Some Red Flags About ‘Red Flag’ Laws

Red-Flag-Laws-Beth-PP-Featured-9-24-19

Some Red Flags About ‘Red Flag’ Laws
Beth Alcazar – 09/24/2019

Some Red Flags About ‘Red Flag’ Laws

A terrible tragedy occurred in my home state of Alabama last month. As reported by the local news, a father and his son were involved in an argument that led to the 70-year-old father shooting his 45-year-old son in the chest in what he claims was self-defense.

Soon afterward, the Alabama chapter of Moms Demand Action shared the news — along with a comment — on social media. They posted:

’Investigators said James Adams and his son, Alfred Dewayne Adams, were involved in an argument Sunday night. They further stated they believe James told Alfred he was going to bed. Alfred then walked into the bedroom and James shot him in the chest. Some of the neighbors and some other family members can tell us about stuff that was happening through [sic] the years.’ This life could have been spared by utilizing a red flag law.

Some Questions

“This life could have been spared by utilizing a red flag law?” That’s quite a statement. And I wanted to post a few questions to Moms Demand Action. First of all, I wanted to ask: If the father truly used a weapon in self-defense, would a “red flag” law have disarmed him … and then spared the life of his violent son? Would the father be dead, then, in this particular situation? Beyond that, do “red flag” laws cover all weapons in the home? What if the suspect had decided to use a knife? Or what about prescription drugs or poisons? Does it cover a person’s bare hands and/or body? Could we confiscate those weapons, as well, whenever we feel there’s “some stuff that was happening through the years?”

Some Examples

And what about the terrible case in which a son killed his father and wounded his mother with a knife? Two months ago, in Arizona, the Yavapai County Sheriff’s Office reported that when the older couple returned home, “they noticed their 33-year-old son had consumed a large amount of beer. The parents argued with him over their drinking concern. He threw his phone at them and then went into the kitchen and grabbed two large knives. When he tried to stab his mother, his father intervened and attempted to restrain him while he was still in the kitchen. The son began attacking his dad. As the struggle moved from the kitchen into the living room, the son was able to stab his dad in the chest. The father collapsed to the floor.”

Or there’s this recent horror story from Illinois: A man in a Chicago suburb was arrested by local police after killing his own mother by stabbing her repeatedly with a samurai sword in the chest. Park Ridge Police had removed the murderer’s firearms two times, with the last time being in July 2019. So the suspect didn’t have a gun … but he still had evil intent. And he used whatever weapon he could find.

There’s also the atrocity from Nevada a few weeks ago in which a 36-year-old man bludgeoned a woman to death with a sledgehammer in what Las Vegas police said was a random attack at a laundromat.

I could go on. But I won’t. Perhaps you see the point.

Some Red Flags

Beyond the fear of just anyone pointing out someone else with a gun for no good reason or people wrongly having their firearms taken from them because of mistaken identity or possibly just being in the wrong place at the wrong time, there are so many red flags about “red flag” laws. Undoubtedly, we’d love to be able to stop crimes and keep bad people from harming or killing others. But this is not the movie Minority Report, in which police can employ some sort of psychic technology to arrest and convict murderers before they commit their crimes. Ultimately, we have to ask: Will “red flag” laws actually target violent people … or just people with guns? Because as the above examples (and countless others) show, the problem isn’t the firearms.

About Beth Alcazar

Author of Women’s Handgun & Self-Defense Fundamentals, associate editor of Concealed Carry Magazine and creator of the Pacifiers & Peacemakers column, Beth Alcazar has enjoyed nearly two decades of teaching and working in the firearms industry. She holds degrees in language arts, education and communication management and uses her experience and enthusiasm to share safe and responsible firearms ownership and usage with others. Beth is certified through the NRA as a Training Counselor, Chief Range Safety Officer and Certified Instructor for multiple disciplines. She is also a Certified Instructor through SIG Sauer Academy, ALICE Institute, DRAW School, TWAW and I.C.E. Training and is a USCCA Certified Instructor and Senior Training Counselor.


How many times have we heard about someone running over a bunch of people too. Even the car or truck can be a deadly weapon. If someone is dead set that they are going to kill, for whatever reason, they will find the tool to kill others with!

