web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > Front Page Stories

Tucker Apologizes for the Stupidity of His Guest’s Gun Control Argument, Says it May be His Last Gun Debate

Westlake Legal Group tucker-gun-control-debate-SCREENSHOT-620x323 Tucker Apologizes for the Stupidity of His Guest’s Gun Control Argument, Says it May be His Last Gun Debate Vermont Uncategorized Tucker Carlson Politics New Hampshire mass shootings Lori Lightfoot loopholes Indiana Guns gun control Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats crime Chicago bernard whitman baltimore background checks Allow Media Exception

[Screenshot from TheDC Shorts, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwX7INeoC2s]

 

I don’t remember seeing this happen before, but it did on Thursday night — Tucker Carlson apologized to his audience for what he considered to be the unacceptable ridiculousness of his guest.

Tucker welcomed to the show former Bill Clinton pollster Bernard Whitman to discuss gun violence in cities such as Baltimore and Chicago.

Tucker asked Bernard:

“Why are the places with gun bans, Chicago and Baltimore, for example, so much more dangerous than places where so-called assault weapons are common like Vermont or New Hampshire?”

Bernard credits surrounding states and their lax gun laws:

“You have to look at where the guns are coming from. In Chicago, 60% of the firearms that Chicago police seize are coming from states like Indiana, with very weak gun laws. In New York City and New York state, 74% of the guns seized are coming from states with weak gun laws. In New York City alone, nine out of 10 guns purchased and used quickly come from states with lax gun control laws.”

That’s right in line with Chicago’s Democratic mayor, Lori Lightfoot. As I covered on September 3rd, she blames the Windy City’s problems on Republicans (here):

“60% of illegal firearms recovered in Chicago come from outside IL — mostly from states dominated by coward Republicans like you who refuse to enact commonsense gun legislation. Keep our name out of your mouth.”



But Tucker had a really great question for Bernard that should maybe be posed to Lori as well:

“[I] have never understood why, if all the guns in Chicago come from Indiana, then why doesn’t Indiana have a similar murder rate?”

Bernard’s answer? Because those states are losin’ all their dadburn guns to Chicago and NYC!

The dude thought he had a real cool comeback:

“Because the guns are leaving. The guns are being shipped to metropolises. … You just made a great argument for federal gun control. That’s exactly why we need federal gun control.”

Tucker:

“We already have federal laws against trans–“

“We have federal loopholes,” Bernard interjected.

Tucker said nope:

“There are no loopholes. Actually, I know a lot about this subject, and there are…the guns moving from Indiana to Chicago are moving by car. … That’s against the law, and the feds don’t do anything about it. It’s not a loophole, it’s unenforced. But you’re not answering my question. There are a lot of guns in Indiana, there are a lot of guns in Vermont, there are a lot of guns in Maine.”

Bernard suggested it’s all about the crowd:

“There’s a lot more people in Chicago, there’s a lot more people in New York City. That’s why the guns go to where the people are. That’s the principle of supply and demand.”

Tucker came back with, “Oh, it’s just population density? But you know that that’s not true. That’s a lie. … There are lots of densely-populated places with guns without a lot of murders. Maybe there’s something else. Maybe it’s not the guns. And you know that that’s true, so why don’t you just say it?”

Talk of background checks ensued.

Back to Tucker, who referenced Tuesday’s horrific execution of a Chicago 4th grader in broad daylight as a strike against the boy’s father’s gang:

“The person who pulled the trigger in this specific case, who was accused of murdering the 9-year-old, had a prior conviction — was not allowed to have a gun under federal law in the first place. And so that’s the point that you ignore every time, which is that people who break the law tend not to obey the law.”

Solid. Bernard went back to loopholes.

You should see for yourself how it ended.

“Might be my last gun control debate,” Tucker uttered to the audience.

“It’s too stupid. I’m sorry to afflict that upon you.”

The Fox host references a riddle no one appears able to answer: A gun ban will take firearms from law-abiding citizens; now how do propose to get them from the criminals?

All of the present plans seem concentrated on disarming those who follow the law. Shouldn’t murderers and robbers be the groups they’re focusing on?

How do you get their guns? They’re the ones, ya know, murderin’.

-ALEX

 

Relevant RedState links in this article: here.

See 3 more pieces from me:

Brazilian Gang Leader & Drug Trafficker Attempts A Prison Break In One Of The Craziest & Most Hilarious Ways Possible

Victoria’s Secret Grants Your Wish: Its New Underwear Angel Is A Man

Pioneer David Hogg Changes His Tune – The Cause Of Violence In America Is No Longer Guns

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. 

