Jill Biden’s First Husband Alleges Joe Biden Stole Jill from Him Via Affair

H/T Western Journal.

Slow Joe The Gaff Machine Biden is keeping up DemocRat tradition of not keeping his pants zipped and diddling someone else’s wife.

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden allegedly stole his wife, Jill, from her first husband, Bill Stevenson, through an affair.

Stevenson told the U.K. Daily Mail in an exclusive interview that the Bidens’ story about falling in love on a blind date was completely made up, and a book he is prepared to publish will shed light on the whole situation.

“I don’t want to hurt anyone,” Stevenson said

“But facts are facts and what happened, happened.”

“I genuinely don’t want to harm Jill’s chances of becoming first lady. She would make an excellent first lady — but this is my story,” he added.

The 72-year-old businessman hasn’t decided if he will publish his book before the election because “it does have facts in it that aren’t pleasant to Jill and Joe.”

Jill Jacobs married Bill Stevenson in 1970, and two years later they worked on then-New Castle County Councilman Joe Biden’s first Senate campaign.

At the time, Biden was married to his first wife, Neilia, who died in a car crash with their daughter before Biden took his Senate seat.

“Jill and I sat in the Bidens’ kitchen,” Stevenson said. “We worked on his campaign.”

Stevenson said he first suspected the affair in August 1974 when he was 26 years old.

Jill was 23 and Biden was 31 at the time.

The founder of The Stone Balloon, a famed live music club, had to go to northern New Jersey to pay Bruce Springsteen, who was going to play at the Delaware music club.

“I asked Jill to go with me and she said no — she had things to do, she had to look after Joe’s kids, Beau and Hunter,” Stevenson said.

“It was kind of a big deal to go meet Springsteen. I had no idea she and Joe were that kind of friendly.”

One of Jill’s friends told Stevenson that she thought his wife was “getting a little too close” to the senator, Stevenson recalled.

He said his suspicions were confirmed in October when a customer told him that Joe Biden was driving his wife’s Corvette.

“I was at work, and a guy came in and asked: ‘Do you own a brown Corvette?’ I said, ‘Yes, it’s my wife’s car.’ He said back in May it had crunched his bumper and they told him to get an estimate, and he never heard back from them,” Stevenson said.

“I said: ‘Wait a minute. Who is they?’ And he said: ‘Funnily enough, Senator Biden was driving.’”

The Bidens tell a slightly different story: Biden saw Jill’s picture in March 1975 after her marriage had ended and fell in love with her on their first date, according to the U.K. Daily Mail.

In her autobiography, Jill Biden recalled meeting Biden’s first wife at his campaign victory party, but said she did not meet the senator himself, the Washington Examiner reported

The Western Journal has reached out to Joe Biden’s campaign for comment but has not yet received a response.

Biden Individual Tax Proposals: The Largest Tax Increase Ever for the Self-Employe

H/T Town Hall.

The tax increase by Slow Joe The Gaff Machine Biden will destroy the self-employed sector of the economy.

Joe Biden has released his individual tax plan.

With respect to one of his most meaningful proposals, the limitation of the tax benefit of individual tax deductions to 28%, no one knows whether Joe is planning to increase or decrease federal taxes for wealthy New Yorkers or Californians. No one can say with certainty whether Mr. Biden is planning to reinstate the full deduction for state and local taxes (SALT) and limit its benefit to 28% or whether he is not planning to reinstate the SALT deduction. If he is reinstating the SALT deduction, the net impact will be that wealthy New Yorkers and Californians would see net federal tax decreases while wealthy residents of other states would see a net federal tax increase.

With respect to Joe Biden’s proposal to eliminate the cap on social security payments for high wage earners, this in conjunction with the return to the 39.6% top federal income tax rate would be a federal tax increase of 41% for every successful self-employed individual. (This regardless of whether there are SALT deductions or not.)

Perhaps Joe’s strategy is to let individuals make up their own minds as to what is in his mind. This can happen if there are no press conferences by the candidate.

If as proposed by Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, the SALT deduction is restored, the value of the reinstated deduction with a 28% value limitation is greater than the proposed top federal tax rate increase of 2.7%. (New York City: .28 x 10.73% = 3.00% & California .28 x 13.3% = 3.72%) Isn’t that just peachy, Texans, Floridians, and most others would see an increase in their net federal tax rates of 2.6%. New Yorkers and Californians would see increases in their federal income tax rates.