These gun grabbers want any possible way to take our protection from us. And these same gun grabbers are socialists/communists.

Impeachment can go more ways than one. These politicians that want to do away with the Second Amendment, work for us. When they were sworn in, they swore to honor and uphold the Constitution. Trying to do away with any of the Amendments to the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, is not honoring and upholding the Constitution. Violating one’s Oath of Office is usually grounds for them to be removed.

I say let’s remove their asses!
(Please note, I usually don’t comment on my own posts).

Advertisements

Trump Supporters Egged, Milkshaked While Holding ‘Free Hugs’ Sign in Seattle

Trump-supporters-egged-in-Seattle-640x480
(Trump supporters egged in Seattle Saleem n Dion/Youtube)

Watch: Trump Supporters Egged, Milkshaked While Holding ‘Free Hugs’ Sign in Seattle
ALANA MASTRANGELO29 Jul 20193,3:50
Trump-supporters-egged-in-Seattle-640x480

Two Trump-supporting YouTubers were egged and “milkshaked” in Seattle, Washington, last week while holding a sign that read, “Free Hugs from a Trump Supporter.”

YouTubers Saleem Juma and Dion Thompson were egged and milkshaked in the Capitol Hill neighborhood in Seattle last week while wearing red “Make America Great Again” hats, and holding a sign that read, “Free Hugs from a Trump Supporter.” The incident was caught on video.

“The entire idea behind something like a free hug sign is to bridge the political gap,” said Juma to Breitbart News. “We also wanted to show that Trump supporters are not what the mainstream media depict us to be.”

Watch Below:

The term “milkshaked” refers to when somebody gets a milkshake thrown at them, typically by a protester. Quilette editor Andy Ngo, for example, was milkshaked last month in Portland, Oregon by Antifa members. The milkshake, according to Portland police, contained “quick-drying cement.”

“We’ve been assaulted here four or five times now, just for wearing Trump hats,” Juma can be heard saying to a bystander who stopped to talk with the YouTubers.

“That’s ridiculous,” continued Juma, “You can not like Trump, but if you’re going to assault people over a political opinion, that’s a ‘you’ problem, not a ‘me’ problem.”

Seconds later, an alleged Antifa activist can be seen hurling eggs at the YouTubers, as well as the bystander who had stopped to talk to them. One egg was thrown directly into the bystander’s ear.

“This guy isn’t even conservative, he was just standing with us, asking questions,” Juma can be heard saying in the video.

“I’m bleeding,” said the bystander, “I’m bleeding in the ear right now. I just pulled out fucking, like, blood, right there. In my hand, right there.”

Thompson told Breitbart News that he and Juma went to the Capitol Hill neighborhood with their MAGA hats and “free hugs” sign to create a “man on the street” video, as the two typically engage in lighthearted social experiments for their YouTube channel.

“We got there and we basically thought this was going to be a feel-good video, but no sooner than ten or twenty minutes later, [Antifa members] started throwing eggs at us,” said Thompson. “This only shows how far the left has gone in our state, and it’s absolutely appalling.”

“These Antifa groups will attack anybody, and that video shows that they’re even willing to attack someone that’s not conservative,” added Thompson of the bystander who was also seen being egged on video, “They’re willing to attack anybody.”

Juma, who is Muslim, and Thompson, who is black, told Breitbart News that a local Antifa group has labeled the two “white supremacists” and “fascists” over their support for President Donald Trump, adding that Antifa has put flyers up around Seattle, which contain the labels alongside their names and photos.

64432743-2301973516552599-2639201813630812328-n-1024x1024
A poster in Seattle listing Trump supporters

Last month, Juma and Thompson were speaking at the University of Washington, when a man attempted to chain the doors to the event shut. The man, who was later arrested, acted after an Antifa call to action to disrupt the event.

The YouTubers also said that they called the police — several times — after they were first egged, but that officers did not arrive on the scene until after Juma and Thompson had left, a little over an hour later.

“We called the police a total of five times and they didn’t show up, that’s what’s crazy to me,” said Thompson. “The 911 dispatcher called Saleem after we left that area.”

Despite being egged and milkshaked — as well as the apparent slow response time by local police — Thompson says that he and Juma plan to continue creating YouTube videos as open conservatives, as he believes it is making a positive difference in his city.

