#MTG
Monday, February 15, 2021
Fake National Populist Marco Rubio Promotes Gun Grab
Marco Rubio continues as a a sell-out.
On February 2, 2021, Marco Rubio introduced a bill that would strip any individual of their Second Amendment rights simply for being “investigated” for acts of domestic terrorism.
Unz Review reported the following:
The Senate bill, named the Terror Intelligence Improvement Act, was reentered last week in hopes of exploiting the hysteria surrounding the January 6th Capitol protests. The law intends to violate the civil liberties of American citizens who are not charged or convicted of a crime if somebody is deemed politically dangerous.David Codrea of AmmoLand observed that “Rubio tried this before in 2016 as a “‘kinder, gentler’ alternative to a bill being pushed by then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid.” Rubio’s move is in line with the Republican belief that by offering compromise or constructive Republican alternative proposals (C.R.A.P), they will satisfy the Left.
Despite all the talk about safeguards in Rubio’s bill, there will effectively be no protections for “due process” since Rubio’s bill would still take away guns from citizens who haven’t been convicted of a crime. Even worse, Codrea said guns would also be taken away from individuals not charged with any crime.
Rubio is one of the main posterboys in favor of red flag gun confiscation orders. He believes that “A red flag law will reduce bloodshed and respect the rights of gun owners.”
The Florida Senator exemplifies the flaccid nature of...
The Strange Priorities Of Biden’s Department Of Defense
Although our Founders correctly recognized that the overriding responsibility of the president is to secure our liberties by “protect[ing] and defend[ing] the Constitution,” in this modern era most Americans likely would consider that the most important job of the president is to serve as “commander-in-chief” of the armed forces, and thereby protect the nation’s security. If so, the new Biden administration is establishing a rather odd vision for how the Department of Defense will meet its responsibilities in this regard.
The national defense priorities of this administration, as revealed in public documents issued already by the president and his chosen Secretary of Defense, retired Army Gen. Lloyd Austin, reflect a sharp departure from his recent predecessors and from historic norms.
In one of his first executive orders, Biden chose to exercise his power as commander-in-chief not to affirm or reaffirm the need for a strong military defense against our nation’s adversaries or to announce an important national security initiative as a way to send a message to a particular adversary. No, the most important national security issue on the mind of the new president, insofar as official public pronouncements reveal, is protection of transgenderism in the military. This was affirmed in presidential Executive Order No.14004 signed just five days after he assumed office.
At the Pentagon, the first publicly revealed priorities regarding the operation of the world’s most powerful military under the Biden Administration were similarly unusual.
On Jan. 29, four days after Biden’s transgender executive order, Secretary Austin followed with a military-wide order that all restrictions on transgenderism would be lifted, at least pending a thorough review of this issue which he and his boss obviously consider crucial to America’s national security. The secretary’s memo reflected the view that such a move was an essential step to reverse limitations placed on transgender personnel by the previous administration. Public analysis of and reporting on the Secretary’s memo affirmed such partisan purposes.
The following week, Austin continued his focus on domestic policy matters, issuing another services-wide memorandum ordering a “stand-down” across all branches of the armed forces in order to address “extremism” in...
America’s Out Of Control Teens Are On A Historic Crime Spree
Young people are running wild all over the country, and nobody seems to be able to come up with a solution to slow down the violence. Following the tragic death of George Floyd, teens were disproportionally involved in the rioting, looting and arson that erupted in major cities throughout the nation for the remainder of 2020. And sometimes they would just take out their frustrations on random people on the street. But in addition to violence that was spurred by social movements, most of our urban areas also experienced dramatic spikes in their murder rates. In fact, one recently released report found that murder rates rose by an average of 30 percent in 34 of our largest cities…
THE HOMICIDE RATE across 34 American cities increased by 30% on average during 2020, according to experts, as the U.S. reeled from the coronavirus pandemic and widespread protests against police brutality.
The newly released report from the National Commission on COVID-19 and Criminal Justice found that homicides rose in 29 of the 34 cities studied and that the three largest cities in the sample – New York, Los Angeles and Chicago – accounted for 40% of the additional homicide victims in 2020.
That 30 percent average increase was the biggest one year spike ever recorded, and way too much of the time these murders are being committed by Americans under the age of 20.
For example, two Milwaukee teens were just charged with the rape and murder of a young woman named Ee Lee…
Kamare Lewis, 17, and Kevin Spencer, 15 each face one count of first-degree intentional homicide, as party to a crime and one count of first-degree sexual assault (great bodily harm), as party to a crime.
Lee was found Sept. 16, 2020 in Washington Park by “bystanders,” still breathing but unconscious, severely beaten and left for dead. She was undressed below the waist, indicating sexual assault. She suffered severe contusions to the face/head. A hospital examination confirmed the sex assault.
Lee later died from her injuries on September 19th.
