Category Archives: Votes voting

Are Voters this Stupid when it Comes to Bernie Sanders?

Posted on by

The legislators on the Left are always voting for laws that protect us from ourselves, taking away independent thought and decisions. It is a double edge sword for sure, some people need others to make decisions for them.

Laws where an individual’s behavior hurts others in all forms does have some merit…but c’mon Bernie and the same goes for Vermont and Iowa or any Bernie voters across the nation.

Bernie Sanders raises $3.3 million in first 10 hours after ...

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) in his first-ever campaign for the Senate made the legalization of all drug use one of the cornerstones of his policy platform.

Recruited in a 1972 special election as the Senate candidate for Vermont’s Liberty Union Party, Sanders promised that if elected, “All laws relating to prohibition of abortion, birth control, homosexual relations, and the use of drugs would be done away with,” the Rutland Daily Herald reported in December 1971.

“In a free society, individuals and not government have the right to decide what is best for their own lives, as long as their actions do not harm others,” Sanders said during the campaign for the seat he would eventually win in 2006. (source)

***

As the DEA explained in its 2019 National Drug Threat Assessment, also released Thursday, most synthetic opioids are produced in China and Mexico; methamphetamine and heroin are primarily Mexican, and much cocaine is produced in Colombia. All of the drugs are routinely smuggled over the porous southwestern border or, in the case of Chinese goods, sent in using the U.S. mail.

“We’re pleased that in 2018, drug overdose deaths declined over 4 percent overall, with even greater decreases—over 13 percent—in overdoses from controlled prescription opioids,” DEA acting administrator Uttam Dhillon said Thursday. “Many challenges remain, however, including the spread of fentanyl and methamphetamine across the country. DEA and its partners will continue to work diligently to combat the drug trafficking organizations that bring these deadly substances into our country and endanger the American people.”

As the drug crisis changes shape, lawmakers continue to struggle over how best to combat it. On Wednesday evening, the House of Representatives finally passed an extension of the DEA’s temporary scheduling of fentanyl’s synthetic analogs, giving law enforcement another year to prosecute traffickers in substances like acetyl fentanyl and carfentanil under the strictest section of the Controlled Substances Act. Eighty-six House Democrats, however, objected, with several taking to the floor to argue that a “public health” approach is preferable to the incarceration of drug dealers. (source)

***

Since fentanyl and carfentinil can be absorbed through the skin, eyes, or respiratory system, there is a very real danger for secondary exposures for firefighters and EMS personnel from drug residue on a patient’s clothing, furniture, and even carpeting. There have been numerous documented cases in the United States of firefighters and EMS personnel experiencing respiratory distress and other overdose symptoms after coming into incidental contact with fentanyl and carfentinil residue in the course of providing patient care. The lethality and ease of coming into contact with the drug underscores the need for firefighters and EMS personnel to exercise extreme caution when responding to suspected opioid-related calls. All responders should be careful to appropriately don and doff any personal protective equipment selected for use when responding to these calls.

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration recently published a handbook and roll call video to educate first responders on the dangers presented by fentanyl and carfentinil. Fire chiefs should work closely with their medical directors to review this information and design protocols to protect firefighters and EMS personnel from exposures to these dangerous narcotics. Fire chiefs also should maintain regular contact with their law enforcement partners to understand which narcotics may be most prevalent in their communities. (source)

*** Has Bernie explained any of that? Not so much. Consider the real destruction of the thousands and thousands of the narcotic generation and the labor output competition with other nations.

Bernie sees the “War on Drugs” as a costly, destructive, and ineffective policy. Current drug laws have not worked. After spending billions of dollars and destroying millions of lives, there has been no real decrease in drug accessibility or use, as evidenced by the opioid epidemic, the rising rates of heroin use, and the scourge of meth. Bernie believes treatment, not punishment, is the answer, and he’s repeatedly introduced legislation to extensively reform the criminal justice system along these lines.

War on Drugs: The fifty year war on drugs is a failed policy that has led to mass incarceration of nonviolent offenders and has unfairly targeted people of color.

Treatment for Drug Offenders: Nonviolent drug offenders should not be incarcerated. Instead, they should have access to affordable treatment to address their drug dependencies.

Legalize Marijuana: Marijuana ought to be legalized.

Addressing the Heroin and Opioid Epidemics : Heroin and opioid abuse is at epidemic levels, and the U.S. is not addressing the crisis with the urgency and seriousness that is required. We must address this crisis by providing resources, proper treatment and healthcare professionals to the communities struggling with this epidemic.