And there is the other side of the plan to limit the value of itemized deductions to 28%. With very, very rare exceptions, the maximum itemized deductions before charitable contributions are $32,500 (the current $10,000 limitation for SALT deductions plus about 3% times the maximum allowable home interest deductions). The standard deduction for a married couple is $24,800. So before the tax benefits from charitable deductions, the maximum cost of the 28% value limitation to a taxpayer would be just under $500.

What Joe has proposed at a time when schools, food banks, universities, hospitals, and all of the charitable institutions in the United States are trying to raise more money to increase necessary services is a disincentive to give to charity through an increase in the after-tax cost of giving to charity. The federal after-tax cost of that $100,000 gift to the local food bank would increase from $64,000 to $72,000. Would that decrease charitable contributions by the wealthy? Yes, it would.

And for the self-employed, Joe Biden has proposed a 41% tax increase on earnings over $400,000. The tax rate would increase from 37% to 52% before state taxes for all earnings over $400,000. (Additional self-employment taxes of 12.4% and an increase in the top income tax rate from 37% to 39.6%). If that law were in force in 2020, the winner of the U.S. Open in golf would see his federal income taxes grow from $810,000 to $1,150,000 from this single golf tournament.

When state taxes are added in, independent contractors and the self-employed could see tax rates of more than 65%.

Mr. Biden needs to hold a press conference to explain precisely what he has in mind with state taxes and why he thinks increasing the taxes of the self-employed by so much is a good tax policy.

Kamala Harris Choice Creates Most Anti-Gun Presidential Ticket in History

H/T AmmoLand.

Slow Joe The Gaff Machine Biden and Kamala Knee Pads Harris are a deadly combination as far as the Second Amendment.

 

Kamala-Biden-NRA-ILA
Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have lengthy histories of hating guns and the Second Amendment. IMG NRA-ILA

U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- Between presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s calls for firearm confiscation and the draft Democratic Party Platform, the 2020 Democratic ticket was already shaping up to be the most anti-Second Amendment in history. With Biden’s, or his team of able-minded handlers’, choice of Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) for the vice-presidential slot, the Biden campaign, and the Democratic Party have cemented this ignominious distinction.

Biden’s advanced age and visible decline make this vice presidential decision even more concerning. A Harris presidency would be an existential threat to the Second Amendment and gun owners.

Harris Does Not Believe the Second Amendment Protects an Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms

As District Attorney of San Francisco, Harris signed on to an amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller that argued the Second Amendment does not protect an individual right to keep and bear arms. The Heller case concerned a complete prohibition on the civilian ownership of handguns within the District of Columbia.

Advocating against the individual right to keep and bear arms, the brief argued,

courts have consistently sustained criminal firearms laws against Second Amendment challenges by holding that, inter alia, (i) the Second Amendment provides only a militia-related right to bear arms, (ii) the Second Amendment does not apply to legislation passed by state or local governments, 

According to the document, the Second Amendment does not protect an individual right, but rather, the lower court in Heller“create[d]” this right. The brief stated,

The lower court’s decision, however, creates a broad private right to possess any firearm that is a “lineal descendant” of a founding-era weapon and that is in “common use” with a “military application” today. 

Anticipating the U.S. Supreme Court’s move in the next landmark Second Amendment case (McDonald v. Chicago), Harris’s brief reiterated that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms should not be incorporated to the states. Had this thinking been adopted, state and local governments would be empowered to curtail or even extinguish gun rights without restraint. State and local governments would have been able to bar their residents from owning any firearms whatsoever.

Harris’s extreme views on the U.S. Constitution were again born out in her votes against President Donald Trump’s pro-Second Amendment nominees for the U.S. Supreme Court. On September 4, 2018, Harris delivered a speech to the Senate where she cited Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s fidelity to the correct interpretation of the Second Amendment as a reason for her opposition to his confirmation.

With this track record, gun owners could expect a president Harris to nominate U.S. Supreme Court justices and lower court judges that share her discredited view of the Second Amendment.

Harris Intends to Ban and Confiscate Commonly-Owned Firearms

Harris has repeatedly supported a ban on commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms.

Harris is a co-sponsor of Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-Calif.) Assault Weapons Ban of 2019 (S.66). During the previous Congress, Biden’s VP pick supported Feinstein’s Assault Weapons Ban of 2017 (S.2095) Sold as a reinstatement of the failed 1994 Clinton semi-auto ban, S.66 is, in fact, a far more sweeping attack on Second Amendment rights.

