest began in downtown Ottawa, according to Blacklock’s Reporter.

In the week prior to the protest, there were 31 police calls for crimes such as robbery, assault, drug trafficking, public drunkenness, and other crimes in the Ottawa district the protest is set up, but there were only three reports of street crime since the protests began, Blacklock’s Reporter said.

In a Feb. 4 post on Twitter, Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson thanked GoFundMe for “listening to the plea made by the City and the Ottawa Police to no longer provide funds to the convoy organizers.”

“I’m hopeful that limiting their access to … funding and resources will restrict their ability to remain in Ottawa,” Watson said.

GoFundMe had earlier allowed withdrawal of C$1 million by the organizers to be used for expenses such as fuel and food for the protesters. The fundraising platform said in its Feb. 4 statement that donors may submit a request for a full refund of their donation until Feb. 19.

The trucker convoy demonstration initially started as a protest against the federal government’s requirement for truck drivers crossing the U.S.-Canada border to have COVID-19 vaccination, but became a large movement as many across Canada opposing various COVID-19 mandates and restrictions joined the protest.

The convoy converged in Ottawa on Jan. 29, and many protesters have remained in the city, parking their trucks and vehicles by Parliament Hill. Sounds of horn honking by protesters can be heard throughout the day.

The protesters say they will remain in the nation’s capital until the government removes COVID-19 mandates.

The organizers have now set up an alternate donation site on GiveSendGo, which they say will ensure the money gets to the protesters. The donation site had raised over $175,000 in just a few hours after its creation.

Cancel GoFundMe for illegally stealing money donated for the truckers!

Next, they will be seizing money for people who didn’t get the jab.

Loading

270
Categories
COVID Corruption Drugs Politics Science

Coming to a country near you: Austria Signs Law Requiring Compulsory Vaccination for All Adults

Views: 29

By Jack Phillips for Epoch Times  February 4, 2022

Austrian President Alexander Van der Bellen on Friday signed a controversial law introducing a national COVID-19 vaccine mandate for adults that includes fines.

Those without proof of vaccination or exemption face an initial fine of 600 euros ($680) and additional fines up to 3,600 euros ($4,100). Individuals can be fined up to four times per year, and the law will last until January 2024.

Van der Bellen signed the law after parliament approved it on Thursday, according to his office in a statement to media outlets. The law will come into force on Saturday, his office said.

Pregnant women and those who can’t be inoculated because it could harm their health are exempt from the mandate. People who recently recovered from COVID-19, caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, within 180 days are also exempt, according to details of the law.

According to the law, anyone aged 18 and older has to get the vaccine. They also have to receive boosters when eligible.

“The vaccine mandate won’t immediately help us break the Omicron wave, but that wasn’t the goal of this law,” Austrian Health Minister Wolfgang Mueckstein said Thursday before Parliament’s upper chamber approved the plan. “The vaccine mandate should help protect us from the next waves, and above all from the next variants.”

Epoch Times Photo
Demonstrators hold flags and placards as they march to protest against the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) restrictions and the mandatory vaccination in Vienna, Austria, on Dec. 4, 2021. (Lisi Niesner/Reuters)

In March, Austrian police will start checking people’s vaccination status during traffic stops and checks on COVID-19 restrictions, according to the law. People who can’t produce proof of vaccination will be asked in writing to do so and will face fines.

Opposition politicians, including Freedom Party of Austria leader Herbert Kickl, said the rule represents “an inglorious era for the rule of law and the fundamental rights and freedoms of Austrians,” according to Die Presse.

“I don’t really see the added value of the vaccine mandate at this point,” said Gerald Gartlehner, an epidemiologist at the Danube University Krems. The Omicron variant’s highly infectious nature and milder symptoms have proven to be a pandemic game-changer, he said, adding that much of the population already has immunity via a previous infection or vaccination.

Meanwhile, in Germany, members of Parliament are debating on whether to also consider a compulsory vaccine for all adults.

But elsewhere in Europe, some countries have started to drop COVID-19 rules, including vaccine mandates. Denmark, for example, lifted all its COVID-19 restrictions on Tuesday and Sweden will follow on Feb. 9.