Here’s a link to Bernie’s plan to legalize marijuana and his comprehensive plan, Justice and Safety for All,  to reform the criminal justice system.

 

 

Carter Page Sues all of Them

Posted on by

As closing arguments are delivered in the Senate impeachment trial, one must note that the House Manager’s Team has made the same points day in and day out while overlooking the other part of the whole concocted scheme against President Trump. The other part is the successful plot against Donald Trump that was launched many months before he even took the Oath of Office for the presidency, Crossfire Hurricane. Carried through to Mueller investigation, it is proven that the ‘dossier’ was complied using foreign entities, some still unnamed.

That plot, using foreign interference was to interfere in our domestic election process. The choreographed operation continued through to the end of the impeachment trial in the Senate. Once, Trump is acquitted, brace for impact as the LEFT will not stop unless they are exposed in full and perhaps that will begin in earnest by two channels. The work pledged by Senator Lindsey Graham is characterized as a systematic examination of all things stemming from the contentious phone call between President(s) Trump and Zelensky. The other channel is the lawsuit filed by former volunteer foreign policy advisor, Carter Page.

Did Carter Page contacts give Obama FBI window into Trump ...

Page is suing the Democrat National Committee, Perkins Coie, LLP. and Michael Sussman. Carter Page has requested a trial by jury.

In a short summary of the Carter complaint:

As part of this effort, Defendants developed a dossier replete with falsehoods about numerous individuals associated with the Trump campaign—especially Dr. Page. Defendants then sought to tarnish the Trump campaign and its affiliates (including Dr. Page) by publicizing this false information.

Defendants’ efforts mobilized the news media against Dr. Page, damaging his reputation, and effectively destroying his once-private life. The Defendants’ wrongful actions convinced many Americans that Dr. Page is a traitor to the United States, and as a result he has received—and continues to receive—multiple death threats. Dr. Page’s businesses have suffered greatly from the false, malicious information spread by Defendants.

In short, Defendants’ actions have not only damaged Plaintiffs’ reputations and financial prospects, they have even caused Dr. Page to reasonably fear for his safety. Defendants misrepresented Dr. Page’s connections to and interactions with certain foreign nationals in order to create the false impression that Dr. Page—who served his country honorably in the United States Navy and in the private sector—was in fact an agent of a foreign power, Russia. Defendants leveraged these fabrications within the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) and the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”), leading these agencies to present false applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (“FISC”).

As a result, Dr. Page was wrongfully and covertly surveilled by the United States government pursuant to Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (“FISA”) warrants for more than a year, and has seen his reputation ruined and his personal safety threatened.

For clarity on the Defendants:

Defendant Perkins Coie LLP (“Perkins Coie”) is an international law firm with over 1,000 lawyers. Perkins Coie has twenty offices worldwide, and its Chicago office has about 144 lawyers and officers. Approximately 67 Perkins Coie partners operate out of the Chicago office.

Defendant Marc Elias is a natural person who is domiciled in Washington, DC. He is a Partner at Perkins Coie. Elias represents the DNC, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, National Democratic Redistricting Committee, Priorities USA, Senate Majority PAC and House Majority PAC. Elias also represented then-U.S. Senator from Illinois Barack Obama from at least as early as 2006, including throughout the period that Obama served as United States President and titular head of the DNC. Elias has served as chair of Perkins Coie’s political law practices since after the start of the Obama Administration in 2009. In 2016, he organized the opposition research which led to the U.S. Government’s surveillance abuse against Plaintiff.

Defendant Michael Sussman is a natural person who is domiciled in Washington, DC. He is a Partner at Perkins Coie and has represented the DNC.

The timing of this complaint will assist the Lindsey Graham investigative team in the Senate under what is known in legal jargon as discovery. This is the process where documents, communications and interrogatories are gained by both sides of the case.

For additional clarity:

In April 2016, as agents of the DNC, Elias, Sussman and Perkins Coie retained Fusion GPS on the DNC’s behalf to produce negative information on then-candidate Trump.Defendants funded Fusion GPS’s research. Fusion GPS reported to Elias the information from its research.

You are encouraged to read the full complaint to expel false notions found in news media and in social media for context and accuracy found here.

 

 

GOP War Room v. Pelosi’s Impeachment?

Posted on by

Do the Republicans in both Houses of Congress need to collaborate with the Department of Justice to create a war room to counter the Democrat’s impeachment operation? Yes, and there are several legal and factual avenues to explore. But one in particular is already in play. In fact, it has been in play since at least 2016, long before Former Vice President Joe Biden announced his candidacy for President of the United States.

