No Science to Support Mandatory Face Masks! What does it take to make the sheeple mad enough to wake up?

There Is No Science to Support Mandatory Face Masks. A Symbol of Social Submission?

As the distraction of BLM/Antifa riots and the coronavirus have consumed much attention and energy, the social engineering agenda of the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset has taken a giant step forward in establishing the mandatory face mask as a symbol of submission to their dehumanizing agenda.  Beyond Orwellian, the face mask is being used as a guise to re shape our perception of reality in acceptance of a scientific dictatorship as an integral part of a looming totalitarian globalist agenda.

As Democratic Governors have played a leading role in advancing the myth that face masks will save lives, Colorado Gov Jared Polis announced his decision on July 16th to mandate face masks to be worn in all public places in Colorado; thus codifying a medical tyranny world view.

In a July 12th Facebook page, Polis stated that “The emerging scientific data is clear” that wearing a mask protects others and reduces the risk of contracting Coronavirus.  Polis then referred to those resistant to a face mask as a “selfish bastard.”

During Polis’s four page Executive Order issued on July 19th, there is not one mention of the ‘emerging science’ as support for his decision to mandate face masks; nor does Polis discuss how health effects will improve with masking except as “mitigating effects of the pandemic.” In announcing the mandate, Polis declared that “Wearing a mask is not a political statement. I don’t know how, in anybody’s mind, this became a game of political football.”

If the Governor is truly at a loss as to how masking or other lockdown requirements became a political football, he has not been paying attention.  Consider the following: on March 20th, California became the first state in the country to order a Lockdown which was quickly followed by other States with Democratic Governors. To date, a majority of those Governors (21 out of 24) have all approved the mandatory wearing of face masks, albeit without applying any science.  It is the arbitrary ‘shutdown’ of business as well as onerous personal requirements (such as social distancing) with a State adopting  oppressive dictatorial behavior as if they have the right to make personal decisions about any one life.

Only four states with Republican Governors, some of which may be considered RINOs, have also adopted similar Executive Orders (Alabama, Arkansas, Massachusetts, Maryland).

*

If CV is merely a variation of an infectious virus, sunshine and warm weather should have already limited its impact; reducing its spread and exposure.  Instead, as Red States attempt to re open  (ie Texas and Florida), sudden intense  CV ‘hot spots’ flare which forces the State to delay and increase its shut down requirements.  Given an advanced radio frequency weapon ability, those ‘hot spots’ may have been generated by 5G at the millimeter level on the electro magnetic Spectrum.

If, in fact, science is not the prime reason for mandatory face masks; that is, if face masks do not provide safety from contagion, then why mandate face masks at all?  What other purpose does a face mask have but to protect the wearer or to inhibit spreading  the virus?  Without evidence that masks have positively reduced exposures and thereby fatalities, then the true purpose of the mandate becomes a more nefarious political and partisan gesture of psychological manipulation and control.

New England Journal of Medicine

On April 1st the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine published its Universal Masking Report including the following highlights:

  • We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection.
  • The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal.
  • In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.
  • The extent of marginal benefit of universal masking over and above these foundational measures is debatable.“
  • “What is clear, however, is that universal masking alone is not a panacea.
  • It is also clear that masks serve symbolic roles. Masks are not only tools, they are also talismans that may help increase health care workers’ perceived sense of safety, well-being, and trust in their hospitals. Although such reactions may not be strictly logical, we are all subject to fear and anxiety, especially during times of crisis. One might argue that fear and anxiety are better countered with data and education than with a marginally beneficial mask

No Scientific Support for Mask Wearing

Renowned nutritionist Dr. Joseph Mercola has recently reversed his earlier support of face masks and interviewed Dr. Denis Rancourt, PhD who examined the issue on behalf of the Ontario Civil Liberties Association.  Rancourt conducted extensive research with an emphasis on masks and did a thorough review of science literature concentrating on whether any evidence exists that masks can reduce infection risk of viral respiratory disease.  As a result of examining many controlled trials with verified outcomes,  he found no statistical advantage to wearing a mask or not wearing a mask and that masks do no inhibit viral spread.

Rancourt asserted that “there is no evidence that masks are of any utility for preventing infection by either stopping the aerosol particles from coming out, or from going in. You’re not helping the people around you by wearing a mask, and you’re not helping yourself avoid the disease by wearing a mask. In addition, Rancourt explained that “Infectious viral respiratory diseases primarily spread via very fine aerosol particles that are in suspension in the air.  Any mask that allows you to breathe therefore allows for transmission of aerosolized viruses.”

In conclusion, Rancourt stated

we’re in a state right now where the society is very gradually evolving towards totalitarianism.  As soon as you agree with an irrational order, an irrational command that is not science-based, then you are doing nothing to bring back society towards the free and democratic society that we should have.”