“At the same time as infections are skyrocketing, [the number of] patients admitted to intensive care [is] actually going down,” Soren Brostrom, director-general of Denmark’s Health Authority, said in a CNN interview. “It’s around 30 people in ICU beds right now with a COVID-19 diagnosis, out of a population of 6 million.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Loading

206
Categories
Corruption Elections Politics

Pelosi Congress Claims Sovereign Immunity in Federal Court to Keep Secret January 6 Videos and Emails

Views: 36

(Washington, DC)Judicial Watch announced that it filed an opposition to the U.S. Capitol Police’s (USCP) effort to shut down Judicial Watch’s federal lawsuit for January 6 videos and emails. Through its police department, Congress argues that the videos and emails are not public records, there is no public interest in their release, and that “sovereign immunity” prevents citizens from suing for their release.

Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit under the common law right of access after the Capitol Police refused to provide any records in response to a January 21, 2021, request (Judicial Watch v. United States Capitol Police (No. 1:21-cv-00401)). Judicial Watch asks for:

  • Email communications between the U.S. Capitol Police Executive Team and the Capitol Police Board concerning the security of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. The timeframe of this request is from January 1, 2021 through January 10, 2021.
  • Email communications of the Capitol Police Board with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security concerning the security of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. The timeframe of this request is from January 1, 2021through January 10, 2021.
  • All video footage from within the Capitol between 12 pm and 9 pm on January 6, 2021

Congress exempts itself from the Freedom of Information Act. Judicial Watch, therefore, brought its lawsuit under the common law right of access to public records. In opposing the broad assertion of secrecy, Judicial Watch details Supreme Court and other precedent that upholds the public’s right to know what “their government is up to:”

“In ‘the courts of this country’— including the federal courts—the common law bestows upon the public a right of access to public records and documents” … “the Supreme Court was unequivocal in stating that there is a federal common law right of access ‘to inspect and copy public records and documents.’” … “[T]he general rule is that all three branches of government, legislative, executive, and judicial, are subject to the common law right.” The right of access is “a precious common law right . . . that predates the Constitution itself.”

The Court of Appeals for this circuit has recognized that “openness in government has always been thought crucial to ensuring that the people remain in control of their government….” “Neither our elected nor our appointed representatives may abridge the free flow of information simply to protect their own activities from public scrutiny. An official policy of secrecy must be supported by some legitimate justification that serves the interest of the public office.”

“The Pelosi Congress (and its police department) is telling a federal court it is immune from all transparency under law and is trying to hide every second of its January 6 videos and countless emails,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The hypocrisy is rich, as this is the same Congress that is trying to jail witnesses who, citing privileges, object to providing documents to the Pelosi rump January 6 committee.”

In November 2021, Judicial Watch revealed multiple audio, visual and photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Ashli Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building.  The records include a cell phone video of the shooting and an audio of a brief police interview of the shooter, Lt. Michael Byrd.

In October, Judicial Watch released records, showing that multiple officers claimed they didn’t see a weapon in Babbitt’s hand before Byrd shot her, and that Byrd was visibly distraught afterward. One officer attested that he didn’t hear any verbal commands before Byrd shot Babbitt.

Also in November, Judicial Watch filed a response in opposition to the Department of Justice’s effort to block Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit asking for records of communication between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and several financial institutions about the reported transfer of financial transaction records of people in DC, Maryland, and Virginia on January 5 and January 6, 2021. Judicial Watch argues that Justice Department should not be allowed to shield “improper activity.”

——————————————————————————

The laws are for thee, not for me!

Loading

274
Categories
Corruption Crime Drugs Politics Reprints from others.

No surprise: Afghan Opium Production Skyrockets Under Taliban

Views: 21

February 2, 2022

Afghanistan’s opium production skyrocketed in 2021, potentially providing the Taliban government a source of revenue between $1.8 billion and $2.7 billion. This according to a new report from the Special Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction (SIGAR).

The war-torn nation’s illegal production ranked as the third-highest recorded since the United Nations began reporting it in 1994. It comprised between 9 and 14 percent of Afghanistan’s GDP and exceeded the value of all of the country’s officially recorded legal exports in 2020.

The surge in opium production comes as the U.S. government allocates millions to combat the spread of illicit drugs in the country, according to SIGAR’s latest report, released on Wednesday.

While the Taliban has vowed to combat opium production—even though it could serve as a lucrative source of revenue for them —SIGAR says it “has seen no evidence that the Taliban are enforcing or can enforce such a ban. On the contrary, the opium trade in Afghanistan appears to be flourishing.”