If you have an iPhone and want to comment, select the box with the upward arrow at the bottom of your screen; swipe left and choose “Request Desktop Site.” If it fails to automatically refresh, manually reload the page. Scroll down to the red horizontal bar that says “Show Comments.”

 

 

The post Tucker Apologizes for the Stupidity of His Guest’s Gun Control Argument, Says it May be His Last Gun Debate appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group tucker-gun-control-debate-SCREENSHOT-300x157 Tucker Apologizes for the Stupidity of His Guest’s Gun Control Argument, Says it May be His Last Gun Debate Vermont Uncategorized Tucker Carlson Politics New Hampshire mass shootings Lori Lightfoot loopholes Indiana Guns gun control Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats crime Chicago bernard whitman baltimore background checks Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Unsolicited Advice: Your Open Marriage Is Just A Pre-Divorce Partnership

Welcome to Unsolicited Advice, the weekly column where I give advice no one asked for to people who don’t know who I am. This week our charming rural farmhouse gets swept up into a tornado and lands us right smack dab in the middle of the bizarre fantasy world we call Hollywood.

Silicon Valley actor Thomas Middleditch admitted in a Playboy magazine interview that he and his wife of four years are in an “open marriage”. Normally I wouldn’t touch something like this with a ten foot sex toy. Of course, these are two consenting adults and what they do with their bodies inside (and outside) of their marriage is their business. But it was the HBO star’s description of their journey into “swinging” that raised alarm bells for me.

“Only after I got married was I like, ‘Mollie, I’m sorry, but we have to get nontraditional here.’ To her credit, instead of saying ‘F–k you, I’m out,’ she was like, ‘Let’s figure this out,’” he recalled. “To be honest, swinging has saved our marriage. We have different speeds, and we argue over it constantly, but it’s better than feeling unheard and alone and that you have to scurry in the shadows.”

He goes on to say that it hasn’t necessarily been a smooth ride. In fact, it sounds downright stressful especially considering Middleditch’s fame and how that effects his prospects as compared to his costume designer wife. He admits she isn’t as excited about the arrangement as he is, and there is a constant negotiation for her comfort level when he explores “opportunities”.

“That’s one of the trickier elements of it all, because Mollie doesn’t get that and yet she has to witness it. I’m like, ‘Come on, what about this chick who’s obviously really into me?’ And Mollie will say, ‘Yeah, she’s into you. Where do I fit in?’ That question comes up.”

“It’s a game of inches on a minefield to try to predict who’s going to feel safe,” he concludes. “My first concern is Mollie. Anything that happens has to be run by the queen.”

“I just like it. I’m sexual.”

All the red flags.

Thomas…you seem to be congratulating yourself for your honesty as though it absolves you from the obvious narcissism of this situation. While you see a marital victory, I see a wife a wife who was not only reluctant to acquiesce to your desire to be sexually active with other women but remains so. I’ve been married 20 years. I know that anything that is a recurring argument for years is not actually the healthy kind of arguing. It is a glaring sign that something is wrong and that one or both parties are hurting.

It sounds to me like Mollie really loves you, and it also sounds to me that she’s been trying to tell you that this arrangement doesn’t feel as good to her as it does to you. I suspect it isn’t just about the swinging, it’s about the trust. No matter what the circumstances are, a marriage cannot thrive if both partners don’t feel safe with each other. In this one interview you have thrown out several worrisome thoughts that make me think your wife isn’t exactly feeling safe.

You say Mollie is a private person and that you hesitate to share too much out of concern for that. That’s nice except you haven’t really honored that. In one single sentence you claim to want to protect her privacy while simultaneously putting her private sexual life on blast. Perhaps it would be one thing if this were a situation you’d both agreed to in the beginning and were both excited about. But exposing Mollie’s hesitancy and her unease with the lifestyle you chose for your marriage is a violation. I obviously know nothing about either of you but I’m guessing she finds the interview embarrassing at the very least.

You seem to have convinced yourself that your clever “workaround” saved your marriage, but I don’t see a marriage victory. I see a pre-divorce partnership.  I see a relationship that is dominated by your sexual needs. I understand there are many details between the two of you no one knows. Perhaps Mollie has her own needs that loom pretty large in your marriage. I don’t know, but this is Unsolicited Advice so I’m taking liberties. What I do know is that sex is not just a physical act- it is an expression of commitment, a celebration of intimacy and a declaration of trust. When you bring an outside party into the marital bed, you disrupt that cycle. It catches up to most people eventually.