While the ACLU remains absent, OCLA (Ontario Civil Liberties Association) recommends Civil Disobedience against Mandatory Mask Laws.  If you are not comfortable with civil disobedience  and  your local food markets all require a face mask, don’t deny yourself the healthy food you and your family need – but DO find ways to  register your dissent against being forced to wear a face mask. Write a Letter to the Editor and contact all of your elected political leaders.  Be sure they understand  your objections that you will not comply with their unconstitutional and immoral behavior.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Renee Parsons served on the ACLU’s Florida State Board of Directors and as president of the ACLU Treasure Coast Chapter. She has been an elected public official in Colorado, an environmental lobbyist for Friends of the Earth and a staff member of the US House of Representatives in Washington DC. She can be found at reneedove3@yahoo.com.

Featured image: A woman wearing a face mask is seen in the subway in Milan, Italy, March 2, 2020. (Photo by Daniele Mascolo/Xinhua)


Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Federal lawsuit calls Tulsa’s mask ordinance unconstitutional and unhealthy for citizens

Federal lawsuit calls Tulsa’s mask ordinance unconstitutional and unhealthy for citizens
First amended complaint attached  –  read my www.Virus-Lies.com for more info
http://tulsabeacon.com/mask-lawsuit/
(Masks cause hypoxia by reducing Oxygen below 19.5% – in violation of OSHA directions – causes headaches, dizzyness, etc)
Doctor Robert Zoellner, Clay Clark, Doctor James Meehan, MD, and several Tulsa-based business owners have filed a federal lawsuit against Tulsa Mayor G.T. Bynum, the Executive Director of the Tulsa Health Department, Bruce Dart and the Tulsa City Council to immediately repeal the mask mandates that they claim are causing healthy people to become sick while trying to prevent the spread of a disease that is not a deadly threat to children and the vast majority of the general population.
According to the lawsuit, “The Court should invalidate and repeal Ordinance No. 24408 of the City of Tulsa (the ‘Tulsa Mask Mandate’) because face coverings create an ‘oxygen-deficient atmosphere,’ which the United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) defines as an ‘atmosphere with an oxygen content below 19.5% by volume.’  Doctors, scientists, and other medical professionals will line up in this court to demonstrate and testify that face-covering lower oxygen levels in the immediate atmosphere of someone wearing face coverings to less than the Department of Labor’s required 19.5%, normally within less than ten (10) seconds.”
The Tulsa businessmen and doctors cite OSHA’s website that reads, “…rulemaking record for the Respiratory Protection Standard clearly justifies adopting the requirement that air breathed by employees must have an oxygen content of at least 19.5 percent.  A lesser concentration of oxygen in employees’ breathing air could endanger them physiologically and diminish their ability to cope with other hazards that may be present in the workplace.”
Zoellner and Clark cite U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, who recently stated, “If you look at under age 18, the mortality rate is about one in a million, if you look at age 18-45, the mortality rate is about 10 in 100,000. Above that, it increases, but interestingly, it is still pretty small, and the vast majority – even people up to 65 years of age, it may well be between 95 and 99 percent have a very mild case of this.
“So I’m not saying it’s a benign disease, people do get sick and die from this. But your chances are good.  We shouldn’t live in fear forever.  We should take normal precautions, we should assess the risks.  People who are older should take more precautions, but we shouldn’t, you know, cover the faces of our children and say you’re gonna have to live your whole life with your mask on.
“We shouldn’t do that, and the government definitely shouldn’t mandate it.”


Other Lawsuits:
1.      When informed that mandatory masking was a fraud, and therefore a felony, the Orange County board of Supervisors abandoned their mandatory mask policy, back on June 9th, 2020. www.thehealthyamerican.org
2.    The Florida Civil Rights Coalition has filed a lawsuit against Palm Beach County, citing the county’s mask mandate is “unlawful” and “infringes upon the well-settled constitutionally protected freedoms of over a million Palm Beach County residents.”
www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lawsuit-filed-against-palm-beach-county-for-mask-mandate/ar-BB16aw3o
3.      Leon County Florida was sued over Mask Mandates:
https://tallahasseereports.com/2020/06/25/lawsuit-filed-to-stop-leon-county-mask-mandate/
4.      Georgia Governor Kemp sued Atlanta to stop them from illegally enforcing a local mask mandate, then changed to issue an executive order to stop them:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/georgia-governor-drops-lawsuit-against-atlanta-mayor-over-mask-mandate
5.      A lawsuit filed in federal court challenges the constitutionality of Minnesota’s mask mandate by a group of Republican lawmakers and voters, including the watchdog group Minnesota Voters Alliance:
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/08/04/lawsuit-challenges-state-mask-mandate
6.      Conservatives sue Gov. Abbott to stop Texas’ mask mandate from being enforced:
https://www.star-telegram.com/news/politics-government/article243987762.html
7.     Lawsuit seeks to stop Ocala Florida face mask ordinance.  https://www.ocala.com/story/news/local/2020/08/14/lawsuit-seeks-to-stop-ocala-face-mask-ordinance/113192692/
8.     Harris Co. judge sued over mandatory mask order.  abc13.com/lina-hidalgo-sued-mask-houston/6125071/