In fact, opium dealers, who once operated in the shadows while the U.S.-backed government was in power, are now selling their drugs from “stalls in village markets,” according to SIGAR’s report. “Opium poppy farmers, a key constituency for the Taliban, are likely to resist a ban,” the watchdog said.

The report quoted one opium seller as saying that the Taliban have “achieved what they have thanks to opium. None of us will let them ban opium unless the international community helps the Afghan people.”

The Biden administration, meanwhile, has renewed its efforts to inject millions of dollars in U.S. aid into the country without formal ties with the Taliban or officially recognizing its rule.

The State Department reported last year that the U.S. Agency for International Development had “suspended all contact with the Afghan government, and terminated, suspended, or paused all on-budget assistance.” The latest report, however, discloses that USAID has “resumed some off-budget,” U.S.-managed activities in Afghanistan.

The White House announced last month it sent an additional $308 million in humanitarian aid to Afghanistan, where poverty and hunger has run rampant since the Taliban in August 2021 retook control of the country amid a bungled evacuation of U.S. forces.

Afghanistan’s citizens are starving. More than half face a “tsunami of hunger,” according to the United Nations. This is the result of “record drought, rising food prices, internal displacement, and the severe economic downturn and collapse of public services following the Taliban’s return to power in August.”

Around 22.8 million Afghans will be at “potentially life-threatening levels of hunger this winter,” with around 8.7 million facing “near-famine conditions.” Another one million are at risk of dying, according to SIGAR, which cites statistics from a recent Integrated Food Security Phase Classification study.

Up to 97 percent of Afghanistan’s population is now at risk of slipping below the poverty line by mid-2022 “as a result of the worsening political and economic crises,” according to the report.

Additionally, the Biden administration’s failure to evacuate skilled Afghan soldiers who worked for the country’s former fighting force has likely led to them joining the ISIS terrorist group, according to the SIGAR report.

In an interview with former Afghan general Sami Sadat, SIGAR learned that “Afghan fighters, especially commandos and intelligence officers, could lead to IS-K’s resurgence. Sadat said these people would be especially vulnerable to IS-K recruitment. Sadat added that this issue needs to be addressed more systematically, noting that IS-K may have the capability to take eastern Afghanistan quickly and establish itself in Kabul within a year.”

The post: Afghan Opium Production Skyrockets Under Taliban appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

Loading

261
Categories
Biden Pandemic Child Abuse COVID Politics

They were loyal liberals who never dreamed of voting Republican but the damage done to kids by the Left’s Covid hysteria is driving a wave of moms away from the Democrats

Views: 57

Tracy Compton, a mother of two in Fairfax, Virginia, had voted for Democrats for as long as she can remember, until the COVID-related school closures. “I tried and went to apply to work with the Democratic Party. I was told I was not allowed to become a member of the Democratic Party [in Fairfax].”

A recording of a reorganization meeting showed fellow Democrats deeming Compton too ‘anti-school’ to be part of their political efforts.

What made Compton anti-school?  She wanted the public schools to fully reopen.

When Compton worked to collect signatures for a recall petition for the local school board, she was welcomed out of the rain by a Republican party tent, even after telling them she was a Biden voter.

In contrast, when Compton offered the petition to those inside the Democrat party tent, she was yelled at.

Now? Given a hypothetical matchup between Kamala Harris or President Joe Biden vs. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, she said she’d vote for the Republican in a heartbeat.

Compton lamented how she got here, now supporting a political party with whom she felt very little in common with until COVID hit.

She told me, “All the things that Biden and Kamala believe in; and what the Democratic Party believe in… I still believe in it. But I have to look at what’s happening in my family and with my children right now.”

Bethany Wagner (above with family) said the 'schools issue' proved to be a gateway into seeing the world through another set of eyes.

Bethany Wagner (above with family) said the ‘schools issue’ proved to be a gateway into seeing the world through another set of eyes.

Wagner (above with children) went from a casual viewer of CNN and MSNBC to seeking out Fox News clips about the 'schools issue' on YouTube because they were the only ones covering it.

Wagner (above with children) went from a casual viewer of CNN and MSNBC to seeking out Fox News clips about the ‘schools issue’ on YouTube because they were the only ones covering it.