The bill would ban the importation, sale, manufacture, transfer, and possession of commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms like America’s most popular rifle, the AR-15. The 1994 ban prohibited firearms capable of accepting a detachable magazine that were equipped with two items from a list of enumerated features –such as a collapsible stock, pistol grip, or threaded barrel. S.66 would prohibit firearms capable of accepting a detachable magazine that have only one of the offending features. Moreover, the list of features has been expanded to target a wider array of firearms.

The bill would also ban the importation, sale, manufacture, transfer, and possession of magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition. This measure would prohibit the standard magazines of the most popular handguns in the country.

However, Harris has made clear that Feinstein’s broad attack on the Second Amendment does not go far enough for her liking. S.66 would grandfather firearms and magazines currently possessed by American gun owners. Harris wants gun confiscation.

At a campaign event in Londonderry, N.H. in early September, then-presidential candidate Harris told reporters that confiscation of commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms was “a good idea.” Elaborating on her support for a compulsory “buyback” program, the senator added, “We have to work out the details — there are a lot of details — but I do…We have to take those guns off the streets.”

On the September 16 edition of the “The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon, ”Harris reiterated her support for gun confiscation. During a question and answer session, an audience member asked Harris “Do you believe in the mandatory buyback of quote-unquote assault weapons and whether or not you do, how does that idea not go against fundamentally the Second Amendment?”

The candidate responded, “I do believe that we need to do buybacks.” Making clear that she believes America’s Second Amendment is for sale, the senator added “A buyback program is a good idea. Now we need to do it the right way. And part of that has to be, you know, buyback and give people their value, the financial value.”

Further demonstrating Harris’s commitment to gun confiscation, the candidate called for a “mandatory buyback program” during an October 3 MSNBC gun control forum and again during a November interview with NBC Nightly News.

Harris Would Abuse Executive Power to Illegally Attack Gun Rights

In their eagerness to burden gun owners, the Barack Obama administration stretched existing federal law to its limits. In late 2015, White House Deputy Press Secretary Eric Shultz told reporters that Obama “has asked his team to scrub existing legal authorities to see if there’s any additional action we can take administratively,” adding, “The president has made clear he’s not satisfied with where we are, and expects that work to be completed soon.”Put another way, the Obama administration exhausted the legislative branch’s authority to unilaterally control guns.

Harris has proposed to use executive power to enact gun control in a manner that even the Obama administration understood was illegal.

According to Harris’s 2020 campaign website,

If Congress fails to send comprehensive gun safety legislation to Harris’ desk within her first 100 days as president – including universal background checks, an assault weapons ban, and the repeal of the NRA’s corporate gun manufacturer and dealer immunity bill – she will take executive action to keep our kids and communities safe 

In other words, if Congress refuses to legislate in the manner she demands, Harris would break the law to legislate by decree.

Among her proposed executive actions would be a cap on the number of firearms an individual could privately transact in a year.

Present statute, 18 U.S.C. §922 requires that an individual “engaged in the business” of selling firearms register as a Federal Firearms Licensee and perform a background check prior to transferring a firearm to an unlicensed individual. “Engaged in the business” is further defined in 18 U.S.C. §921 to mean, 

a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms, but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms;

This language was explicitly adopted to avoid a numerical cap on the number of firearms an individual could privately transfer, instead of focusing on whether the person was engaged in the activity “with the principal objective of livelihood and profit.”Harris’s proposed executive action would violate the clear language of 18 U.S.C. §921.

The Obama administration explored this avenue of gun control and determined it was outside their authority. Rejecting a hard cap as untenable, the Obama administration opted to release a guidance document elaborating upon the circumstances under which a person must obtain a Federal Firearms License.

Harris has also made clear that she intends to abuse ATF’s firearm manufacturer and dealer licensing function to circumvent the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act and attack the gun industry. Other proposed executive actions include an illegal expansion of the prohibited persons categories and further restrictions on the importation of firearms.

With her rejection of the Second Amendment, advocacy for gun confiscation, and intent to ignore existing firearms law, Harris is a singular and despotic danger to gun owners. Devoid of any respect for the U.S. Constitution, the legislative process, and the rule of law, Harris has proven herself unfit for office.

 

 

Sunday Show Blackout: Team Biden Fully Embraces ‘Basement Strategy’

H/T Town Hall.

I think eventually Slow Joe The gaff Machine Biden will be forced out of his basement.

The his mental decline will be on full display.

