Barr to Announce New Initiative to Combat Violence Carried Out With Guns

H/T Town Hall.

It will be interesting to hear Attorney General Barr’s plan.

Attorney General Bill Barr will announce a new Department of Justice initiative tomorrow called Project Guardian. Project Guardian, which will be implemented through ATF and overseen by DOJ, will focus on preventing “gun violence” in cities across the country.

Barr will make the announcement and detail the project Wednesday from downtown Memphis. He will be joined by ATF Acting Director Regina Lombardo, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Tennessee D. Michael Dunavant and ATF Special Agent in Charge of the Nashville Field Division Marcus Watson.

In the meantime, President Trump’s DOJ has been setting records for prosecutions against felony possession of firearms, against criminals carrying out crimes with firearms, illegal firearms sales and more.

“According to data from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA), the number of defendants charged with criminal felony offenses increased by nearly 15 percent from more than 71,200 defendants in FY 2017 to more than 81,800 in FY 2018. In FY 2018, the Justice Department charged the largest number of violent crime defendants since EOUSA started to track this category more than 25 years ago (more than 16,800)—surpassing by nearly 15 percent the previous record set just last year,” DOJ released last year. “In FY 2018, the Justice Department charged more than 15,300 defendants with federal firearms offenses, which is 17 percent more than the previous record.”

In other words, instead of demanding additional gun control, DOJ is enforcing laws already on the books.

Attorney General Barr has a record of Second Amendment support and has expressed the need to go after criminals breaking the law to reduce violence.

Advertisements

Bernie Sanders: ‘Mandatory Buybacks’ of AR-15s and AK-47s Is Unconstitutional

H/T Town Hall.

This is the smartest thing Crazy Bernie Sanders has said in his life.

Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders explained he does not support a mandatory buyback of firearms because he believes such a law would be unconstitutional.

“Gun violence is an incredibly complex [and] large epidemic in our country…and I wanted to ask what your plan is to combat this epidemic, but also, specifically, wanted to see if mandatory buybacks for AR-15 and AK-47s is something you would consider,” Grace asked.

Sanders acknowledged a mandatory buyback is actually confiscation and that would be unconstitutional.

“Let me tell you what my plan is — and I don’t support it. A mandatory buyback is essentially confiscation, which I think is unconstitutional. It means I am going to walk in your house and take something whether you like it or not. I don’t think that stands up to constitutional scrutiny,” he replied.

Sanders does support banning AR-15s and other types of rifles.

“Assault weapons are designed and sold as tools of war. There is absolutely no reason why these firearms should be sold to civilians,” his campaign website states, adding he also supports a ban on “high-capacity ammunition magazines” and  universal background checks.

Of the many Democratic presidential candidates who started so far, those who supported very strict gun control measures have not made it very far. Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) started his whole campaign around the issue of gun control in April of this year and dropped out in July after never gaining any traction.

While former Rep. Beto O’Rourke had a stronger start to his campaign, when he started to slide towards the bottom in the polls, his stance to have a compensated confiscation of AR-15s and AK-47s did not help. He dropped out of the race in November.

 

Concealed Carrying Restaurant Owner Shoots, Kills Armed Robber

H/T Concealed Nation.

Restaurant Owner-1 Armed Thug-0.

HIGHLAND PARK, MICHIGAN — It was late at night, after 1am, and the restaurant was shutting down for the evening. A few patrons remained, along with one waitress and one bartender. That’s when someone came into the restaurant with a gun and attempted to rob the place. That robber never made it out alive.

The incident happened at the Woodward Bistro on Woodward near Davison. The man came inside the restaurant with the intent to rob the place, according to police.

A CPL holder inside the business at the time opened fire, killing the suspect. Police say the CPL holder was the business owner.

Via WXYZ Detroit

The robber had come in just at the right time as the owner, waitress, and bartender were tallying up the cash for the night in the managers office. After getting the cash from the owner, the robber turned his attention to the bartender. This is when the owner took the opportunity to draw his weapon and fire.

The owner managed to shoot and kill the robber, but he also accidently shot his bartender as well. Fortunately, the bartender’s wounds were not life threatening and was later released from the hospital. The owner does have a CPL and legally owned the firearm.

No files have been charged against the owner, but police say the investigation is ongoing. They want to be sure that this was in fact a self-defense shooting. Unless something in the story changes, it seems like a cut and dry case of self-defense. Not only was the owner protecting his life and his business, but also the lives of his workers and patrons still in the restaurant.

Now that word is out that this restaurant owner carries, I don’t foresee too many future robbery attempts. We do hope, however, that the owner considers additional firearm training so should this happen again, his chances of hitting a bystander will be diminished.

Dem. Rep Lacy Clay’s Campaign Has Paid Over $1M to Sister’s Firm

H/T The Washington Free Beacon.

Rep. William Lacy Clay(Delusional-MO)will get away with this for two reasons he is a DemocRat and he is black.

Sister’s law firm is often biggest beneficiary of Rep. Clay’s campaign cash.

A law firm run by the sister of Democratic representative William Lacy Clay Jr. (Mo.) has now banked more than $1 million from the congressman’s campaign since 2002, filings show.