“They’re being hurt by not being able to be in school, and not in school normally. My focus has to be on making sure that they’re going to grow up and prosper and be the good citizens that they need to be.

“So that they can protect the environment. And they can go on to do all the things that are important to me… I’ve got to put my attention on the thing that’s yelling at me the most.”

She went on, describing how she’ll vote in the future, “Until [Democrats] can present someone that’s logical, I’m going to have to make choices. Right now, my choices are very much based on my children and my children getting an education.”

“If that can be solved, then I can worry about other things that are important to me, like gun control, the environment, and universal healthcare. I can’t do that until I know my kids are good.’

Compton isn’t alone, she’s part of an army of Virginia parents who swung the gubernatorial election towards the Republican Glenn Youngkin, who just took office this week.

Compton was active in her community’s efforts to open schools, as was her friend Bethany Wagner, a mother of two, also living in Fairfax.

For Wagner, the ‘schools issue’ proved to be a gateway into seeing the world through another set of eyes.

She realized early in the pandemic that it was conservative sites that were reporting on the impact of school closures and concerns she had over curriculum.

She went from a casual viewer of CNN and MSNBC to seeking out Fox News clips about the ‘schools issue’ on YouTube because they were the only ones covering it. Soon, she did the unthinkable: She just turned on Fox News itself. And she realized, “It’s not what CNN claims it to be.”

Neither women see themselves as Republicans, but for the time being, they will be voting for them.  Compton and Wagner are just two names behind a widespread shift towards Republicans over the course of the last year.

Ashley (a pseudonym), a mother of three from Central New Jersey, fumed, 'I hate when Democrats like Biden get all defensive and say that 95% of schools are open right now. They are being willfully ignorant and not paying attention that even though schools are 'open' they are NOT NORMAL.'

Ashley (a pseudonym), a mother of three from Central New Jersey, fumed, “I hate when Democrats like Biden get all defensive and say that 95% of schools are open right now. They are being willfully ignorant and not paying attention that even though schools are ‘open’ they are NOT NORMAL.”Gallup reported a remarkable shift in the way Americans identify themselves politically. Strikingly, the most pronounced shift away from Democratic party identification came in the third and fourth quarter of the year, coinciding with the fall as children returned to school.

Gallup reported a remarkable shift in the way Americans identify themselves politically. Strikingly, the most pronounced shift away from Democratic party identification came in the third and fourth quarter of the year, coinciding with the fall as children returned to school.

  • In the first quarter of 2021, 49% of U.S. considered themselves to be Democrats. By the third quarter of 2021, self-identified Democrat (and Democrat-leaning individuals) dropped to 42%.
  • For Republicans it went in the opposite direction. 40% self-identified with the GOP at the start of 2021, and 47% put themselves in the Republican-camp at the end of the year.
  • That’s a 14-percentage point swing from a nine-point Democratic advantage to a five-point GOP edge, and among the largest advantages the GOP has ever held in Gallup polling.
  • Strikingly, the most pronounced shift away from Democratic party identification came in the third and fourth quarter of the year, coinciding with the fall as children returned to school.

Why might parents have snapped in the fall when their kids finally went back to school? Ashley (a pseudonym), a mother of three from Central New Jersey, fumed, “I hate when Democrats like Biden get all defensive and say that 95% of schools are open right now. They are being willfully ignorant and not paying attention that even though schools are ‘open’ they are NOT NORMAL.”

It’s a line that President Biden repeated at his two-hour White House press conference on January 19.

“It’s always going to be the top of the news,” Biden said of the ‘schools issue.’

“But let’s put it in perspective: 95 — as high as 98 percent of the schools in America are open, functioning, and capable doing the job.”

He’s not fooling parents like Ashley.

Kids are masked, have no field trips, no extracurriculars, no sports (our town canceled winter recreation sports just for kids but kept adult recreation programming). Not to mention the constant threat of closures when cases rise. School might be mostly ‘open’ but it is not normal. Democrats should be paying attention instead of gaslighting me and telling me everything is fine.’

Now we’re learning that Biden wants to increase masking for children – not reduce it.

President of the American Mask Manufacturer’s Association (AMMA) told Reuters that the White House is interested in creating a U.S. manufacturing base for protective masks for kids.

“We are ready to provide protective children’s masks for American families,'”said President Lloyd Armbrus. I’m sure they are. But do parents want them, and do kids really need them anymore?