“I’ll bet you anything that a lot of people are conservative,” said Thompson, “but they’re afraid to come up to us out fear of being identified by leftists.”

You can follow Alana Mastrangelo on Twitter at @ARmastrangelo, on Parler at @alana, and on Instagram.

Supreme Court Lets Trump Build the Wall; Lifts Injunction

trump-el-paso-rally-build-wall-getty-640x480
(EL PASO, TEXAS – FEBRUARY 11: U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a rally at the El Paso County Coliseum on February 11, 2019 in El Paso, Texas. U.S. Trump continues his campaign for a wall to be built along the border as the Democrats in Congress are asking for …Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

Supreme Court Lets Trump Build the Wall; Lifts Injunction
https://www.breitbart.com/border/2019/07/26/supreme-court-lets-trump-build-the-wall-lifts-injunction/
JOEL B. POLLAK26 Jul 201911,830

The U.S. Supreme Court allowed President Donald Trump to begin building the wall on the U.S.-Mexico border using emergency funds, lifting an injunction Friday that had been imposed by a district court in California and upheld by the Ninth Circuit.
After Congress refused to appropriate enough funding to build a barrier along the border earlier this year, President Trump declared a national emergency to allow the administration to access more money. In total, he ordered $8 billion spent — though, as Breitbart News pointed out, only $3.6 billion needed an emergency declaration.

The president was exultant on Twitter:

Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump
Wow! Big VICTORY on the Wall. The United States Supreme Court overturns lower court injunction, allows Southern Border Wall to proceed. Big WIN for Border Security and the Rule of Law!

126K
6:37 PM – Jul 26, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy
56.7K people are talking about this

The decision was largely along partisan lines, with all five Republican-appointed justices voting to lift the injunction, while all three liberal justices were opposed. Justice Stephen Breyer sought to have it both ways, allowing the process to go forward but not the construction: “There is a straightforward way to avoid harm to both the Government and respondents while allowing the litigation to proceed. Allowing the Government to finalize the contracts at issue, but not to begin construction, would al- leviate the most pressing harm claimed by the Government without risking irreparable harm to respondents.”

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

“The Fraud Squad’s” Ilhan Omar Now Facing Up To 40 Years In Prison & Deportation If Steinberg’s Allegations About Her Past Are Proven To Be True In Court

Capture1453

“The Fraud Squad’s” Ilhan Omar Now Facing Up To 40 Years In Prison & Deportation If Steinberg’s Allegations About Her Past Are Proven To Be True In Court
POSTED BY: DEAN JAMES JULY 18, 2019
https://rightwingtribune.com/2019/07/18/the-fraud-squads/
Posted by Dean James at Right Wing Tribune

David Steinberg released his latest report on controversial Rep. Ilhan Omar on Thursday, it can be read in its entirety at PowerLineblog.com.

Jim Hoft’s, The Gateway Pundit suggests that: According to Steinberg there is credible evident that Ilhan Omar and her family changed their name to illegally enter the United States back in 1995.

There are also allegations that suggests that Ilhan Omar, from that time forward, through her time as an adult, has continued to break United States law. Steinberg believes Rep. Omar committed perjury at least eight times, beginning as early as 2009. If proven in a court of law, the charges against the Muslim Democrat Rep could mean up to 40 years of prison time and/or even forced deportation.

If Steinberg’s research and allegations prove to be true, it would sure seem that Ilhan Omar has no regard for US law and yet there she is, “serving” in Congress representing Minnesota, voting on what becomes the law of the land in the greatest nation on Earth and is even a sitting member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

This story is developing quickly and David Steinberg has reported today on Ilhan’s alleged criminal activity.

Again, if the allegations are proven, it would sure seem that the Minnesotan Rep has no qualms about lying on federal documents. I’m not an attorney and I could be wrong, but that sounds like the “F” word to me … FRAUD.

Powerline.com Reported: Please read the verified evidence below — and read it alongside the three years of verified evidence published by Scott Johnson, Preya Samsundar, and myself (our work is linked here https://twitter.com/realDSteinberg/status/1095789152589754377). The answers to those questions about 2009 appear to give probable cause to investigate Omar for eight instances of perjury, immigration fraud, marriage fraud, up to eight years of state and federal tax fraud, two years of federal student loan fraud, and even bigamy.
To be clear: The facts describe perhaps the most extensive spree of illegal misconduct committed by a House member in American history.