  1. Lawsuit filed against the city of St. Augustine for Jeffrey Nager. who has asthma issues, which are aggravated by wearing a mask.   https://www.staugustine.com/story/news/coronavirus/2020/07/09/mask-mandates-spark-political-debate-in-st-johns-county/112699758/

masks

The facts I present in my www.Virus-Lies.com with links to evidence by Doctors, etc
Masks don’t stop tiny Viruses & small moisture: Link12345pdf
Masks make you sick: rebreathing CO2 & germs: Dr BlaylockLink2
Tests give false positives and test wrong thing: Link123
HydroxyChloroQuine HCQ best cure, not used so more Deaths:Link
If HCQ not used, Ventilators don’t work, but KILL: Link
Lockdowns only ruin Economy – more suicides & failed businesses.
CDC Director admits Lockdown Suicides More Threat than Covid 1
Deaths down & are lower than normal Flu

Deaths from Chlamydia Pneumonia Bacteria, not Virus: Link1,Link2
CDC admits 94% of Reported Deaths not “from” Covid19: Info
No Pandemic or Epidemic – only about 10,000 deaths “from” Covid19 now alleged (not 2 million or even 180,000), but deaths really from bacteria not treated with HCQ, usually Ventilator deaths

CovidDeaths_EthicalSkeptic-Just-Chart

More Tests give More “Cases” – So What?
Tests give false positives and test wrong thing: Link123

===============================================================================

A Must Read! Cease and Desist Your Mandatory Mask Policy by Jason Hommel

CEASE AND DESIST YOUR MANDATORY MASK POLICY

Jason Hommel
(530) 559 2974

 

CEASE AND DESIST YOUR MANDATORY MASK POLICY

On 7-31-2020, just before 1:30pm in the afternoon, my wife and I were asked to leave the Sprouts Store located on 82nd and Quaker, in Lubbock, TX, because they specifically said they do not recognize medical exemptions to wearing masks. We were wearing medical exemption badges, which are not required by law to be worn, to help inform others. I was given a store policy sheet, and I was invited to shop online, from home.

I hereby demand that you cease and desist requiring wearing masks to shop at your stores owned and operated by Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc.

I hereby demand that you stop violating the law in numerous ways, as follows.

  1. You are in violation of both the City of Lubbock and the State of Texas masking laws, both of which make provisions for medical exemptions. You are not allowing medical exemptions, in violation of both laws, laws which you are fraudulently attempting to enforce.

1A. You are not a police officer. You are not empowered to enforce laws.

  1. You are practicing medicine without a licence, which illegal in all States in America, which is a felony, and carries with it a prison term from 1 to 8 years. A mask to prevent viral transmission is a medical intervetion that carries with it risks, such as reduced oxygen intake, increased CO2 intake, increased risk of viral and bacterial and fungal lung infections, fungal face infections, and potential brain damage from reduced oxygen. A list of up to 131 scientific articles and reasons to avoid wearing a mask can be found online at https://revealingfraud.com/2020/05/health/refuse/ You are overriding both the science, the law, and other doctor’s orders, in overriding the legal medical exemptions, without a medical license, in violation of numerous laws. When engaged in practicing medicine without a licence, you can be sued for damages that your advice might cause, there not need be any actual damages. You can be sued for “possible brain damage” that often carries rewards exceeding $1-10 million dollars in damages, and you can be held personally and corporately liable. I hereby again claim my own medical exemption, and I’m not required by law to tell you my medical history, nor are you allowed to ask, because of medical privacy laws protected by HIPAA. But my medical history is published online at revealingfraud.com anyway.

2.(A) Medical Professionals can only “prescribe” medical procedures, which means to give advice. They are not even legally allowed to mandate a medical procedure. In order for Doctors to mandate a medical procedure, they first need to either obtain a medical power of attorney document over a patient, and/or declare the person unconscious and/or unfit to decline a life saving procedure. You neither have a medial power of attorney over me, nor have I hired you to be my doctor, nor am I unconscious. Nor am I mentally compromised in any way. By wearing a mask, you restrict your own oxygen, and you mentally compromise yourself. You might want to take off your mask, and take a few deep breaths to get oxygen to your brain, to help you understand the rest of this.