It’s not only in K-12 schools where the situation is critical.

On parenting boards across the country parents of young children in daycares and preschools are at a breaking point.

After a huge spike in cases around the holidays, and with holidays and then weather-related closures, many of these centers have been closed more than they’ve been open so far in 2022.

A single case can lead to a closure of 10-14 days, and several of those means no routine or steady childcare for parents of small children.

On supply chain issues, Biden asserted much of the same. Everything is fine, don’t believe your lying eyes.

Biden claimed, “The share of goods in stock in stores is 89% now, which is barely below the 91% that prevailed pre-pandemic.”

It’s a fascinating strategy, telling Americans that everything is fine when they are keenly aware of the reality.

It’s a strategy that isn’t exactly paying off for the President, with his approval numbers sinking faster than the Titanic.

According to new poll numbers from Gallup, Biden’s approval rating is at just 40%, with 56% of respondents disapproving.

Alongside a shift away from the Democratic Party, there was a similar shift away from the President, with his support dipping in the fall of 2021.

Gallup explains, “In the latest survey, 40% of Americans approve and 56% disapprove of the job he is doing, as the U.S. is plagued by the highest inflation in four decades and another surge of COVID-19 cases, this time fueled by the omicron variant of the coronavirus.”

But it’s not just that.

Read the President’s meandering answer when he was asked if school closures would become a potent midterm issue for Republicans.

To get the full-flavor of this alternatively dismissive, halting, and incoherent answer – you really have to watch.

(Problems with sound)

Here’s some of it from the official White House transcript: 

Reporter question: Could school reopenings or closures become a potent midterm issue for Republicans to win back the suburbs?

Biden: Oh, I think it could be, but I hope to God that they’re — that — look, maybe I’m kidding myself, but as time goes on, the voter who is just trying to figure out, as I said, how to take care of their family, put three squares on the table, stay safe, able to pay their mortgage or their rent… You know, every — every president, not necessarily in the first 12 months, but every president in the first couple of years — almost every president, excuse me, of the last presidents — at least four of them — have had polling numbers that are 44 percent favorable… I mean, the idea that — the American public are trying to sift their way through what’s real and what’s fake.’

You can see why struggling Democratic parents have snapped.

In contrast, Republicans in Congress are vocally advocating for children. “Children are paying one of the greatest costs of this pandemic, despite being the least at risk to COVID-19. It’s time for the Biden administration to prioritize children’s well-being above junk CDC science, political donors and teachers unions,” tweeted Washington Congressman Cathy McMorris Rodgers on January 20.

Ashley warned, ‘I’m about as lefty as they come. I campaigned for Elizabeth Warren in 2020, Bernie Sanders in 2016, and Ralph Nader in 2000. Most of my views on specific issues haven’t changed… Now I don’t know if I can vote for any of them unless they reckon with what they did, and continue to do, to kids during this pandemic.’

‘I would even accept an apology, a mea culpa, a reflection on what they failed to do, and an effort to make it right. But I’m not holding my breath.’

Judging from Biden’s performance at the White House an apology or more importantly a change of course – is not coming.

Loading

249
Categories
Corruption Elections Politics The Courts

SHOCKER: ‘Someone Opened the Doors From the Inside,’ Jan. 6 Defense Attorney Says

Views: 81

 

By Joseph M. Hanneman for Epoch Times
January 28, 2022 Updated: January 29, 2022

Kelly Meggs and other Oath Keepers could not do one of the major things federal prosecutors accuse them of – force their way into the U.S. Capitol Rotunda on Jan. 6, 2021, through the famous Columbus Doors.

The two sets of historic doors that lead into the Rotunda were opened by someone on the inside, and not his client, says defense attorney Jonathon Moseley.

Department of Justice video widely circulated on Twitter this week shows a man trying to open the inner doors by leaning against them, before turning around as if listening to someone, then returning to the entrance and opening the left door for protesters.

“The outer doors cast from solid bronze would require a bazooka, an artillery shell or C4 military-grade explosives to breach,” Moseley wrote in a letter to federal prosecutors. “That of course did not happen. You would sooner break into a bank vault than to break the bronze outer Columbus Doors.”