As Bronson noted, “Fox News Sunday” anchor Chris Wallace expressed his astonishment at the Biden campaign’s media avoidance strategy on my radio show this past Friday. Not only has the presumptive Democratic nominee declined Wallace’s persistent invitations to appear on his show for a rigorous interview (President Trump gave Wallace a full hour, in spite of his public criticisms of Wallace), Biden’s running mate has taken zero questions from anyone since her selection — and the campaign itself decided against participating on any Sunday show on convention eve. Wallace, a veteran journalist who moderated the final general election presidential debate of the last cycle, was astounded:

Later in the interview, Wallace said, “I’ll tell you another little bit of inside baseball: So Bernie Sanders went out independently to several of the Sunday shows and said, ‘Hey I’d like to come on.’ And in the absence of anybody from the Biden campaign, several of the [other] Sunday shows are taking him. Now, here’s a question, do you think it’s helpful to the Biden campaign that perhaps the leading Democrat who’s going to be out on Sunday — the day before the convention, with coverage in the Monday papers — is Bernie Sanders?” Bernie as a top Biden surrogate certainly fuels a certain GOP talking point, but apparently Team Biden is comfortable with that.

I’ll also mention that during our chat, I pressed Wallace on his assertion that Kamala Harris was “not far to the left,” and we debated whether New York and New Jersey deserve credit for their relatively stable COVID status quo, given the disastrous spikes and unflattened curves they experienced early on during the pandemic. Our full exchange is here. But his remarks about so-called “hidin’ Biden” generated the most attention by far, and understandably so. In three joint appearances last week, the newly-formed Democratic ticket took no questions from reporters, with the exception of one small aside. Some journalists are noticing, even at CNN:

Swan, of course, garnered widespread attention for his very tough interview with Trump, which the president largely flubbed. Team Trump also made sure to draw a clear contrast
The strategy from Team Biden seems to be pretty straightforward: Keep all the attention on the incumbent, hide the football on the challenger, and turn the election into the purest “referendum” possible. That may be sound tactically (though a rusty, under-prepared, and out-of-practice Biden could harm himself in future debates and interviews), but voters deserve to see both sides tested and challenged robustly in a national election, which always boils down to a choice. But as things stand now, Biden leads fairly comfortably — currently besting Trump by substantial margins among senior citizens and independents, two groups Trump carried last cycle (by seven and four points, respectively):

Right now, if Biden were to prevail, Democrats would obviously try to claim a governing mandate. But the electorate seems to be saying that the challenger’s top selling point by far is who he’s not, as opposed to anything he’s proposing on the rare occasion that he says anything:

I’ll leave you with a few points about Harris’ bogus “moderation” (which I raised with Wallace) and profound double standards, followed by a classy tweet from the former Vice President following the death of President Trump’s brother over the weekend:

Steve Scalise: ‘Joe Biden Wants to Take Our Guns Away’

H/T Breitbart.

  Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) is spot on with his observations about Slow Joe The Gaff Machine Biden and his anti Second Amendment stance.

Kamala Knee Pads Harris is just as bad if not worse.

During a Fox News interview, Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) warned voters that Joe Biden wants to take away guns and suggested Biden is letting anti-gun leftists push that agenda for him.

Scalise began his commentary by pointing out that Americans use guns for self-preservation. He said, “Every day in America people use guns to save their lives.”

He then noted the left’s push to defund the police and asked viewers to consider what that means for personal safety. He said, “It means you’re at your house, just and your family, and there’s no police around or they’ve defunded the police like cities like New York and Minneapolis are doing. If someone comes to your house who’s there to protect you? It’s you, with your family, with a gun.”

Scalise observed, “We better fight to protect our Second Amendment rights,” adding, “Don’t let the left take it away.”

He noted, “Joe Biden wants to take our guns away,” and claimed that Biden’s agenda is being “run” by anti-gun leftists.

Breitbart News reported a November 6, 2019, exchange between Biden and CNN’s Anderson Cooper in which Cooper asked if a Biden administration would take away guns, and Biden answered in the affirmative:

Cooper: So, to gun owners out there who say, well, a Biden administration means they’re going to come for my guns?

BIDEN: Bingo. You’re right if you have an assault weapon.

Biden went on to say, “The fact of the matter is, [assault weapons] should be illegal, period.”

Anti-Gun Activists Salivating, Over Prospects of Biden/Harris Presidency

H/T Bearing Arms.

Slow Joe The Gaff Machine Biden and Kamala Knee Pads Harris are the anti-gun crowd’s wet dream.