The Democrats for months have been not only alleging President Trump for inviting a foreign power into our 2020 election process by asking a favor of the Ukraine President. They additionally charge President Trump for publicly asking China for the same thing. Remember, President Trump said in the phone call: can you do US a favor, OUR COUNTRY has been through a lot. That is not a personal favor for President Trump but rather a service to our nation as a whole. Given the decades of rampant corruption in Ukraine and frankly in our own country, you would think the Democrats would want the same favor right when it comes to money-laundering and interference into our election(s).

So, let us go back to that one avenue already in play since 2016 and that is Rosemont Seneca and Bohai Capital.

For example, one of the companies involved in the Henniges transaction was a billion dollar private investment fund called Bohai Harvest RST (BHR). BHR was formed in November of 2013 by a merger between the Chinese-government linked firm, Bohai Capital, and a company named Rosemont Seneca Partners. Rosemont Seneca was reportedly formed in 2009 by Hunter Biden, the son of then-Vice President Joe Biden, Chris Heinz, the stepson of former Secretary of State John Kerry, and others.3The direct involvement of Mr. Hunter Biden and Mr. Heinz in the acquisition of Henniges by the Chinese government creates a potential conflict of interest. Both are directly related to high-ranking Obama administration officials. The Department of State, then under Mr. Kerry’s leadership, is also a CFIUS member and played a direct role in the decision to approve the Henniges transaction. The appearance of potential conflicts in this case is particularly troubling given Mr. Biden’s and Mr. Heinz’s history of investing in and collaborating with Chinese companies, including at least one posing significant national security concerns. This history with China pre and post-dates the 2015 Henniges transaction. For example, in December of 2013, one month after Rosemont Seneca’s merger with Bohai Capital to form BHR, Hunter Biden reportedly flew aboard Air Force Two with his father, then-Vice President Biden to China.4 While in China, he helped arrange for Jonathan Li, CEO of Bohai Capital, to “shake hands” with Vice-President Biden.5 Afterward, Hunter Biden met with Li for reportedly a “social meeting.”6 After the China trip, BHR’s business license was approved.7 In December of 2014, BHR also reportedly became an investor in China General Nuclear Power Corp (CGN), a state-owned energy company involved in building nuclear reactors.8 In April of 2016, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) charged CGN with conspiracy to unlawfully engage and participate in the production and development of special nuclear material outside the United States which could cause “significant damage to our national security.”9 Then, in August of 2015, Gemini Investments Limited, another Chinese-government linked entity, purchased 75 percent of Rosemont Reality, a sister company of Rosemont 3 Seneca.10 Rosemont Realty became Gemini Rosemont and it reportedly focused on purchasing American real estate.11In September 2015, BHR joined with a subsidiary of the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) to acquire Henniges for $600 million. AVIC acquired 51 percent of the company, and BHR acquired 49 percent.12 According to reports, the acquisition of Henniges by BHR and AVIC was the “biggest Chinese investment into US automotive manufacturing assets to date.”13 Because the acquisition gave Chinese companies direct control of Henniges’ anti-vibration technologies, the transaction was reviewed by CFIUS. CFIUS approved the transaction despite reports that in 2007, years before BHR teamed up with AVIC’s subsidiary, AVIC was reportedly involved in stealing sensitive data regarding the Joint Strike Fighter program. AVIClater reportedly incorporated the stolen data into China’s J-20 and J-31 aircraft.14

You will notice numbered footnotes in the text above. That text is in part of a letter sent by Senator Grassley (Senate Finance Committee) to Treasury Secretary Mnuchin this past August. It is uncertain if Treasury did respond to the letter. But hold on there is more.

In May of 2016, the Wall Street Journal had an interesting piece regarding the sale of fake Indian tribal bonds. 7 people were charged of this fraud. Among them was a former campaign adviser to Secretary of State John Kerry and a second man once dubbed by the media “porn’s new king” along with five others. Devon Archer, an advisor to Mr. Kerry’s presidential campaign in 2004 and Jason Galanis a former investor in the adult entertainment business allegedly duped clients into investing more than $43 million in sham bonds in 2014 and 2015.

Image result for Rosemont Seneca Bohai, LLC

Now Devon Archer and Hunter Biden were best of buddies. In 2014, there was a lot of money flowing into a Morgan Stanley account under the name of Rosemont Seneca Bohai, LLC c/o Devon Archer.

 

Rosemont Seneca Partners Co… by JohnSolomon on Scribd

Now, we must remember that the United States has a ‘Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty’ (MLAT) with several countries.