  1. You are violating the ADA Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, that requires that you make reasonable accommodation to those with disabilities that could include numerous medical disabilities that could prevent people from wearing masks, such as, but not limited to, the following: asthma, allergies, anemia, fungal infections, blood clotting disorders, diabetes, PTSD, autism, pre existing lung problems, “being a human”, and needing to meet basic OSHA air quality requirements of more then 19.5% oxygen, and less then 400 parts per million CO2. Masks have been shown to reduce oxygen to 18% and increase CO2 to over 10,000 ppm.

3.(A) To help you understand the level of offense of your illegal discrimination, try demanding that black people not enter your store on the basis that give off particles that are offensive, and requiring them to shop at home. That is as offensive as refusing service to those not wearing masks for reasons of a medical exemption. The ADA also requires you to make reasonable accommodations for people with a religious exemption to wearing masks, because discrimination based on religion is also illegal.

  1. Your demand that customers wear masks, with no medical exemptions, fraudulently assumes that masks work. They do not. Air easily slips around all masks, such as the very large air gaps around the nose, cheeks and chin. Furthermore, the particle size of the coronavirus is typically 1/1000th of the size of the spacing between threads of the mask itself. A coronavirus is 0.1 microns. Holes in cloth masks are up to 100 microns. If you “zoom in” this is like expecting two threads, spaced as far apart as three football fields, 900 feet, to filter out a shoe the size of one foot. That is insane. Furthermore, there are 1000 microns per millimeter. The air gaps around the mask, by the nose, if they are half a centimeter, are 5000 microns. A coronavirus is 0.1 microns. The difference is 50,000 times in size. This gap is so big, and the virus is so small, it’s like two lines, 10 miles apart, (52,800 feet) trying to filter out a basketball (just under a foot). Mask wearing is mental insanity. In both theory and actual fact, masks cannot possibly work to do what you expect them to do, so your position is not based on science, but rather, irrational fear, and irrational expectations that masks work, when they cannot. Since your position is based on insanity and the fraud that masks work, it cannot be said to follow the law and be “reasonable”. Furthermore, restaurants are open, with up to 60-100 people eating at once, with nobody wearing a mask while eating, and that fully complies with the law. So how could one person not wearing a mask in a grocery store be a danger compared to that? Fraud also carries with it a prison sentence, as fraud is a felony.
  2. When informed that mandatory masking was a fraud, and therefore a felony, the Orange County board of Supervisors abandoned their mandatory mask policy, back on June 9th, 2020. https://www.thehealthyamerican.org/
  3. The COVID19 scare is a fraud, from top to bottom. Politicians and the Media are immune from the consequences of lying, but commercial stores have no such immunity from practicing fraud. COVID19 is fraud for the following reasons.

A. The test kits do not work. The tests have a 50% to 80% false positive rate.

B. The rate of positives has always been about 10%, from the very beginning of the crisis. The rate of people testing positive has not gone up, they have only increased the number and rate of tests given.

C. The test kits have been reported to be contaminated. June 23, 2020: https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200623/early-cdc-covid-19-test-kits-likely-contaminated Unswabbed swabs are reported to test positive.

Nurses’ Lawsuit Claims ‘Fabricated’ COVID-19 Tests at Georgia Hospital
Max Blau June 22, 2020 https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/932722

D. While “confirmed case” counts have been going up, there is no such thing as a “confirmed case” because the test kits say directly on them “not to be used for diagnostic purposes” and therefore a fraudulent test with a high false positive rate cannot “confirm” anything.

  1. To determine the lethality of any disease, they need to compare cases to deaths. Both numbers suffer from massive fraud. Regarding death counts:

A. The death counts are overinflated, as States have been directed by the CDC to include presumptive or presumed cases that would not even include the fraudulent test kit non confirmation, which, itself, over counts things with that false positive rate of from 50% to 80%. “COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death.” https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/coronavirus/Alert-2-New-ICD-code-introduced-for-COVID-19-deaths.pdf

Furthermore, Birx says government is classifying all coronavirus death cases as COVID19 caused deaths, regardless of the cause, such as underlying health issues. See point B for further corroboration. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/birx-says-government-is-classifying-all-deaths-of-patients-with-coronavirus-as-covid-19-deaths-regardless-of-cause

B. Other nations have determined that 99% of their “died with COVID” cases did not die “from COVID” as 99% of other patients were elderly and had from 1-4 other co-morbid chronic conditions. If that is true, it takes the real death rate down to nearly nothing. This was reported by Bloomberg, back on March 18th, which basically shows and admits that this is all a media hoax. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-18/99-of-those-who-died-from-virus-had-other-illness-italy-says