David Steinberg wraps up his article with the following list of possible crimes Ilhan Omar may have committed:

Consider the disturbingly inadequate evidence used to obtain FISA warrants on members of Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. Consider that Democratic representatives have demanded that Attorney General William Barr release grand jury testimony — itself an illegal act.

Yet here we have:

Verifiable UK and U.S. marriage records

Verifiable address records

Time-stamped, traceable, archived online communications (Convictions and settlements based upon social media evidence are commonplace, Anthony Weiner being a notable example)

Background check confirmations of SSNs and birthdates

Archived court documents signed under penalty of perjury

Photos which can be examined to rule out digital manipulation

The 2019 Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board investigation, which found Omar filed illegal joint tax returns with a man who was not her husband in at least 2014 and 2015

Three years’ of evidence published across many articles — none of which has been shown to be incorrect, or have even been challenged with contradictory evidence from Rep. Omar or any other source

Perjury evidence that stands on its own — regardless of whom she married:

Long after June 2011, she was clearly in contact with the only man in either the U.S. or the UK with the same name and birthdate as the man she married. She was clearly in contact with several people who were in contact with him.

Further, Preya Samsundar did contact him, published how she managed to contact him, and published his email admitting to being photographed with Omar in London in 2015. To be clear: Omar was legally married to an “Ahmed Nur Said Elmi” at the time she was photographed next to a man who admits his name is Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, and that he is in the photo.

Samsundar published all of this information on how to contact Ahmed Nur Said Elmi a few months before Omar swore to that nine-question court document.

Rep. Omar has refused all inquiries from her constituents, elected officials, and media outlets to provide any specific evidence contradicting even a single allegation suggested by three years of now-public information.

In fact, Omar has responded by making information less available:

In August 2016, after Scott Johnson and Preya Samsundar posted the allegations, Omar’s verified social media accounts were taken offline.

Ahmed Nur Said Elmi’s social media accounts were also taken offline.

When the accounts returned, a large amount of potentially incriminating evidence had verifiably been deleted.

I found and published at least ten additional “before and after” instances of evidence still being deleted in 2018.

Omar has released carefully worded, Clintonian statements that denigrate those seeking answers from her as racists. Yet she has repeatedly refused to answer questions or issue anything other than public relations statements.

I have a large amount of information that we have not published for reasons including the protection of sources.

Sources have expressed fear regarding published video and photo evidence (https://twitter.com/realDSteinberg/status/1102349426771853312 confirming threats from Omar’s campaign team. These sources have shared other evidence of threats. I have contacted the federal authorities to share this and other unpublished information. Providing knowingly false information to the DOJ is a serious crime.

I believe Scott Johnson, Preya Samsundar, and me, with our three years of articles, columns and posts, have provided more than enough evidence to give law enforcement authorities probable cause to open an investigation. Now would be the chance for law enforcement, and especially for Rep. Ilhan Omar’s House colleagues, to make a sincere stand against corruption and for the uniform application of the law.

The Gateway Pundit Reported: Once Again… It should be noted that by American law — When a marriage fraud is discovered, not only might the immigrant face severe immigration consequences, but both members of the marrying couple may face criminal penalties… An immigrant who is found to have committed marriage fraud would likely be removed from the United States (deported).

Please read this incredible report written by David Steingberg at Power Line today
Join us at SPREELY if you want REAL NEWS without the leftist censorship!

Dean James at Right Wing Tribune

God Bless.

Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you, we appreciate it!
FACEBOOK HAS B

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Chief of Staff Saikat Chakrabarti wore a t-shirt bearing the face of Subhas Chandra Bose, a staunch collaborator of Adolf Hitler and his Nazi regime.

chandra-bose
AOC’s Chief of Staff Wears Shirt Supporting Fascist Nazi Collaborator.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Chief of Staff Saikat Chakrabarti wore a t-shirt bearing the face of Subhas Chandra Bose, a staunch collaborator of Adolf Hitler and his Nazi regime.

AOC’s Chief of Staff Wears Shirt Supporting Fascist Nazi Collaborator.