The 20,000-pound Columbus Doors that lead into the Rotunda on the east side of the U.S. Capitol are secured by magnetic locks that can only be opened from the inside using a security code controlled by Capitol Police, Moseley wrote in an eight-page memo.

‘Impossible and Cannot Be Done’

“Imagine how the prosecution will prove at trial what cannot be proven because it is not true,” Moseley wrote to prosecutors Jeffrey S. Nestler and Kathryn Leigh Rakoczy of the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

“Who is going to testify that the defendants entered the Columbus Doors when the U.S. Capitol Police will begrudgingly testify that that is impossible and cannot be done?”

In a superseding indictment on Jan. 12, 2022, Meggs and 10 other members of the Oath Keepers were charged with seditious conspiracy, destruction of government property, obstruction of an official proceeding, civil disorder, tampering with documents, and other counts related to rioting on Jan. 6.

The indictment charges that Meggs led a “stack formation” up the Capitol steps to the entrance at the Columbus Doors. At 2:39 p.m., the doors were breached, and Stack One entered the Capitol with the mob, the indictment said.

Moseley said there’s one big problem with that accusation: it’s impossible to force entry from the outside. Only someone with the security code could release the locks—from the inside.

Video evidence submitted in the case showed the glass panes in the inner doors were cracked but intact, so no one accessed the building through the windows or by reaching for the inside door handles, he said.

“Therefore,” Moseley wrote. “Nobody opened the Rotunda doors from the outside. Someone opened the doors from the inside.”

Video shot by multimedia journalist Michael Nigro shows the outer bronze doors were partially retracted before a large crowd gathered outside the entrance.

The inner doors were closed and U.S. Capitol Police were stationed outside. Protesters sprayed police with pepper spray, threw items at them, and hit them with flagpoles.

A short time later, the inner doors were opened and hundreds of protesters streamed into the Rotunda, the video shows. A protester in the Rotunda is heard shouting, “Don’t vandalize the property!”

Capitol Tour Confirms Door Security

American sculptor Randolph Rogers designed the solid-bronze doors to depict scenes from the life of explorer Christopher Columbus. The doors were first installed in 1863, moved in 1871 to the central east entrance, and moved to the current location in 1961.

The doors are 17 feet high and weigh 20,000 pounds, according to the Architect of the Capitol. Once opened, the giant doors retract into pockets in the walls via built-in tracks.

Epoch Times Photo
First installed in 1863, the historic Columbus Doors depict scenes from the life of explorer Christopher Columbus. (Architect of the Capitol)

Moseley asked federal prosecutors for “any and all specifications, details and operational information about the so-called Columbus Doors.”

Moseley said he and an assistant took a tour of the Capitol on Jan. 22, along with other attorneys and investigators. The U.S. Capitol Police officers on duty were emphatic, he said, that the doors could not be opened from the outside.

“These are facts that in the supposedly largest nationwide investigation in the history of the U.S. since the kidnapping of the Charles Lindbergh baby or the search for Al Capone could easily have been investigated, check(ed), and determined before the U.S. Attorney’s Office presented false information to the grand jury,” Moseley wrote.

“For these purposes, I don’t care who opened the Columbus Doors from the inside, or why, or who they worked for. History will reveal all of that,” Moseley wrote. “History will care very much. But all I care about is that it wasn’t my client or any of these defendants, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office knows that or should have discovered it upon reasonable investigation.”

The Epoch Times asked the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia for comment on Moseley’s letter but received no reply.

The superseding indictment said Meggs and four other Oath Keepers became part of a mob that “aggressively advanced toward the Rotunda Doors, assaulted the law enforcement officers guarding the doors, threw objects, and sprayed chemicals toward the officers and the doors and pulled violently on the doors.”

The ‘mob’ breached the Rotunda entrance around 2:39 p.m., the indictment alleges.

Nigro’s video from outside the entrance shows a group of Oath Keepers near the Columbus Doors, which are clearly open at the time the men got near the threshold. By the time they entered the Capitol, dozens if not more than 100 people had flowed into the building, the video shows.

‘Baseless Prosecution’

Moseley accused prosecutors of crafting a case against the Oath Keepers that is “false and reprehensible.”

“This baseless prosecution is the greatest threat to the Republic since 1812. This prosecution is not about an attack on our Republic. This prosecution IS the attack on our Republic,” Moseley wrote, “seeking to criminalize political dissent, free speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of political association, and the right to petition the government for the redress of grievances.”