Hillary was way ahead in the polls also at this time.

While Joe Biden’s campaign has been leading most polls, the former vice-president doesn’t seem to be generating much genuine excitement, even among supporters. With the addition of Sen. Kamala Harris to the campaign, however, at least one group of voters is cheering: gun control activists.

Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun group Everytown for Gun Safety quickly shot out a fundraising email to supporters calling the Biden/Harris ticket an opportunity to elect “the strongest president and vice president for gun safety in American history.” Of course, Everytown’s idea of gun safety is “don’t own a gun,” and if Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have their way, that’s exactly what they’ll demand of Americans who choose to exercise their Second Amendment rights.

A puff piece by Marie Claire‘s Rachel Epstein highlights some of the extreme positions taken by Kamala Harris during her brief presidential campaign, though of course for Epstein the anti-gun agenda of the Democratic ticket is nothing more than “common sense” gun safety regulations.

Now that we have an official selection, it’s time to get to work and focus on where the candidates stand on key issues, starting with gun control.

Luckily, Harris has made her position on the gun control debate clear. During her presidential campaign last year, Harris declared that she would sign an executive order “mandating background checks for customers of any firearms dealer who sells more than five guns a year,” per the New York Timesif Congress didn’t take action within the first 100 days. She also stated that she would close the boyfriend loophole and ban assault weapons, and fugitives would not be allowed to purchase any handgun or weapon.

Since making those statements, she has remained consistent on her stance, and emphasized that it’s possible for citizens to keep their Second Amendment rights while also passing effective gun control legislation that could save millions of lives. (For the record, she’s a gun owner.)

I love that last aside. Yes, Kamala Harris has said that she owns a gun. So what? As we’ve reported here at Bearing Arms, while Harris may have a firearm, she doesn’t think you have a right to own one. For the Biden/Harris campaign, gun ownership is a privilege to be doled out to a select few, not a right of the people that shall not be infringed. Under the Biden/Harris gun control agenda, Americans would be prohibited from possessing the most commonly sold rifle in the United States (unless they paid a special tax and registered their firearm with the federal government ), would be forced to apply for a permit to exercise their Second Amendment rights, and would be banned from buying ammunition online, to name just a few of the draconian proposals put forth by the Democrats.

These proposals wouldn’t save “millions of lives” as Marie Claire‘s Epstein claims. Instead, they’d turn tens of millions of law-abiding gun owners into felons for simply maintaining possession of the firearms that they currently own, and they’d throw up numerous roadblocks in front of anyone who hoped to exercise their Second Amendment rights for the very first time.

A Biden/Harris administration wouldn’t just target gun owners. It would also go after the firearms industry by encouraging junk lawsuits designed to bankrupt companies by trying to hold them accountable for the actions of criminals. The results, if successful, would cripple the firearms industry, but would do absolutely nothing to go after criminals who use guns in the commission of violent crimes.

In fact, the entire Biden/Harris anti-gun agenda is aimed squarely at legal gun owners, while offering scant support for efforts to enforce existing laws. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are intent on banning their way to safety, but if they end up in the White House the American people and their Second Amendment rights will be far less secure and safe. It will be the criminals who’ll be breathing a sigh of relief, not good people in bad neighborhoods or those who own a firearm to protect themselves and the people they love.

 

Kamala Harris Doesn’t Think You Have The Right To Own A Gun

H/T Bearing Arms.

Electing Slow Joe the Gaff Machine Biden and Kamala Knee Pads Harris would spell the end of the Second Amendment.

Knee Pads Harris believes guns for me but none for thee.

We knew that Joe Biden’s vice-presidential pick wasn’t going to be an NRA member or a Second Amendment supporter, but that doesn’t mean he had to pick someone who actually argued in 2008 that Washington, D.C.’s ban on handguns didn’t violate the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. As District Attorney in San Francisco, Kamala Harris signed on to an amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court in the Heller case, arguing that “for nearly 70 years courts have consistently sustained criminal firearms laws against Second Amendment challenges by holding that, inter alia, (i) the Second Amendment provides only a militia-related right to bear arms, (ii) the Second Amendment does not apply to legislation passed by state or local governments, and (iii) the restrictions bear a reasonable relationship to protecting public safety and thus do not violate a personal constitutional right.”