Your narcissism makes it so you think your request for an open marriage was the loving thing to do, when in fact it was tragically selfish. “We have to be nontraditional about this” is a hell of a bomb to drop on a spouse after the marriage. While I understand that you perhaps may have felt disappointed by the realities of marriage once the sparkle wore off, what you so sadly don’t seem to get is that marriage isn’t about how well your partner serves your needs. It is about how well you serve your partner’s needs. Marriage isn’t a selfish institution, it is the exact opposite. It requires us to put the needs of our partner ahead of our own. As difficult as it may be at times, there’s a rich reward in that. It builds a foundation for a lasting commitment that isn’t based on how you feel but what you promised. It engenders something that is ultimately both vital and extremely sexy in a marriage…

Trust.

Mollie can’t trust you with her desire; you’ve all but said so yourself. Again, it’s one thing if this is an idea you both had and wanted to try together but it’s quite another for you to not only spring it on your wife years into the marriage but recognize that the arrangement isn’t a safe one for her. Yet you continue.

“I just like it. I’m sexual” has a lot of “I” in it and not much “we”. We’re all sexual, Thomas. You’re not the first human on earth to enjoy lots of sex. Lord, have mercy you sound so stupid.

And you say Mollie is your “queen”?

I say it won’t be long before Mollie is your ex.

Honor your “queen” by shutting up about her sex life in public and putting a halt to your “nontraditional” nonsense until you can both agree on a situation that is completely safe for both of your hearts.

It sounds like you’re really the only one enjoying yourself here. Poor Mollie. Get help, Thomas. You’re not well.

*Follow Kira on Twitter @RealKiraDavis

*Follow Kira on Facebook @RealKiraDavis

*Subscribe to Kira’s podcast Just Listen to Yourself on iTunes

 

The post Unsolicited Advice: Your Open Marriage Is Just A Pre-Divorce Partnership appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group middleditch-emmy-awards-300x200 Unsolicited Advice: Your Open Marriage Is Just A Pre-Divorce Partnership trust TMI Thomas Middleditch swinging safety open marriage Front Page Stories Featured Story Culture Commitment   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Tucker Apologizes for the Stupidity of His Guest’s Gun Control Argument, Says it May be His Last Gun Debate

Westlake Legal Group tucker-gun-control-debate-SCREENSHOT-620x323 Tucker Apologizes for the Stupidity of His Guest’s Gun Control Argument, Says it May be His Last Gun Debate Vermont Uncategorized Tucker Carlson Politics New Hampshire mass shootings Lori Lightfoot loopholes Indiana Guns gun control Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats crime Chicago bernard whitman baltimore background checks Allow Media Exception

[Screenshot from TheDC Shorts, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwX7INeoC2s]

 

I don’t remember seeing this happen before, but it did on Thursday night — Tucker Carlson apologized to his audience for what he considered to be the unacceptable ridiculousness of his guest.

Tucker welcomed to the show former Bill Clinton pollster Bernard Whitman to discuss gun violence in cities such as Baltimore and Chicago.

Tucker asked Bernard:

“Why are the places with gun bans, Chicago and Baltimore, for example, so much more dangerous than places where so-called assault weapons are common like Vermont or New Hampshire?”

Bernard credits surrounding states and their lax gun laws:

“You have to look at where the guns are coming from. In Chicago, 60% of the firearms that Chicago police seize are coming from states like Indiana, with very weak gun laws. In New York City and New York state, 74% of the guns seized are coming from states with weak gun laws. In New York City alone, nine out of 10 guns purchased and used quickly come from states with lax gun control laws.”

That’s right in line with Chicago’s Democratic mayor, Lori Lightfoot. As I covered on September 3rd, she blames the Windy City’s problems on Republicans (here):

“60% of illegal firearms recovered in Chicago come from outside IL — mostly from states dominated by coward Republicans like you who refuse to enact commonsense gun legislation. Keep our name out of your mouth.”



But Tucker had a really great question for Bernard that should maybe be posed to Lori as well:

“[I] have never understood why, if all the guns in Chicago come from Indiana, then why doesn’t Indiana have a similar murder rate?”

Bernard’s answer? Because those states are losin’ all their dadburn guns to Chicago and NYC!

The dude thought he had a real cool comeback:

“Because the guns are leaving. The guns are being shipped to metropolises. … You just made a great argument for federal gun control. That’s exactly why we need federal gun control.”

Tucker:

“We already have federal laws against trans–“

“We have federal loopholes,” Bernard interjected.