By Ian Miles Cheong
July 9, 2019

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Chief of Staff has shown support for a controversial Indian leader known for his long-time collaboration with both Imperial Japan and Adolf Hitler.

Bose described his ideology as “a synthesis of what modern Europe calls socialism and fascism.”

Saikat Chakrabarti, who previously supported Bernie Sanders’ bid for the White House in 2016, entered public politics with a series of tweets slamming Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for belittling her freshman colleagues and losing to the Republicans.

D-rv-AAXs-AAs8-Ko
Following his brief brush with fame, the AOC staffer has posed in a t-shirt printed with the likeness of early 20th century politician Subhas Chandra Bose.

As twice-elected leader of the Indian National Congress, Bose called for the violent overthrow of India’s British government, but was forced to resign following opposition from Mohandas Gandhi.

At the dawn of the Second World War, Bose established diplomatic ties with authoritarian regimes, including the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, and Imperial Japan.

Bose was a fierce proponent of both Hitler’s national socialist ideology and Stalin’s version of communism. Bose described his ideology as “a synthesis of what modern Europe calls socialism and fascism.” During his exile from India, Bose penned laws that demanded a death sentence for anyone who defied his future rule. He intended to rule India for at least 20 years following its liberation from British rule.

Despite this, Bose continues to be a celebrated figure amongst Indian nationalists.

At the height of the war, Bose led the self-styled Indian National Army with heavy assistance from Imperial Japan.

He made use of slave labor made up of prisoners of war captured by the Japanese, and conscripted Indian POWs into the role of shock troops to support the Japanese invasion of Asia. His military campaigns against the British Commonwealth and Allied forces in the region were failures.
Subhas-Chandra-Bose-meeting-Adolf-Hitler
Chandra Bose meeting Hitler, 1942 (Wikimedia Commons)

Bose died in a plane crash in August 1945, just days before Japan’s unconditional surrender to the United States of America.

Despite his failures, he continues to be a celebrated figure among some Indian nationalists and members of the diaspora – among them Saikat Chakrabarti, who appears to idolize the controversial figure.

It is not known if Chakrabarti is aware of the full scope of Bose’s political leanings – or if he is simply wearing a shirt with Bose’s face on it the same way leftists celebrate the memory of Che Guevara by wearing t-shirts with his face on them.
D-4n1-LHXk-AAKWu-T
Chakrabarti’s reverence for Chandra Bose is the perfect accompaniment to Ocasio-Cortez’s recent quoting of Argentina’s Eva Perón, whose sympathies for the Nazis are well documented.

Ian Miles Cheong is the managing editor of Human Events

Limbaugh on Mueller Remarks: ‘Do You Realize What an Abomination of the Justice System That Is?’

Mueller-Yes-But-No-640x480

Limbaugh on Mueller Remarks: ‘Do You Realize What an Abomination of the Justice System That Is?’
8,920
JEFF POOR29 May 20191,977
6:48

You can listen too Rush Limbaugh on the following link:
https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/05/29/limbaugh-on-mueller-remarks-do-you-realize-what-an-abomination-of-the-justice-system-that-is/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=daily&utm_content=links&utm_campaign=20190529

Wednesday on his nationally syndicated radio show, conservative talker Rush Limbaugh slammed Department of Justice special counsel Robert Mueller for his statement regarding whether or not President Donald Trump had committed obstruction of justice during his investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

Limbaugh called such a statement an “abomination” of the U.S. justice system.

Partial transcript as follows:

LIMBAUGH: You know, this is going to be very interesting because I went back during the break, I went back to the archives out there, and I found the attorney general on two separate occasions — they were both in the press conference — when he announced that Mueller’s report was in and that he had read the report and gave his four-page summary, it had some questions out there. The media asked questions. Of course, Mueller didn’t deign to take any questions. And we know why. Mueller doesn’t want any questions about the stuff he ignored.

Anyway. This is going to be a big bone of contention because Mueller made it plain today — in fact, I’ve got three Mueller sound bites. I’ve been looking for every reason in the world not to use ’em ’cause they just tick me off. This is going to be a big bone of contention because of what Barr has said on two separate occasions. I’ll get to what Barr has said after I play for you Mr. Integrity, Mr. Boy Scout, Mr. Honorable, Mr. Impeccable, Mr. They don’t come any better than this, Robert J. Mueller III.