C. The real death counts are not higher than the rate of normal rates of pnumonia. People vastly overestimate their chances of “catching” COVID, and vastly overestimate their chances of death, with younger people, aged 18-34 giving the highest estimations, at 90% estimated chances of catching it, and a 20% chance of death if they do catch it. https://www.nber.org/papers/w27494.pdf see chart on p. 12. These estimates would have COVID killing about 328 million x .9 x .2 = 59 million Americans. Even the White House estimations of the deaths of 2 million Americans were vastly over exaggerated, and the man responsible for that model resigned in disgrace. The “official” death toll, which is grossly over exaggerated, for multiple reasons, as I am going over, stands at 137,922, per the CDC as of July 31: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm see Table 1. That is a total death rate of the population of 0.04%, which is substantially lower than the CDC’s latest death rate estimate last month of 0.26%. Typical flu deaths in a year vary from 50,000 to 80,000.

D. Death counts are inflated from putting people into a very risky coma plus a ventilator, and that process kills people from 88% to 90% of the time. https://ktla.com/news/nationworld/nearly-90-of-covid-19-patients-put-on-ventilators-in-new-yorks-largest-health-system-died-study-finds/

E. The real death rate could well be 137,922 x 1% (no comorbidities) x 50% due to false positives, which would be 689! Given that there is no higher overall death rate than normal, the risk from a fraudulent disease that is not increasing the total death rate is zero. A real pandemic would not require fraudulently overstating things at all levels, from test kits that don’t work, to fraudulently claiming an increase in the infected, to inflated death counts, to masks that don’t work.

F. The false pandemic is a “live exercise” planned in advance, in October 18th, 2019. https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/

  1. People with honor do not practice nor support games of fraud. If managers wish to stop participating in the COVID media lies, they may wish to remind their employer of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which makes it illegal to discriminate based on religious beliefs. Sections 703 A(1)(2). My own religious beliefs also prohibit me from participating in fraud, or from lying in any way.
  2. Managers of businesses cannot be hired to break the law. You may have been told by a supervisor to “enforce store policy”, but you cannot be hired to break the law nor be hired to commit one felony, let alone multiple felonies. You always have the right to tell your supervisor, “You cannot legally require me to break the law.” You may wish to present this letter to your immediate supervisors and/or human resources department, and/or legal department and/or corporate board and/or company owners.
  3. Even if you were a doctor, and a lawyer, and a police officer, you would still not have the right to demand that free people wear masks to shop at your store.
  4. Even if you petitioned congress to change all the laws above, you would still not have the right to trample on people’s Constitutional rights, and it would remain unwise to do so.
  5. Numerous “emergency COVID orders” have already been struck down as un-Constitutional in various other states.
  6. Several other large retailers in Lubbock, at their corporate level, such as Market Street United Supermarkets and Wal-Mart, have decided to honor medical exemptions to mask wearing, presumably because they have been informed of the legal issues involved, or maybe because they are already involved in litigation over it, and are engaged in actions designed to settle the disputes.
  7. After having been informed of the law, such as through a cease and desist letter like this one, if you continue to violate the law, it will be presumed that you are “willfully” violating the law, which often carries with it additional penalties, such as double the criminal prison sentence to be served, and/or double the civil fines to be paid.

Sincerely,

Jason Hommel

Post navigation

You know my response.  It would take one of the masks below, to protect you from a deadly disease spreading.  The stupid little masks that people wear, does not even cover their eyes. 
Is common sense so lacking for people?
 
Damn it sheeple wake up, you act like idiots.

fullfacemasks

McConnell: Pelosi Refuses to Release Impeachment Articles Because She’s Afraid, Unrelated to Fair Trial

Mc-Connell-Says-Pelosi-Is-Afraid-640x480
(Erin Schaff-Pool/Getty Images)

McConnell: Pelosi Refuses to Release Impeachment Articles Because She’s Afraid, Unrelated to Fair Trial
EDWIN MORA
19 Dec 2019 3:37
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/19/mcconnell-pelosi-refuses-to-release-impeachment-articles-because-shes-afraid-unrelated-to-fair-trial/

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) on Thursday lambasted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), often described as fearless and even never-daunted, as “too afraid” to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate that were approved mostly along party lines with three Democrats defecting.

On the Senate floor Thursday, McConnell accused Pelosi of suggesting “that House Democrats may be too afraid … to even transmit their shoddy work product to the Senate.”

Referring to the development as “comical,” McConnell said Democrats who stressed the urgency of the process now seem “content to sit on their hands.”

McConnell, one of the top Republican leaders who has been holding the party together against the impeachment-fueled onslaught against Trump and his allies, taunted Pelosi’s threat to withhold the articles of impeachment until the GOP agrees to a fair impeachment trial.

“This particular House of Representatives has let its partisan rage at this particular president create a toxic new precedent that will echo well into the future,” McConnell said from the Senate floor Thursday.