Tucker said nope:

“There are no loopholes. Actually, I know a lot about this subject, and there are…the guns moving from Indiana to Chicago are moving by car. … That’s against the law, and the feds don’t do anything about it. It’s not a loophole, it’s unenforced. But you’re not answering my question. There are a lot of guns in Indiana, there are a lot of guns in Vermont, there are a lot of guns in Maine.”

Bernard suggested it’s all about the crowd:

“There’s a lot more people in Chicago, there’s a lot more people in New York City. That’s why the guns go to where the people are. That’s the principle of supply and demand.”

Tucker came back with, “Oh, it’s just population density? But you know that that’s not true. That’s a lie. … There are lots of densely-populated places with guns without a lot of murders. Maybe there’s something else. Maybe it’s not the guns. And you know that that’s true, so why don’t you just say it?”

Talk of background checks ensued.

Back to Tucker, who referenced Tuesday’s horrific execution of a Chicago 4th grader in broad daylight as a strike against the boy’s father’s gang:

“The person who pulled the trigger in this specific case, who was accused of murdering the 9-year-old, had a prior conviction — was not allowed to have a gun under federal law in the first place. And so that’s the point that you ignore every time, which is that people who break the law tend not to obey the law.”

Solid. Bernard went back to loopholes.

You should see for yourself how it ended.

“Might be my last gun control debate,” Tucker uttered to the audience.

“It’s too stupid. I’m sorry to afflict that upon you.”

The Fox host references a riddle no one appears able to answer: A gun ban will take firearms from law-abiding citizens; now how do propose to get them from the criminals?

All of the present plans seem concentrated on disarming those who follow the law. Shouldn’t murderers and robbers be the groups they’re focusing on?

How do you get their guns? They’re the ones, ya know, murderin’.

-ALEX

 

Relevant RedState links in this article: here.

See 3 more pieces from me:

Brazilian Gang Leader & Drug Trafficker Attempts A Prison Break In One Of The Craziest & Most Hilarious Ways Possible

Victoria’s Secret Grants Your Wish: Its New Underwear Angel Is A Man

Pioneer David Hogg Changes His Tune – The Cause Of Violence In America Is No Longer Guns

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. 

If you have an iPhone and want to comment, select the box with the upward arrow at the bottom of your screen; swipe left and choose “Request Desktop Site.” If it fails to automatically refresh, manually reload the page. Scroll down to the red horizontal bar that says “Show Comments.”

 

 

The post Tucker Apologizes for the Stupidity of His Guest’s Gun Control Argument, Says it May be His Last Gun Debate appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group tucker-gun-control-debate-SCREENSHOT-300x157 Tucker Apologizes for the Stupidity of His Guest’s Gun Control Argument, Says it May be His Last Gun Debate Vermont Uncategorized Tucker Carlson Politics New Hampshire mass shootings Lori Lightfoot loopholes Indiana Guns gun control Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats crime Chicago bernard whitman baltimore background checks Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

This Trump-Ukraine “Whistle-Blower” Story Is Ridiculous and It’s Going to Blow Up In the Media’s Face Again

Westlake Legal Group squinty-joe-biden-620x317 This Trump-Ukraine “Whistle-Blower” Story Is Ridiculous and It’s Going to Blow Up In the Media’s Face Again Ukraine right wing ridiculous republicans Politics Obama Administration media bias Joe Biden Hypocrisy hunter biden Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story donald trump democrats Corruption Probe 2016

Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden speaks with reporters after a campaign stop at Lindy’s Diner in Keene N.H., Saturday, Aug. 24, 2019. (AP Photo/Michael Dwyer)

You want to know why conservatives hate the liberal media and have no faith in many commentators on their own side? All you have to do is look at the reactions to this stupid story.

Yesterday, a supposed “bombshell” dropped via numerous anonymous sources that the much ballyhooed “whistle-blower” complaint against Trump involved him encouraging Ukraine’s new president to continue it’s corruption investigation into Joe Biden. To this point, we actually have no specifics saying Trump promised him anything after that request and you’d be remiss to ask why it’s wrong to ask an ally to look into corruption involving U.S. citizens.

Let me quote myself responding to the most fleshed out account of what is claimed to have happened. This was posted late last night.

As per usual, the media are losing their minds. Trump was pressuring an ally to conduct an investigation! It’s unheard of and unprecedented! Who could ever do such a thing!?

Oh, I don’t know. Maybe the Obama administration when they were working with UK intelligence, including using foreign assets, to target Trump in 2016? That seems like much more of a big deal given the only real allegation here is that Trump asked Ukraine to keep an already occurring corruption probe going in which we have the target on tape admitting what he did. I was assured that what happened in 2016 was above board because the Obama administration had legitimate suspicions. You know who else has legitimate suspicions? President Trump, because again, its on freaking video.