MUELLER: As set forth in the report after that investigation, if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime. Beyond department policy we regarded by principles of fairness, it would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge. So that was Justice Department policy, those were the principles under which we operated, and from them we concluded that we would not reach a determination one way or the other about whether the president committed a crime. That is the office’s final position, and we will not comment on any other conclusions or hypotheticals about the president.

LIMBAUGH: Now, he actually was more emphatic than that, even, on the Justice Department guidelines. By the way, Office of Legal Counsel is the lawyers for the lawyers. You know, DOJ is the Department of Justice, but even they have lawyers who tell the other lawyers what the law is and what procedures are, and it’s the Office of Legal Counsel that determines what the DOJ can charge and not charge. They have determined since 1979 that you cannot indict a sitting president.

And Mueller made it clear over and over again today that that’s the reason they didn’t pursue the president is because of those guidelines. Can’t indict a sitting president, so why do it? That’s why I was screaming when he said this. “What the hell was this for then?” If from the very beginning you were operating under guidelines that say you can’t accuse him, you can’t charge him, you can’t indict him, then what the hell has been going on here?

Well, Attorney General Barr on two separate occasions has said that Robert Mueller told him three different times Mueller specifically was asked by Barr, “Is your reason for not charging Trump anything to do with the Office of Legal Counsel guidelines?” And Barr says that Mueller said three times, “No, that has nothing to do with it.” Barr is on record on two occasions saying that Mueller told him three times the Office of Legal Counsel guidelines have nothing to do with his decision not to indict the president or not to link the president to crimes.

And today Mueller goes out there and says the only reason we didn’t — he implied — the only reason we didn’t is because of those guidelines. And then what else he said here? You know, I promised I was gonna drop this, but I played this sound bite and I get revved up again. “As set forth in the report after the investigation, if we had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.”

Do you realize what an abomination of the justice system that is? I say this without any partisanship or favoritism toward Trump here at all. This just turns our system of justice on its head. It really does, folks. If we had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.

How about this? “If we had confidence the president clearly did commit a crime, we would have said so.” That’s the way it’s supposed to be. “If we had evidence the president committed a crime, we would have damn well said so.” It’s not, “If we had confidence the president did not commit a crime, we would have said so.” That’s not what the job is. And then he goes on to say we couldn’t have indicted him anyway because of Justice Department guidelines.

But then this next: “We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime.” Well, go tell that to Jerry Nadler and Elizabeth Warren and the rest, ’cause they sure as hell think that you have. “We did not make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime.”

Yes, you have! You have done everything you can to imply that he did and that you just couldn’t find it! That’s what makes me so livid. This guy in his righteousness sitting here saying that “We did not make a determination as to whether the president committed a crime.”

“Beyond department policy, which is the Office of Legal Counsel guidelines, we were guided by the principles of fairness.” Ha. What an absolute crock. There hasn’t been anything fair about this from the moment it began! “It would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the charge.”

That didn’t stop you from charging the Russians! They’re not gonna get their day in court because you can’t get them extradited, and you knew they weren’t gonna come face your charges. That’s why you could charge ’em with anything. You could charge them with blowing up human feces in San Francisco, and they wouldn’t come face the charges because Russia wouldn’t indict ’em.

So you charged those Russians knowing full well they would never have a chance to refute and to prove their innocence. So what the hell do you care, Mr. Mueller, about somebody having a chance to prove their innocence? You clearly, by innuendo, wanted to destroy these Russian groups and give them no chance whatsoever to answer your charges. And yet that fairness is what prevents you from charging the president. “So that was Justice Department policy. Those were the principles under which we operated.” Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Take a look here what has actually happened in this so-called investigation. James Comey, July 5th, 2016, press conference, lists all the crimes Hillary Clinton committed, lists all the crimes that they know she did! And then said, “But we’re not charging her because we don’t think she intended to do any of this.”

Now, we move to the Trump investigation, “We can’t find a damn thing the guy did, but we are certain he intended to.” What the hell is this, folks? They exonerate Hillary because they think she didn’t intend to do what she did. They can’t find that Trump did anything, but they think he intended to do what he didn’t do, and so we need to impeach him.