The brief, written by Adrian Fenty (at the time the Attorney General for Washington, D.C.) urged the Supreme Court to uphold the District’s ban on handgun ownership, as well as a firearms storage law requiring guns to be kept locked up or disassembled with ammunition stored separately. To do otherwise, claimed Fenty, Harris, and several other prosecutors, would create “a broad private right to possess any firearm that is a ‘lineal descendant’ of a founding era weapon and that is in ‘common use’ with a ‘military application’ today.”

Create a right. In other words, Kamala Harris told the Supreme Court that Americans didn’t have an individual right to possess a firearm that is in common use, turning a right of the people into a privilege to be exercised by a chosen few.

Harris lost the argument in 2008, but she’s been opposing the right to keep and bear arms ever since. As District Attorney, Harris demanded an end to gun shows at the Cow Palace convention center just outside of the San Francisco city limits, and as California’s Attorney General she not only defended the state’s gun control laws in court, but according to California Rifle & Pistol Association president Chuck Michel, she failed to properly oversee several databases that the state uses to determine whether or not someone is eligible to own a firearm.

.. not one but two separate Reports from the California State Auditor have found serious problems with the way the DOJ processes mental health records to determine a person’s firearm eligibility. Despite these multiple admonitions, Harris has failed to fix the problems. A 2013 Report from the California State Auditor found that under Harris, the DOJ “had not sufficiently reached out to the courts or mental health facilities to remind them to promptly report required information,” which if done would have allowed the DOJ to determine when dangerously mentally ill persons were in possession of firearms or attempting to purchase them.

Additionally, this report found that: [K]ey decisions, such as whether a person is prohibited, are left to staff whose work does not receive a supervisory review. Because of these issues, Justice cannot identify all armed prohibited persons in California as effectively as it should, and the information it uses to ensure public safety by confiscating firearms is incomplete.

As U.S. Senator, Kamala Harris has backed bans on so-called assault weapons, universal background check mandates, and more, but it was her short-lived presidential campaign that really allowed her to once again tout her anti-gun agenda. Harris proclaimed that if she was elected president, she would enact gun control with or without the support of Congress.

“Five million assault weapons are on the streets of America today. During the course of this debate, eight people will die from gun violence. We need action, and Congress has had years to act and failed because they do not have the courage. When I’m elected, I’ll give them 100 days to pull their act together, put a bill on my desk for signature and if they don’t, I will take executive action and put in place a comprehensive background check requirement and ban the importation of assault weapons into our country, because it is time to act.”

Expect the media to highlight the fact that Harris says she owns a gun, in order to portray her as some sort of “moderate” on the issue of the right to keep and bear arms. She’s not a moderate. She’s a hypocrite. Here’s what she told a CNN townhall audience last April.

“I am a gun owner, and I own a gun for probably the reason a lot of people do — for personal safety,” the California Democrat said Thursday. “I was a career prosecutor.”

Remember, as a career prosecutor Harris argued that you and I don’t have a right to own a handgun for personal safety, and that local governments should be able to ban you and I from legally possessing one. As a member of law enforcement, of course Harris would have been exempt from the very gun bans she wanted to keep in place in Washington, D.C., but she wanted local governments to be able to strip you of your ability to legally own a firearm for self-defense. Harris may own a gun, but that doesn’t mean she believes that you have a right to own one too.

 

 

 

Rep. Matt Gaetz Likens Joe Biden’s Campaign to ‘Elder Abuse’

H/T Western Journal.

Rep.Matt Gaetz(R-FL)is spot on with his observation about Biden.

Slow Joe The Gaff Machine Biden is slipping mentally.

Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida likened former Vice President Joe Biden’s presidential campaign to “elder abuse” during an interview on Sunday.

Speaking to Fox News host Steve Hilton, the Republican spoke on Biden’s mental acuity and specifically cited an incident that occurred between Biden and a CBS News correspondent last week.

“First of all — OK, boomer, nobody says ‘junkie’ anymore. When someone suffers from substance abuse issues, we try to extend the hand of grace,” Gaetz told Hilton on “The Next Revolution.”

“I would think Joe Biden might know that given his own family history. But Biden is substantively making the argument that there’s no factual predicate to question his mental capability, and in every American family, we see this dynamic where somebody loses contact, they become a little slower on the uptake, and it would be funnier if America weren’t facing such serious challenges.”

“We’ve got to beat this virus,” Gaetz said. “We’ve got to confront China.”

The Republican then signaled his doubt that Biden is up to the task of leading the country and suggested he is being used for political gain by those around him.

“We’ve got to get our economy moving again. Joe Biden’s effort in politics here looks less like a presidential campaign and more like elder abuse,” he said.