“Looks like the prosecutors are getting cold feet,” McConnell mused in remarks on the Senate floor after the House voted to impeach Trump along party lines.

Three Democrats defected, voting against at least one of the articles, while the Republicans remained together in their opposition.

House Democrats impeached Trump on abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. Trump joined the impeached president’s club as its third member.

Historically, the House sends the articles of impeachment approved in the House to the upper chamber — the Senate – for a trial.

Pelosi, however, appears to be doing what she knows best, playing legislative games. She has threatened that the Democrats would only send over the impeachment articles until she gets what she wants — the promise of a “fair” Senate process.

“We’ll make a decision… as we go along,” Pelosi told reporters Wednesday, adding that “we’ll see what the process will be on the Senate side,” Fox News reports.

“We have acted,” Pelosi continued, repeatedly refusing to commit to sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate. “Now, they’ll understand what their responsibilities are, and we’ll see what that is.”

Many Republicans have balked at Pelosi’s request because they believe Democrats denied them a fair trial while Pelosi sat by and watched the show.

McConnell’s speech on the Senate floor came after House Democrats voted to impeach Trump for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress on Wednesday night.

On Thursday, Senate majority leader McConnell deemed the House impeachment vote — which passed without the support of a single Republican — as “the most rushed, least thorough, and most unfair impeachment inquiry in modern history.”

Impeaching Trump became an obsession for many Democrats soon after he took office.

Speaker Pelosi has vowed not to send the articles of impeachment against President Trump to the Republican-controlled Senate until they agree to make the Senate trial fair. House Republicans repeatedly made similar requests, but the Democrat majority ignored them.

So now, Democrats are complaining that Republicans are denying them the legislative commodities that just a few weeks ago they gleefully refused GOP lawmakers.

Pelosi’s threat not to release the articles of impeachment until she gets what she wants is a surprise move that plunges Congress’s timeline of Trump’s trial in the Senate into even more uncertainty.

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).

Universal Background Checks Won’t Stop Criminals Getting Guns

guns-640x480
In this Jan. 19, 2016 file photo, handguns are displayed at the Smith & Wesson booth at the Shooting, Hunting and Outdoor Trade Show in Las Vegas. Backers of an expanded gun background check ballot measure approved by Nevada voters in 2016 are arguing that the Nevada governor and attorney …AP Photo/John Locher, File

NRA: Universal Background Checks Won’t Stop Criminals Getting Guns
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/09/05/nra-universal-background-checks-wont-stop-criminals-getting-guns/
AWR HAWKINS5 Sep 2019

The NRA is warning universal background checks will not keep criminals from getting guns to use against innocents.
This warning comes as politicians as divergent as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R) argue in favor of taking action against private gun sales. Patrick specifically argued that the NRA ought to get behind the effort to close the private sale “loophole.”

But the NRA notes that universal background checks are riddled with problems, not the least of which is that they will not prevent criminals from obtaining guns.

The NRA tweeted:
NRA

@NRA
So-called “universal” background checks won’t stop criminals from obtaining guns, would criminalize private transfers and loans between friends and family, and is completely unenforceable. Criminals don’t follow the law.

A BIG NO FROM US! https://twitter.com/NBCDFW/status/1168969378660007936

NBC DFW

@NBCDFW
Do you support universal background checks for all firearm purchases?

3,054
2:46 PM – Sep 4, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy
1,473 people are talking about this
Down Range with AWR Hawkins. Sign up today!
Enter your email address
SIGN UP
The NRA also notes universal background checks make it difficult for guns to be transferred between friends and family. Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) made this same point earlier in the week by citing a Houston woman who was able to save herself from alleged robbers by pulling her handgun and shooting the suspect. He noted, “With universal background checks, I wouldn’t be able to let my friends borrow my handgun when they travel alone like this. We would make felons out of people just for defending themselves.”

California has had universal background checks since the early 1990s, yet criminals in that state continue to be armed.

On December 9, 2018, Breitbart News reported California’s firearm homicides witnessed an 18 percent rise in firearm homicides from 2014 to 2016. How is this possible with universal background checks in place, unless such checks do not actually prevent criminals from getting and/or possessing guns?

AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and the writer/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is the political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com. Sign up to get Down Range at breitbart.com/downrange.

Students hate Trump’s immigration, border wall quotes, don’t realize they’re from Dems

Campus

VIDEO: Students hate Trump’s immigration, border wall quotes, don’t realize they’re from Dems
Cabot Phillips
Cabot Phillips
Media Director
@cabot_phillips
on Jan 08, 2019 at 10:02 AM EDT
https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=11717

Campus Reform's Cabot Phillips asked students on the campus of American University if they agreed with President Donald Trump's statements on immigration and the border wall.