If this is the best Washington has, if this is the top of the heap when it comes to integrity and honor and decency and all that, then we have run out of decency and honor in Washington, D.C. This is such a crock, I can’t even begin to aptly, accurately describe the anger, the rage, and the emotions here that I am feeling and not get profane in doing so.

Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor

https://www.climatesciencenews.com/

I cannot possibly post everything that I would like to tonight.
I am going to steer you where you might be interested:

RECENT NEWS & ARTICLES

Bogus “global warming” lawsuits against Big Oil tossed by judge… demanded oil companies pay for rising sea levels
07/01/2018 / By Vicki Batts
https://www.climatesciencenews.com/2018-07-01-bogus-global-warming-lawsuits-against-big-oil-tossed-by-judge-rising-sea-levels.html

The “global warming” hoax: 30 years of failed predictions that never happened
06/26/2018 / By JD Heyes
https://www.climatesciencenews.com/2018-06-26-the-global-warming-hoax-30-years-failed-predictions.html

City of Berkeley demands forced depopulation to halt climate change “crisis” that it claims is worse than the Holocaust
06/20/2018 / By Vicki Batts
https://www.climatesciencenews.com/2018-06-20-city-of-berkeley-demands-forced-depopulation-to-halt-climate-change-crisis.html

Global warming / Climate change is dead, so when can conservatives say: “We told you so”?
06/12/2018 / By News Editors
https://www.climatesciencenews.com/2018-06-12-global-warming-climate-change-is-dead-so-when-can-conservatives-say-we-told-you-so.html

Counterthink video: Mike Adams interviews Marc Morano on the greatest “science” hoax of our time: climate change
05/29/2018 / By Ralph Flores
https://www.climatesciencenews.com/2018-05-29-mike-adams-interviews-marc-morano-greatest-science-hoax-climate-change.html

Managing your personal carbon footprint is like managing your health or weight; commitment and consistency lead to slow and steady improvements
05/25/2018 / By Zoey Sky
https://www.climatesciencenews.com/2018-05-25-managing-your-personal-carbon-footprint-is-like-managing-your-health-or-weight.html

Cult-minded “climate change” scientists are making ALL of science look like a fanatical religion rather than science
05/18/2018 / By Isabelle Z.
Global-Warming
https://www.climatesciencenews.com/2018-05-18-cult-minded-climate-change-scientists-are-making-all-of-science-look-like-a-fanatical-religion.html

The following can be found at:
https://www.climatesciencenews.com/

Seaweed could save California’s coastline by reducing ocean acidification
05/18/2018 / By Janine Acero

Researchers find that the shape of tropical forests determine their stability; to prevent collapse of these ecosystems we must not alter the contours
05/16/2018 / By Ralph Flores

The latest left-wing ecological insanity: Clear-cutting forests to burn the trees for “green” energy
05/06/2018 / By Ethan Huff

Rebuilding the Amazon forest with chocolate: How cocoa could be the key to making South America green again
05/06/2018 / By Edsel Cook

PROOF that liberals despise real science: EPA’s Scott Pruitt attacked for daring to require full transparency of scientific evidence behind EPA regulations
05/04/2018 / By Ethan Huff

Geoengineering may destroy us all: Hysterical climate change scientists now trying to DIM the sun through planned atmospheric pollution
05/03/2018 / By Ethan Huff

Liberals freak out as EPA plans to bring full transparency to the science behind its regulatory decisions
05/02/2018 / By Ethan Huff

“Climate change” hoax starting to crumble as scientists admit doom projections were totally wrong
04/28/2018 / By Vicki Batts

Electric vehicles to become more affordable than gas guzzling counterparts in just 7 years: Report
04/28/2018 / By David Williams

What a concept: EPA administrator Pruitt to implement new rule that the agency can only use REAL science when making policy
04/25/2018 / By JD Heyes

China plans to finance and build thousands of coal-fired power plants worldwide
04/25/2018 / By David Williams

Scientists are “farming” coral reefs in an effort to increase their survival
04/24/2018 / By Ralph Flores

Researchers discover ways to obtain energy from marine currents more efficiently
04/24/2018 / By David Williams