Click here for the presentation of the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty

This is an agreement between two or more countries for the purpose of gather and exchanging information in a effort to enforce laws and prosecute public or criminal cases that include witness statements, service of documents, forfeiture, illicit assets, terrorism, sanctions, freezing accounts, restraining orders, judgement, subpoenas, transfers of financial instruments, security, regulations and disclosures. Most of the time these cases are a result of transnational organized crime, tax evasions or money-laundering. Other cooperative international agencies include Europol, Interpol repatriation organizations including the FBI and the United Nations.

So Nancy, with assistance of some in the Senate, the Treasury Department and the Trump White House, Trump is doing the right thing by following the law, draining the swamp and asking for continued foreign cooperation in fraud cases. Hold your powder everyone, this will get very interesting.

Did Pelosi, Schiff and Nadler Read Federalist No. 65?

Posted on by

While Nancy Pelosi has been ‘prayerful’ during this impeachment inquiry process, Congressman Adam Schiff, HPSCI Chairman has been touting the Constitution and poor old Congressman Jerry Nadler, Chairman of the House Judiciary remains lost as he was forced to give up control of the impeachment process after the stupid hearing with Corey Lewandowski. Meanwhile.

Whitaker will testify before House panel after tense back ...

Nadler, a lawyer himself has previously railed against impeachment during the Clinton scandal, has invited 3 Constitutional lawyers as witnesses for his first impeachment hearing and the Republicans were only granted 1 witness. Seems Nadler needs several law classes and he and the others meaning Pelosi and Schiff should actually read Federalist No. 66. More on that later.

Nadler has called: Noah Feldman, a Harvard Law professor. His position on impeachment and argument is that President Trump can be impeached even without evidence of a crime. He published an article in The New Yorker in May of 2017 stating his argument which is all the actions of the president are a pattern and can be collectively be used in sum as impeachable. Feldman has also called for Special Counsel to be assigned to investigate Rudy Giuliani and AG William Barr.

Another Nadler witness is Pamela Karlan, a law professor at Stanford. Her concentration including being on the faculty at Stanford is voting rights and political processes. Karlan was on the Obama short list to be a Supreme Court Justice while her resume includes being an attorney for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and was a commissioner on the California Fair Political Practices Commission. Outside of being known as snarky, she often quotes poetry in her classes. Karlan was one of the 42 legal scholars that signed a letter before Trump took office urging him to change his views on several issues and was very critical of his rhetoric.

The last Nadler witness is Michael Gerhardt, a law professor at the University of North Carolina. Gerhardt penned an article in the Atlantic stating that impeachment proceedings are fully legitimate. Gerhardt is also a CNN legal analyst and was once the deputy media director for Al Gore’s senate campaign. Further, Gerhardt counseled Clinton on judicial selections and was special counsel to Senator Patrick Leahy on the nominations to the Supreme Court of Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor.

The only witness the Republicans were allowed to invite was Democrat and George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley. Turley appears to be an okay feller when it comes to Constitutional law. He has provided testimony often on The Hill. He is often the ‘go-to’ person for being a Constitutional originalist and protector of separation of powers within government. Turley has called out the Democrats several times including over the Russia investigation. In a recent interview, Turley had this summary on the impeachment:

The fact is I think that this is the – well certainly the shortest investigation, it’s certainly the thinnest evidentiary record, and it’s the narrowest impeachment ever to go to the Senate, if they were to go on this record….did they prove something was contemptible or impeachable? Contemptible is not synonymous with impeachable. The President does set policy. They have three conversations, two of them directly, one with Senator Johnson, one with Ambassador Sondland, where Trump denies a quid pro quo….so you have a conflicted record. And the question is what do you need to remove a sitting president?…

Whether this is intentional or not, it seems designed to fail in the Senate.

Meanwhile back to Federalist No. 65:

Hamilton argued that the Senate was the body to hold the impeachment trial and not the Supreme Court where evidence of misconduct of public men was a violation of public trust, meaning that society is a victim of that violation. That misconduct would contain injuries to society itself. In Federalist No. 66, Hamilton went on to further argue that the impeachment proceedings would seldom fail to agitate the passion of the whole community and divide parties into less friendly factions stating it would become a condition and test of political strengths between warring political tribes.

It is no wonder that President Trump reminds the nation often of his accomplishments as they are hardly injurious to society, in fact just the opposite.

 

 

 

 

 

Self Described Socialist Now the DA in San Francisco

Posted on by

Senator Dianne Feinstein lives in Pacific Heights, a suburb of San Francisco. Speaker Nancy Pelosi lives there too. In fact 56 billionaires live in the Bay Area of which at least 20 live in Pacific Heights. Did they all vote for the Marxist Boudin or know his history much less objectives as a District Attorney?