The payments to the firm are often the largest expenditures from the committee. The campaign cash was disbursed to an address in Maryland and in part has gone toward community organizing services despite Clay’s district being located more than 800 miles away and the longtime representative having not faced any serious challenges to his seat since entering Congress.

Payments from campaigns to family members have gotten other politicians in hot water. Rep. Maxine Waters (D., Calif.), for example, was hit with an FEC complaint over hundreds of thousands of dollars that her campaign paid to her daughter for running a mailer operation. More than a dozen politicians from both political parties have raised concerns of nepotism by placing family members on campaign payrolls in recent years, which is permitted but carries stipulations such as providing a “bona fide service” and paying fair market value.

Clay, who was elected in 2001 to a seat previously held for more than 30 years by his father, Bill Clay, began pushing money to family members shortly after taking office. Clay Sr. established the William L. Clay Scholarship and Research Fund in the 1980s to address concerns of rising tuition costs. The fund is one entity that has received cash from the campaign. Between 2002 and 2016, more than $30,000 in donations were made to the congressman’s father’s fund.

However, the payments to his sister’s firm, the Law Office of Michelle C. Clay, LLC, have been among the largest committee expenses in recent years. The firm was first placed on the campaign’s payroll in 2002—the year the congressman took office—and has now received over $1 million since that time.

So far this year, the law firm has been paid $90,000 by Clay’s campaign committee for fundraising, compliance, legal work, and community organizing and outreach, filings show. The payments account for more than half of the campaign’s $175,000 in operating expenditures for the 2020 cycle and follow the more than $950,000 in payments the firm had collected between 2002 and the 2018 election cycle. Since 2010, Michelle Clay’s firm has been the highest paid vendor in all but the 2012 cycle, when it received the second most money from the campaign.

The law office, which lists its address in Silver Spring, Md., just outside of Washington, D.C., appears to be a residential home. The law office also does not have a website and practically no information is available online about it.

While Clay’s sister was paid for activities like fundraising, the committee was also paying another firm for the same services over the years. For the current 2020 election cycle, the committee has given $27,000 to Fraioli & Associates, a D.C.-based campaign consulting group, for fundraising. More than $200 was disbursed to the group for travel and food reimbursements.

Clay’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment on the payments from his campaign to his sister’s law firm by press time.

Despite Gun Laws, Even Juvenile Criminals Are Getting Guns

H/T Bearing Arms.

There is not one gun control law on the books now or to be passed in the future will stop criminals from getting guns.

When I was a kid, my parents were reading the school handbook at a new elementary school I had just started. “Oh, well, Tom. Looks like you can’t carry your pistol on campus,” my father quipped. “Same with your cigarettes or booze.”

“That applies to you guys, Dad,” I answered.

“Nope. It says students,” he fired back and showed me. Right there in black and white, I saw for the first time that some people might be worried about kids walking around with guns.

This was long before Columbine. School shootings weren’t really a thing, though gangs were. Still, kids with guns? I couldn’t comprehend such a thing back then.

Today, though, things are different. I have no trouble comprehending it. Which is probably good, because it seems to be a real issue in some places.

The number of kids caught with handguns on the streets of Nashville continues to skyrocket, leaving police increasingly frustrated with the juvenile justice system.

An exclusive NewsChannel 5 investigation even discovered juveniles previously implicated in homicides still out on the streets, repeatedly getting arrested on gun charges.

“Kids out here in the community have no hesitation to steal a gun out of a car [and] carry that gun with them,” said Metro police Lt. Blaine Whited, who heads the department’s juvenile crime task force.

“They take them to schools, they take them to community events, they are taking them to other youths households with parents that don’t even an idea that youth brought that gun into the home. There’s no hesitation whatsoever amongst a lot of the youth to pick these guns up.”

For the task force, the search for kids with guns can take them into Nashville’s most violent neighborhoods, where danger is just around the corner.

Over the past five years, there’s been a dramatic increase in the number of juvenile charges for handgun possession.

“We had eight firearms that we recovered from one incident — that’s a lot of guns to be in the hands of youth,” Whited said.

“Like we said, that’s a recipe for disaster.”

Whited recalled that “there was one house where they had guns stuffed in a teddy bear.”

I wrote about the case with a teddy bear not all that long ago, actually.

Look, gun control laws are, in theory, supposed to keep guns out of the hands of bad people. Yes, they make it more difficult for the law-abiding citizens to get guns, but that’s supposed to be a small price to pay for keeping them out of the wrong hands.

Well, how is that working out? These are children, for crying out loud. It’s not like their parents assessed their maturity and figured they’d be safe with a firearm. Nope. They’re kids who are arming themselves.

Why?

The answer is simple. They’re involved in criminal activity and are arming themselves for that purpose. This isn’t Our Gang from the old TV show, these kids are part of a very different kind of gang, most likely.

Tell me again how well gun control works?

If it can’t keep guns out of the hands of children, how is it going to keep guns out of the hands of anyone else who isn’t supposed to have a gun? Huh?