Gaetz also speculated on the program that Susan Rice, President Barack Obama’s former national security advisor, is Biden’s favorite to become his running mate.

“She’s deeply flawed, and we would love that on our side. The question is: Is Joe Biden in charge of the Joe Biden campaign?” he asked.

The radical wing of the Democratic Party will “roll right over Joe Biden,” he added.

The congressman suggested Biden would be swayed into picking a running mate who is much further to the left.

“We’ve got to re-elect President Trump. It is very serious,” he said.

The comments from Gaetz were in response to questions about Biden’s cognitive health following now months of speculation the candidate has lost a few steps.

In an interview Biden granted to CBS News correspondent Errol Barnett Wednesday, the former VP was asked if he had taken a cognitive test.

“No, I haven’t taken a test. Why the hell would I take a test? Come on, man,” Biden responded.

“That’s like saying to you, before you got on this program, if you had taken a test were you taking cocaine or not,” Biden said.

“What do you think, huh? Are you a junkie?” he asked Barnett.

The Democrat then said he cannot wait to debate President Donald Trump so the American people can judge his cognitive health.

He told Barnett, “I am very willing to let the American people judge my physical as well as my mental fitness.”

Biden had previously claimed that his cognitive abilities are tested regularly.

 

Sarah Sanders: This Is What It Will Take To Defeat Biden in November

H/T Western Journal.

If Slow Joe The Gaff Machine Biden agrees to debate President Trump he will be toast.

The media’s focus in the 2020 presidential election isn’t on Donald Trump vs. Joe Biden. It’s on Donald Trump vs. anybody else.

It doesn’t matter that it’s Joe Biden, because that’s not who anyone is talking about. The Democrats certainly aren’t. The media certainly isn’t. Most days, Donald Trump’s opponent might as well be one of those illustrations of a shadowy human profile with a question mark.

If this is the man the other party wants you to vote for, that’d normally be an odd strategy. That said, we’re in the midst of a pandemic and a concomitant economic collapse. The Biden strategy, such as it is, involves emphasizing the president’s Trump-iness and saying that’s what’s responsible.

If the polls are anything to go by, that’s not doing badly so far. In fact, it’s doing so well that some Democrats don’t want their candidate to take the debate stage at all.

That’s why former White House press secretary Sarah Sanders says what it’ll take to defeat the former vice president in November is getting America to take a long, hard look at Biden.

“The idea that Joe Biden or anybody around him, the reason they don’t want him to be on a debate stage is because they don’t want him taking questions,” Sanders said Tuesday on Fox News. “They know that he has been a part of the problem for the last 50 years and he can’t defend his record.

“If this race becomes about Joe Biden he knows he loses. People around him know he loses. He is a failed career politician that has moved so far to the left that he is out of touch with America,” she continued.

“If he has to go up and take questions, it is going to be, I think, a disastrous moment for him and his campaign, and I think a lot of people around them know it, that’s the reason they’ve kept him in the basement bunker and it’s the reason they want to limit the debates to one or two and no more than that, if they have them at all.”

One prominent liberal figure to float the idea Biden shouldn’t debate Trump is former Clinton administration press secretary Joe Lockhart.

In a CNN Op-Ed published last Tuesday, Lockhart wrote that “Trump has now made more than 20,000 misleading or false statements according to The Washington Post. It’s a fool’s errand to enter the ring with someone who can’t follow the rules or the truth.

“Biden will undoubtedly take heat from Republicans and the media for skipping the debates,” he wrote. “But it’s worth the risk as trying to debate someone incapable of telling the truth is an impossible contest to win.”

I’d say something about the richness of the man who was Bill Clinton’s press secretary when Clinton was formally impeached for lying under oath having written that, but I digress.

In The New York Times, meanwhile, former debate panelist Elizabeth Drew argued for scrapping the debates entirely, saying they’ve come “to resemble professional wrestling matches, and more substantive debates were widely panned in the press. Points went to snappy comebacks and one-liners. Witty remarks drew laughs from the audience and got repeated for days and remembered for years.”

“This, by the way, isn’t written out of any concern that Donald Trump will prevail over Joe Biden in the debates; Mr. Biden has done just fine in a long string of such contests. The point is that ‘winning’ a debate, however assessed, should be irrelevant, as are the debates themselves,” she wrote.