Primer, a leading voice from CNN for Black Lives Matter:

Was going to write a piece on Boudin but I found this perfect summary below.

Nation's Most Toxic DA Candidate - Patriot Gun News

On Saturday, public defender Chesa Boudin won the race to become district attorney of San Francisco. His victory, although celebrated as part of the larger national movement to elect more criminal justice reformers to offices of power, may not be such a gift to San Francisco, whose crime woes seem to be at least partly the result of too little criminal enforcement.

Boudin’s political leanings are fairly unsurprising. San Francisco’s newest DA and self-proclaimed socialist is the son of former members of the violent revolutionary far-left group Weather Underground, an organization that rose to infamy in the 1970s and carried out as many as two dozen bombings of government properties. Both of Boudin’s parents were imprisoned for murders related to a robbery they conducted as Weathermen, and Boudin’s father David Gilbert is still serving time.

In his parents’ stead, two other militant Weathermen, known as leaders within the organization, raised Boudin. Indeed, in an interview with Jacobin (yes, that Jacobin), Boudin spoke positively of how his four parents’ “activism” has inspired his own work, despite the “mistakes” they all made—a supposedly “charming” detail that is fundamentally grotesque.

As a Yale-trained lawyer, Boudin eventually left the United States to work as a translator for Venzuela’s now-deceased socialist dictator Hugo Chavez, an outrageous resume data point that ought to get someone laughed out of political office (for those unfamiliar, Chavez’s socialism eventually transformed Venezuela into a failed state). But predictably not so in San Francisco, where behemoth, yet ineffective government is fetishized to the point of allowing piles of human feces in the streets.

Starting January 1, 2020, Boudin will hold the office of the city’s top law enforcement official, but his staggeringly leftist vision—regarded by some as exceptionally to the left, even by San Francisco standards—may be at sharp odds for what the city needs.

True, Boudin isn’t entering the easiest of roles. Among the United States’ 20 largest cities, San Francisco currently ranks number one in property crime, a status that has been driven by a cottage industry of organized gangs reselling stolen goods, often in broad daylight. Boudin’s stated approach to crimes like this is to stop punishing them.

Boudin’s platform is nominally predicated upon reducing mass incarceration and racial disparities in the criminal justice system. Among Boudin’s declared initiatives is to no longer charge for gang enhancement, which significantly increases the penalties if an offender is found to have participated in a street gang.

Boudin has called this penalty “racially motivated” since recent studies have found that only 8 percent of documented gang members are white. However, San Francisco, whether its latest DA is willing to admit it or not, has a serious problem with gang activity. For instance, 70 to 80 percent of the city’s car break-ins are carried out by organized gangs, and a car is broken into in San Francisco 80 times per day. If these numbers suggest anything, there isn’t enough deterrence for joining a street gang.

Decriminalizing gang membership should not be used as a political cudgel to advance the left’s identity politics drivel, and doing so may have disastrous consequences. San Francisco has previously relaxed certain policies, reducing penalties for some facially non-violent charges, to reduce incarceration levels and allow police supposedly to focus on violent crime. While this method can be applied with some measured success, it requires a highly tailored approach that San Francisco has shown itself ill-equipped to carry out.

For instance, when San Francisco passed Proposition 47 five years ago, it met loud applause from criminal justice reform groups, such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). But it was an abysmal failure. As I wrote last week when reflecting on Prop 47, “Prop 47 was allegedly designed to keep non-violent offenders out of the state’s already packed prisons by reducing certain non-violent felonies to mere misdemeanors. For instance, a thief can now steal twice as much as he or she formerly could before facing a felony charge. But thieves have begun to capitalize on this loophole. In cities like Vacaville, CA, just outside of the state’s capital, theft has more than doubled, and police believe Prop 47 is to blame.”

Boudin’s platform, in all its emphasis on reducing incarceration (as opposed to reducing crime), likely promises more failed policies similar to Prop 47. Some have voiced their discontent with Boudin’s election, which they fear will only exacerbate San Francisco’s current crime woes, ones that remained largely unaddressed by San Francisco’s former DA George Gascon. On Saturday, police union president Tony Montoya declared in an official statement, “Unfortunately, the election results mean that San Francisco residents will have to suffer through another four years of George Gascón style policies that have plagued our city and decimated public safety.”

Two Marches ago, I reflected in the tone of a sad desperado how San Francisco had begun to resemble a failed state. As a former San Franciscan, I have little hope that Boudin’s policies will do anything but exacerbate what is, by all metrics, an urban crisis fomented and sustained by excessive liberalism. Hat tip Federalist