Only the quotes the students were given were not actually from Trump. They were from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Secretary of State Hillary of Clinton, and President Barack Obama.

This month, the federal government entered a partial shutdown after Congress was unable to reach a budget agreement, primarily on funding for President Donald Trump’s proposed wall along the southern border.

The wall, a key talking point for Trump throughout the campaign, has been decried by leaders in the Democrat party as anti-American and immoral, among other things.
“I just really think it’s hateful speech”

But their opposition to the wall and embrace of looser immigration laws seems to be a new development.

In recent years, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, President Barack Obama, and Secretary Hillary Clinton have all stated the danger in embracing illegal immigration and ignoring the laws we have on the books.

Such quotes include:

“Illegal Immigration is wrong, plain and simple. Until the American people are convinced we will stop future flows of illegal immigration, we will make no progress.” -Senator Chuck Schumer, 2009

“We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented and unchecked” -Barack Obama, 2005

“I voted numerous times… to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in. And I do think you have to control your borders.” -Hillary Clinton, 2008

Wanting to know if opponents of Trump’s border wall had opinions on these past quotes from Democrat leaders, Campus Reform’s Cabot Phillips headed to American University.

But there’s a catch… the students were told the quotes actually came from President Trump.

Upon hearing the quotes, students said Trump’s words were “dehumanizing,” “problematic,” and “jingoist.”

“I just really think it’s hateful speech,” one student said, while another added, “the way he’s referring to people across the wall is dehumanizing.”

One student said the comments held racist undertones, claiming “there are racial biases deeply embedded in there.”

But this was all before they knew these quotes were actually coming from political idols of theirs.

Watch the full video to see their reactions to being told Democrats actually the statements.

Follow the author of this article on Twitter: @Cabot_Phillips

Carbon-Trading Fraudsters at the U.N.

Carbon-Trading Fraudsters at the U.N.
October 17, 2018

Carbon-Trading Fraudsters at the U.N.

With his usual humor and wit, James Corbett gives his much-needed, succinct perspective on the report released this week by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This has led to the Mainstream Media outlets, like the UK Guardian to scream that we have “12 years to limit climate change catastrophe”. Just a year ago, the Guardian screamed we had only 3 years left till climate catastrophe but the magical cutoff date was just moved from 2020 to 2030.

Corbett eviscerates the IPCC’s faulty science and demonstrates that there is no “hockey stick” of Global Warming in our current Holocene Epoch, whether anthropogenic (human-caused) or otherwise. Previous geological eras have seen vast swings in Earth’s temperature but the planet entered into a comparatively stable period following the end of the last Ice Age about 12,000 years ago.

Corbett amply demonstrates how Global Warming aka Anthropogenic Climate Change is bad science cooked up to justify implementing carbon taxes and a “cap and trade” financial derivatives schemes that make mortgage-backed securities look like the gold standard.

A growing list of scientists is questioning the accuracy of the IPCC’s climate projections. Deplorable “Climate Change deniers” are not saying that petrochemicals aren’t toxic or that these and other environmental pollutants and plastic garbage aren’t terrible problems. Indeed, Global Warming is a distraction from the very real threats being posed to our health in our air, food and water, from thousands of environmental toxins, ranging from glyphosate, to petrochemicals, to radionulides and microwaves.

What’s being rejected is the faulty climate science, the fraudulent carbon-trading schemes and the supragovernmental bureaucracy made up of elitist U.N. psychopaths selling us out to the Globalist banksters.

Corbett closes by saying, “Even bigger than the trillion dollar climate scam that they’re trying to run right now, which of course will generate oodles of money for certain corrupt politicians and people and corporations that are in the back pockets of the banksters – yes, there is the monetary aspect to this – but it goes much deeper into the heart of the technocratic agenda, itself by way of carbon eugenics…that is going to try to get us into the technocratic enslavement grid. It is coming and you can see it clearly. The way they hype these types of UN reports, as if they are going to be the saviors of humans. Newsflash: They’re not.

“I’ll keep drilling this point home, despite the fact that there are a lot of people out there that don’t like to hear this bitter message. It is horrible and it is hard to swallow and it is nightmarish but it is the truth and I will keep telling this truth until I get de-platformed from every platform…”

Researchers released a report this week revealing “ultralow surface temperatures” in East Antarctica that surpass the coldest temperatures ever recorded on the earth’s surface.


(Photo AP/Rod McGuirk)

Scientists Observe Coldest Temperatures Ever on Earth’s Surface
A group of U.S. climate scientists have had to be rescued by helicopter from Antarctica after being trapped by encroaching ice.
AP/Rod McGuirk
30 Jun 2018
https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/06/30/scientists-observe-coldest-temperatures-ever-on-earths-surface/

Researchers released a report this week revealing “ultralow surface temperatures” in East Antarctica that surpass the coldest temperatures ever recorded on the earth’s surface.