But it wasn’t just Lewis and Spencer that were involved in this brutal attack. In fact, we are being told that a total of 11 youths were seen leaving the area…
Video from the Washington Park Library showed 11 people leaving the park — six in a group on bicycles; five in a separate group, some on bikes and others on foot.
Sadly, young girls are also murdering one another.
Here is an example of one young girl stabbing another young girl to death…
Lyric D. Stewart, 14, of Rock Island, was stabbed to death Dec. 30 during a fight in the 1200 block of 11th Street.
Jimena Jinez, 18, also of Rock Island, was arrested in the early morning of Dec. 31, 2020, and charged with first-degree murder in the stabbing death. She has been in custody in Rock Island County Jail since then, and is being held on $1.5 million bond.
Our nation is degenerating right in front of our eyes, and it is only going to get worse.
In Jacksonville, Florida a group of teens recently ganged up to kill...
New York Times Retracts Story Claiming Capitol Officer Brian Sicknick Was Killed in Riot
This is gravely irresponsible fake news.
“Law enforcement officials initially said Mr. Sicknick was struck with a fire extinguisher, but weeks later, police sources and investigators were at odds over whether he was hit. Medical experts have said he did not die of blunt force trauma, according to one law enforcement official.”
The New York Times had originally claimed Sicknick suffered brain injuries. Evidence has since emerged revealing that Sicknick collapsed at a USCP facility following the riot’s conclusion, having texted his brother that he was alright after the event. FBI investigators are reportedly struggling to build a homicide case in Sicknick’s death, with charges yet to be filed more than a month after the event.
A formal autopsy report is yet to be released in regards to Sicknick’s death, a highly unusual situation, especially with the event colored with controversy. The New York Times spread the idea that the New Jersey Air National Guard veteran and longtime Capitol officer died as a result of injuries inflicted by a rioter. This now appears highly unlikely.
It’s difficult to speculate as to how Sicknick died, but in the absence of a homicide, it appears probable he died as a result of a medical condition following the event.
Marc Santora, Megan Specia and Mike Baker were listed as the authors of the report indicating Sicknick had been murdered.
The New York Times at the time had claimed that its reporter was made aware of the Sicknick’s cause of death by a “source familiar with the Capitol police.” It appears likely that the NYT’s source had no direct line of communication with the agency, and was instead a a Democrat member of Congress or staffer, or even a Washington DC district official.
This kind of fake news is as egregious as it gets. The New York Times falsely cited a bogus source who indicated a homicide had happened when they had no grounds to make...
Biden Pulls 65 Pending Trump Executive Orders
Withdrawals take sledgehammer to immigration agenda
President Joe Biden has pulled 65 pending Trump administration executive orders, many of which deal with key national security and immigration matters.
Several of the withdrawals strike down orders that would protect American jobs by tightening immigration restrictions and eliminate proposed oversight regulations on how China-backed Confucius Institutes operate on campus. The Biden administration selectively cut the orders, as some pending Trump administration actions remain under review.
Biden withdrew one Department of Homeland Security regulation that would bar foreign nationals with deportation orders from working. Under current law, outgoing aliens released from custody can still seek legal employment. The proposed—and now withdrawn—Trump executive order would increase protections for American workers by striking down such an expansive employment policy.
Rep. Ronny Jackson (R., Texas) blasted Biden's rollback on Trump-era regulations as "disheartening" and "disingenuous."
"President Biden's approach to immigration is both disheartening and predictable given the hypocrisy of the left. In less than one month, the Biden administration has steamrolled commonsense immigration policies simply because they were tied to President Trump," Jackson said. "Clearly, Democrats are not serious about working across the aisle. Disingenuous attempts to legislate in a bipartisan manner are bad for effective policymaking and, in turn, for the American people."
Robert Law, the director of regulatory affairs and policy at the Center for Immigration Studies, said the withdrawal signals radicalism in Biden's coming immigration agenda and that such reversals harm both the country’s security and economy.
"What is very apparent is that there is nothing moderate about the direction of immigration policy that the Biden administration, through his various political appointees, is pursuing," Law said. "If there's any immigration regulation or policy that the Trump administration approved that should be carried on, you would think it would be something like this."
The Biden administration struck down another proposed immigration order that would have eliminated the ability of certain visa holders to seek employment.
These withdrawals—which came without any congressional consultation—also come as the Biden administration and Democrats upend other legislative actions taken to secure the border. On Thursday, the Biden administration rescinded the national emergency proclamation used by the Trump White House to allot funding to construct the southern border wall.
Rep. Jim Banks (R., Ind.) said that such actions hurt the American economy and give illegal immigrants "privileged treatment."
"America's labor market is already tight and thanks to Biden, U.S. citizens now have to compete with a flood of illegal immigrants," said Banks. "Stimulus checks, vaccines, no threat of deportation—it's hard to see what Biden's actual voters get that illegal immigrants don't, aside from income taxes. The only way this sort of privileged treatment makes sense is if Biden is counting on their help in 2024."