Moseley rapped federal authorities for “dishonestly trying to deceive the public” for eight months by concealing the fact that six demonstration permits had been issued for the Capitol grounds on Jan. 6. Implicit in those permits is the permission for people to have ingress and egress across the grounds to reach each event, he said.

This baseless prosecution is the greatest threat to the Republic since 1812.
— Jonathon Moseley

Moseley proposed a stipulation that both sides in the case agree none of the demonstrators or the defendants opened the Columbus Doors on Jan. 6 and that the government strike three paragraphs of the indictment that refer to defendants entering the Capitol because they are “untrue and withdrawn.”

Prosecutors refused that proposal.

News of the Columbus Doors issue comes as more video was released from the protective court seal. It shows large groups of Jan. 6 protesters peacefully streaming into the U.S. Capitol through wide-open doors. Among them was Rabbi Mike Stepakoff, who spent about five minutes inside the Capitol, doing nothing more than looking around and taking photos.

On his way out, Stepakoff stopped to shake hands with a police officer, and told him “Thank you for your service, we love you, and God bless you,” according to his attorney, Marina Medvin.

Rabbi Stepakoff was charged with entering and remaining in a restricted building, disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building, violent entry and disorderly conduct in a Capitol building, and parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building, all misdemeanors.

Stepakoff pleaded guilty to the parading charge and received 12 months of probation. The other charges were dismissed. The government sought to punish him with a jail term “for events he did not partake in, for destruction and violence he did not witness, for severity he did not experience, and for an effect he did not cause nor could foresee,” Medvin said.

———————————————————————————-

There is so much hyperbole in the indictment that the DOJ’s own video refutes it’s not funny –Phoenix.

Loading

687
Categories
Elections Politics

George Soros Pours $125 Million Into Dem. Super PAC Ahead of 2022 Midterms

Views: 42

By Jack Phillips for The Epoch Times

Left-wing billionaire George Soros handed over $125 million to a Democrat-aligned super PAC to boost Democrat groups and candidates ahead of the 2022 midterm elections.

The controversial 91-year-old investor confirmed to Politico on Friday his plans, saying the large donation to Democracy PAC, which he set up in 2019 as his main political action committee to support Democrats, is a “long-term investment” beyond the 2022 elections.

Soros said that the new infusion of funding will back pro-democracy “causes and candidates, regardless of political party” and who are involved in “strengthening the infrastructure of American democracy: voting rights and civic participation, civil rights and liberties, and the rule of law.”

Soros’s son, Alexander Soros, will serve as Democracy PAC’s president. The younger Soros issued a statement to news outlets about the development, immediately making reference to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach.

According to his statement, Soros said he believes there is an existential “threat to our democracy” by alleged attempts to “discredit and undermine our electoral process.”

“It is a generational threat that cannot be addressed in just one or two election cycles,” Alex Soros said. “Democracy PAC is now positioned to pursue its mission of preserving and protecting our democracy well into the future.”

Democracy PAC’s spending will be uploaded on Monday, Jan. 31, after it files with the Federal Elections Commission, according to Politico.

In recent years, Soros has courted controversy for his donations to left-wing candidates, including district attorneys who have promoted and enforced policies that critics say allow criminals and repeat offenders to be allowed back on the streets. Soros in May 2021 gave $1 million to the Color of Change PAC, whose website explicitly calls for “defund[ing] the police,” according to Federal Election Commission records.

Soros also contributed some $300,000 to Chicago District Attorney Kim Foxx for her first campaign in 2016 and another $2 million for her reelection in November 2021, records show, according to the New York Post. He’s also provided funds to controversial Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon, who is facing a recall after critics say his office has taken a soft stance on crime, as well as providing $1 million to newly elected Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, among others.

Earlier in January, Bragg, a Democrat, announced in a memorandum (pdf) that he will not prosecute certain offenses, including marijuana misdemeanor, not paying public transportation fare, trespassing except a fourth degree stalking charge, resisting arrest, obstructing governmental administration in certain cases, and prostitution.

And in 2020, Soros’ Open Society Foundations poured some $220 million into initiatives that seek to advance left-wing “racial justice” causes.

The Epoch Times has contacted Soros’ Open Society Foundations for comment on the $125 million donation.

Loading

325
Verified by MonsterInsights