Another Republican Congressman Has Announced Their Retirement Ahead of 2020

H/T Town Hall.

Peter King is not a true Republican but is a RINO.

Republican Congressman Peter King announced Monday morning he will not seek re-election in New York’s 2nd Congressional District.

“I have decided not to be a candidate for re-election to Congress in 2020. I made this decision after much discussion with my wife Rosemary; my son Sean; and my daughter Erin. The prime reason for my decision was that after 28 years of spending 4 days a week in Washington, D.C., it is time to end the weekly commute and be home in Seaford,” King wrote on his Facebook page. “This was not an easy decision. But there is a season for everything and Rosemary and I decided that, especially since we are both in good health, it is time to have the flexibility to spend more time with our children and grandchildren. My daughter’s recent move to North Carolina certainly accelerated my thinking.”

King has served in Congress for nearly 30 years and has been a key player on the House Homeland Security and Intelligence Committees.

“My time in Congress has been an extraordinary experience – an experience I wouldn’t have even dared imagine when I was a kid growing up in Sunnyside or a college student loading and unloading trucks and freight cars at Manhattan’s West Side Railway Terminal. I intend to remain in Seaford, be active politically and look forward to seeing what opportunities and challenges await me in this next chapter of a very fortunate life,” he said. “Politically I will miss the energy and dynamism of a re-election campaign especially since my polling numbers are as strong as they have ever been and I have more than $1 million in campaign funds.”

“Governmentally I will miss fighting for the people of my district and America and will always be proud of my efforts for 9/11 victims and their families; protecting our citizens from terrorism and MS-13; leading the successful effort to recover from Superstorm Sandy; being consistently cited for bipartisanship; working with President Clinton to achieve the Good Friday Agreement and end centuries of warfare in Ireland and Northern Ireland; and standing with the brave men and women of law Enforcement. In the coming weeks and during the next year I intend to vote against President Trump ‘s impeachment and will support the President’s bid for re-election,” King continued. “Most importantly I want to thank the residents of the 2nd Congressional District for giving me the opportunity to represent them in Washington, D.C. I will complete my term of office and continue to work hard for these constituents all the way to the final bell of the final round on Dec. 31, 2020. It’s been a great run! Thanks.”

King joins a list of 19 Republican House members who have announced their retirement ahead of the 2020 election.

Schiff Goes Full Authoritarian, Responds To Republicans’ Witness Request – Denies Right To Cross Examine Whistleblower – Not Now, Not Ever

H/T  Right Wing Tribune.

Pencil Neck Schiff(Delusional-CA)is a tin horned thug running a kangaroo court.

There are times when you need someone to interpret what you’re seeing.  This ain’t one of those times.

It takes a sycophant to believe that what we’re watching unfold in the Stalin-like impeachment inquiry is anything close to fair.

While it’s true that the Framers were vague about what the requirements to achieve impeachment charges should be, and they were even more vague about the legal protections afforded the party being impeached, it should be clear that would include the right to mount a vigorous defense.

To that end, Republicans were offered a chance to submit a witness list by no later than yesterday.  They did that by way of a letter from the committee’s ranking member Devin Nunes (R-CA).

Republicans made eight requests by name and another one by association.  Chairman Schiff denied at least the last two… so far.

Concerns that the whistleblower could be a political operative intent on damaging President Trump stem from his suspected involvement in a 2016 plot, in conjunction with Ukraine to discredit then-candidate Donald Trump .

Committee Chairman Adam Schiff Schiff (D-CA) denied the request.  Not now, not ever.

Brooke Singman

@brookefoxnews

NEW: @RepAdamSchiff response to GOP proposed witness list… says will be protected and will not testify

View image on Twitter
343 people are talking about this

Why?  Fundamental fairness – not to the president but to the 63 million Americans who voted for him – demands that both the anonymous whistleblower whose secondhand complaint initiated the inquiry, and anyone who he or she relied on in drafting the complaint, should be cross examined for the public to decide whether they sound truthful.

It is known that Schiff and/or members of his staff met with the whistleblower prior to his complaint being filed.  It is also clear that the complaint was clearly the work of lawyers (Lawfare or Schiff himself?)

Schiff’s involvement, no matter how peripheral makes him a fact witness.  That matters. A lot.

What can we learn from the whistleblower who admits only to hearsay?  Probably, not a whole lot, I’d guess. But, by questioning whoever put him up to filing the complaint we might learn a whole lot more.

Especially, if the person running the sham impeachment inquiry also served as his adviser.  Keep in mind, Schiff is a partisan hack who, for nearly three years told us he had proof of Trump-Russia collusion and that it was overwhelming.

That’s when Schiff made it clear he was willing to lie to take down this president.  This raises the question is Schiff refusing Republicans’ short list of witnesses to protect his own sorry ass from being hauled before this or other committees?

The animus Schiff holds for President Trump is palpable.  That doesn’t necessarily disqualify him from conducting a legitimate inquiry of the president but denying the president legal counsel and the right to call witnesses in his defense is proof he has no intention of being fair.

Sometimes it’s clear as the nose on your face when the rules ain’t fair.