Biden also reversed an order that would mandate the disclosure of any agreement made between American schools and Confucius Institutes. Operated by Chinese Communist Party-affiliated entities, Confucius Institutes peddle Chinese influence and monitor...
The Journalistic Tattletale and Censorship Industry Suffers Several Well-Deserved Blows
 |
| New York Times reporter Taylor Lorenz and Silicon Valley investor Marc Andreessen |
The NYT's Taylor Lorenz falsely accuses a tech investor of using a slur after spending months trying to infiltrate and monitor a new app that allows free conversation.
A new and rapidly growing journalistic “beat” has arisen over the last several years that can best be described as an unholy mix of junior high hall-monitor tattling and Stasi-like citizen surveillance. It is half adolescent and half malevolent. Its primary objectives are control, censorship, and the destruction of reputations for fun and power. Though its epicenter is the largest corporate media outlets, it is the very antithesis of journalism.
I’ve written before about one particularly toxic strain of this authoritarian “reporting.” Teams of journalists at three of the most influential corporate media outlets — CNN’s “media reporters” (Brian Stelter and Oliver Darcy), NBC’s “disinformation space unit” (Ben Collins and Brandy Zadrozny), and the tech reporters of The New York Times (Mike Isaac, Kevin Roose, Sheera Frenkel) — devote the bulk of their “journalism” to searching for online spaces where they believe speech and conduct rules are being violated, flagging them, and then pleading that punitive action be taken (banning, censorship, content regulation, after-school detention). These hall-monitor reporters are a major factor explaining why tech monopolies, which (for reasons of self-interest and ideology) never wanted the responsibility to censor, now do so with abandon and seemingly arbitrary blunt force: they are shamed by the world’s loudest media companies when they do not.
Just as the NSA is obsessed with ensuring there be no place on earth where humans can communicate free of their spying eyes and ears, these journalistic hall monitors cannot abide the idea that there can be any place on the internet where people are free to speak in ways they do not approve. Like some creepy informant for a state security apparatus, they spend their days trolling the depths of chat rooms and 4Chan bulletin boards and sub-Reddit threads and private communications apps to find anyone — influential or obscure — who is saying something they believe should be forbidden, and then use the corporate megaphones they did not build and could not have built but have been handed in order to silence and destroy anyone who dissents from the orthodoxies of their corporate managers or challenges their information hegemony.
Oliver Darcy has built his CNN career by sitting around with Brian Stelter petulantly pointing to people breaking the rules on social media and demanding tech executives make the rule-breakers disappear. The little crew of tattletale millennials assembled by NBC — who refer to their twerpy work with the self-glorifying title of “working in the disinformation space”: as intrepid and hazardous as exposing corruption by repressive regimes or reporting from war zones — spend their dreary days scrolling through 4Chan boards to expose the offensive memes and bad words used by transgressive adolescents; they then pat themselves on the back for confronting dangerous power centers, even when it is nothing more trivial and bullying than doxxing the identities of powerless, obscure citizens.
But the worst of this triumvirate is the NYT’s tech reporters, due to influence and reach if no other reason. When Silicon Valley monopolies, publicly pressured by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and other lawmakers, united to remove Parler from the internet, the Times’ tech team quickly donned their hall-monitor goggles and Stasi notebooks to warn that the Bad People had migrated to Signal and Telegram. This week they asked: “Are Private Messaging Apps the Next Misinformation Hot Spot?” One reporter “confess[ed] that I am worried about Telegram. Other than private messaging, people love to use Telegram for group chats — up to 200,000 people can meet inside a Telegram chat room. That seems problematic.”
These examples of journalism being abused to demand censorship of spaces they cannot control are too numerous to comprehensively chronicle. And they are not confined to those three outlets. That far more robust censorship is urgently needed is now a virtual consensus in mainstream corporate journalism: it’s an animating cause for them.
"Those of us in journalism have to come to terms with the fact that free speech, a principle that we hold sacred, is being weaponized against the principles of journalism," complained Ultimate Establishment Journalism Maven Steve Coll, the Dean of Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism and a Staff Writer at The New Yorker. A New Yorker and Vox contributor who runs a major journalistic listserv appropriately called “Study Hall,” Kyle Chayka, has already begun shaming Substack for hosting writers he regards as unacceptable (Jesse Singal, Andrew Sullivan, Bari Weiss). A recent Guardian article warned that podcasts was one remaining area still insufficiently policed. ProPublica on Sunday did the same about Apple, and last month one of its reporters appeared on MSNBC to demand that Apple censor its podcast content as aggressively as Google’s YouTube now censors its video content.
Thus do we have the unimaginably warped dynamic in which U.S. journalists are not the defenders of free speech values but the primary crusaders to destroy them. They do it in part for power: to ensure nobody but they can control the flow of information. They do it partly for ideology and out of hubris: the belief that their worldview is so indisputably right that all dissent is...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)