Drew, a prolific Washington, D.C., journalist, moderated a 1976 Gerald Ford-Jimmy Carter debate; the intervening 44 years have apparently been busy, which is why she’s decided just now is the time to take a visible stand on the issue .

Democrats don’t seem particularly enthralled by what Lockhart or Drew are pushing, at least not yet.

“We’ve had presidential debates for a long time now, and it’s been a way for a lot of people around the nation to be able to see the candidates in action,” Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren said, according to The Hill.

“I know that Joe Biden will show who he is, a man of both empathy and competence, and I’d like the American people to have a chance to see that.”

“This is a big race, and the answer is yes, I think he should,” California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein added, while saying they ought to be limited.

“I think one or two debates is sufficient,” she said.

It’s not just about the debates, either. Biden has limited his appearances and media access — allowing the Democrats and the media to make the race about Trump alone, something Sanders suggested was indicative of the campaign.

“I think the fact that they want to hide Joe Biden tells us everything we need to know about that campaign,” she said.

“This has nothing to do with his plans are for the country and everything to do with attacking the president. The focus needs to be on who is best fit and ready to lead our country, rebuild our economy. I think when you ask that question, there is no doubt it’s Donald Trump, and that’s the reason nobody wants Joe Biden on a stage being compared to this president.”

Trump, she said, must contrast his record to Biden’s.

“He can restore law and order, he’s built the economy strong, he can certainly do it again, and I think those are two areas that this president can really show contrast with somebody like Joe Biden who’s been part of the problem for far too long, on a debate stage, and I think it’s why it’s important for Americans to see,” Sanders said.

Biden, of course, insists he wants to be on that stage.

“Joe Biden said in June that he looks forward to debating Donald Trump on the dates and in the locations chosen by the Presidential Commission on Debates. We are still waiting for Donald Trump to agree to as much,” Andrew Bates, Biden’s rapid response director, said in a statement to The Hill, referring to the  fact that the Trump campaign has yet to formally commit to participating in the debates.

If the former vice president really is looking forward to debating Trump, though, Biden has a funny way of showing it. He gives short speeches, takes few if any questions and prefers highly scripted events which happen as infrequently as possible.

The Democrats have realized their best chance to get Joe Biden elected is to completely ignore Joe Biden. Counterintuitive as that may seem, conservatives oughtn’t kid ourselves — that’s exactly what they’re doing right now, and it’s working.

Trump is wildly popular among his base, but he’s just as viciously hated by the other side.

Allowing the Democrats to focus on Trump and Trump alone while allowing Biden’s competence issues to remain unaddressed is the perfect recipe for a loss.

If the Trump team wants to be sure to keep Joe Biden out of the Oval Office, one way or another, they need to keep him out of the basement.

Joe Biden Pledges Gun Controls That Already Failed

H/T Breitbart.

Slow Joe The Gaff Machine Biden wants to double down on failed gun control laws.

Democrat presidential hopeful Joe Biden cited the August 3, 2019, El Paso Walmart shooting and pushed for background checks on Tuesday, although the Walmart shooter reportedly passed a background check for his rifle.

Biden made this push in a Tuesday tweet, where he wrote, “One year ago, just hours after the massacre in El Paso, nine precious lives were cut short in Dayton. In the wake of the tragedies, Donald Trump promised the most modest of gun safety policies, then caved to the NRA and failed to deliver.”

He added, “As president, I’ll take on the powerful gun lobby to pass universal background checks, ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and close loopholes to keep guns out of dangerous hands. We can and will end our gun violence epidemic.”

The El Paso Walmart attacker used an AK-47 variant in his attack. The Texas Tribune reported that the Romanian-made gun was sent to a gun retailer in Allen, Texas, where the attacker faced requirements of passing a background check before taking possession of the gun.

El Paso police made clear the attacker’s gun was “bought legally.”

Yet Biden is pushing background checks.

Moreover, Biden is also pushing a ban on “assault weapons” and “high-capacity magazines.” The Chicago-area has an “assault weapons” ban via a Cook County ordinance, and that ban includes a prohibition against “high-capacity” magazines. These bans notwithstanding, Chicago witnessed a 139 percent surge in murder in July 2020, when compared to July 2019.

Chicago also has de facto universal background checks, via the state of Illinois’ Firearm Owners Identification (FOID) card requirement, which mandates that would-be gun owners acquire a FOID card before being allowed to buy a gun. The process for getting a FOID card includes a background check.

Yet Biden is pushing an “assault weapons” ban, a ban on “high-capacity” magazines, and more background checks.