The lowest measured air temperature on earth is −89.2 °C (−129 F) on 23 July 1983, observed at Vostok Station in Antarctica, but new data published in Geophysical Research Letters this week, has found that some 100 different locations on the East Antarctic Plateau reached temperatures of -98° C (-144° F) during the Antarctic polar night between 2004–2016.

A team from the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) at the University of Colorado Boulder have identified the East Antarctic Plateau — a massive, empty expanse the size of Australia that begins near the South Pole — as the coldest place on the planet.

The East Antarctic Plateau sits some 3,500 m (11,500 ft) above sea level and the air over the Plateau is extremely still, dry and thin, providing an ideal environment for extreme cold.

“In this area, we see periods of incredibly dry air, and this allows the heat from the snow surface to radiate into space more easily,” said Ted Scambos of the University of Colorado Boulder, lead author of the study.

East Antarctica is home to extremely low air and surface temperatures brought on by intense radiative cooling of the snow surface during prolonged wintertime periods of clear sky, weak winds, and very dry atmosphere, the report revealed.

The researchers analyzed data from NASA’s Terra and Aqua satellites, as well as the NOAA’s Polar Operational Environmental Satellites, gathered during the Antarctic winters between 2004 and 2016, and found that snow surface temperatures regularly dipped below -90° C (-130° F) across the Plateau, with some 100 spots reaching a lowest temperature of -98° C (-144° F).

“Approximately 100 sites have observed minimum surface temperatures of ~−98 °C during the winters of 2004–2016,” and the researchers believe that this represents close to the absolute coldest the earth’s surface can get.

“This temperature appears to be about as low as it is possible to reach, even under clear skies and very dry conditions, because heat radiating from the cold clear air is nearly equal to the heat radiating from the bitterly cold snow surface,” the report states.

The coldest temperatures were found where pockets of air sat still for several days, allowing it to reach ultra-cold levels.

While Vostok, Antarctica, still holds the world record for the coldest temperature ever measured by a land-based weather station, the scientists hope to deploy ground-based instruments in the coldest locations of the East Antarctic Plateau in the next year or two.

Follow Thomas D. Williams on Twitter Follow @tdwilliamsrome

CA Assault Weapons Registration…Chalk Up One More for CA!

CA Assault Weapon Registration Website Crashed As Deadline Loomed

Posted at 6:00 pm on July 2, 2018 by Tom Knighton

California wanted all so-called “assault weapons” to be registered by July 1, 2018. The state wanted it so badly that it created a website in hopes that it would make the process easy enough that most would comply with the rule. It was smart, not because registration will do anything, but in that, if you want people to comply with the law, you’d better make it easy.

However, as with so many other things in California, what worked well, in theory, turned into a colossal case of fail.

As the deadline looms for California gun owners to register their firearms that have been re-classified as “assault weapons,” the registration system has been crashing, preventing compliance with the law if the site is not fixed.

California passed a bill expanding its already lengthy definition of “assault weapon.” Under SB 880 and AB 113, which became effective in January 2017, “assault weapon” now includes firearms that are required to be equipped with a bullet button or a similar magazine locking device.

…

All applications must be completed and submitted by Saturday at 11:59 p.m. PDT. With less than a day until the deadline, the California Firearms Application Reporting System (CFARS) has had difficulty processing the high volume of applications, according to the Firearms Policy Coalition. The spike in traffic repeatedly crashed the CFARS website, preventing gun owners from registering properly.

If firearms are not registered before the deadline, gun owners could be charged with a felony and receive up to eight years in prison.

Now, waiting until the last minute is usually not a recipe for success, but as long as there was time on the clock, people are free to procrastinate. It’s up to the state of California to make sure its website works.

And it didn’t.

Constant crashes delay people being able to comply with the law, and it’s not their fault. Like I said, waiting until the last minute might not be ideal, but it’s not illegal, and it’s not their fault the state can’t build a working website.

Now, those who weren’t able to register their guns despite trying to may well be guilty of a felony as you read this. Hopefully not. So far, though, there’s been no mention of an amnesty for those who tried but were turned away by the state’s ineptitude.

To err is human. To really foul stuff up, though, you need the government involved.

This is a prime example.

Meanwhile, the state has made modern sporting rifles an endangered species, and the state’s violent crime rate has increased over the last couple of years despite the full-court press on “assault rifles.” Maybe it’s not the guns that are the problem in the first place? You know, California, I’m just throwing that out there for consideration.

Unfortunately, it’s not like the state is known for listening to reason or doing anything except the most anti-gun thing it can manage to do. California has never met a gun control proposal it didn’t like, and there’s no reason to expect that to change in the near future.