But ask yourself this. Why is the corruption Trump was asking to be probed not the actual story here? Let me refresh your memory of exactly what we are dealing with.

Yes, that’s Joe Biden, on tape admitting he threatened to withhold $1B in loan guarantees from Ukraine if they didn’t fire a prosecutor that was close to taking down the company his son worked for. Seems pretty corrupt doesn’t it? Yet, the media yawned. They didn’t care at all. It was barely reported and the “fact-checkers” rushed to deliver half-true ratings, shilling for Biden as not being aware his son was a member of the board of the company. It was all predictable.

But Trump asks Ukraine to keep looking into the issue and amazingly, the media care. Not only do they care, they want him impeached for “treason” over it. Yes, that was an actual thing said on MSNBC’s Morning Joe this morning.

So to recap, being on video trying to extort Ukraine to protect your son is perfectly acceptable. Asking Ukraine to not drop their investigation into someone who tried to extort them to protect their son is impeachable. Does that make sense? No, it doesn’t.

And as to this “whistle-blower,” he’s not one at all.

No, what it means is that an intelligence official has no right to force declassification of presidential communications just because he disagrees with what was said. That’s not being a whistle-blower. It’s being a partisan. The constitution gives near total unanimity to the President in conducting foreign policy. That means if he wants to ask an ally to investigate corruption or risk straining cooperation, he’s entitled to do so. You can not like it and you can vote him out in 2020 in response. But the laws don’t suddenly change just because Donald Trump is president.

The hypocrisy being displayed in the mainstream reporting of this story is mind-blowing. But the hypocrisy is part of the grift.

Perhaps the only thing more frustrating though is seeing some on the right rush to Twitter to proclaim how terrible this all because that’s what a certain wing always does. And when this blows up in the media’s and their faces (again), they’ll insist it was all just an honest mistake. Rinse and repeat.

————————————————

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

The post This Trump-Ukraine “Whistle-Blower” Story Is Ridiculous and It’s Going to Blow Up In the Media’s Face Again appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-08-21-at-10.25.40-AM-300x161 This Trump-Ukraine “Whistle-Blower” Story Is Ridiculous and It’s Going to Blow Up In the Media’s Face Again Ukraine right wing ridiculous republicans Politics Obama Administration media bias Joe Biden Hypocrisy hunter biden Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story donald trump democrats Corruption Probe 2016   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump Isn’t Bulletproof, But Even With The Ukraine Story He’s Far From Toast

Westlake Legal Group trump-obama-judge-620x291 Trump Isn’t Bulletproof, But Even With The Ukraine Story He’s Far From Toast Ukraine Rudy Giuliani Joe Biden Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception 2020

screengrab from https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/c/embed/ee51e63a-ed08-11e8-8b47-bd0975fd6199

A continuously-developing story puts Donald Trump on the phone with a Ukrainian leader, telling that leader to continue investigations into corruption that include former Vice President Joe Biden. The reporting stems from a whistleblower report that the Washington Post got its hands on. Since the story originally broke, we appear to have confirmed Ukraine is the nation, and Biden was the intended target of Trump’s negotiation tactic (allegedly, continuing the investigation was a condition for improving U.S. relations).

Naturally, you have people on the right defending the President and people on the left (and some from the right) attacking him. Rudy Giuliani appears to be both trying to confirm the story while also saying it’s totally fine.

There are some who would lead you to believe that this is Silver Bullet v.263, which is totally guaranteed to take Trump out this time (they swear it!). Even if you were Trump skeptical, there are some facts here that must be taken into account:

  1. Every so-called silver bullet has failed so far.
  2. Trump’s base isn’t deserting him.
  3. The Democrats are not offering any reason to elect one of their own to replace Trump.

Think about this for a moment: Trump may actually be guilty of something here, but Trump is always suspected of being guilty. That is nothing new. The Democrats, however, are vowing to go to the extremes on every social issue, and those extremes don’t actually poll well. Primarily because they scare the hell out of most Americans.

Trump wanted Ukraine to investigate Biden for corruption vs.

  • Democrats outright claiming they’ll come into your homes and take your guns.
  • Abortion up to and just after birth.
  • Jacking up taxes.
  • Getting rid of Americans’ private insurance.
  • Making Americans pay reparations.

The list goes on.

That doesn’t excuse Trump if he did break the law. That’s a pretty big no-no. Being President of the United States doesn’t grant you automatic immunity. However, the American people are going to weigh this against the many things Democrats say they want to force Americans to comply with. If you think that Americans will choose the Democrats over Trump, you fail to remember 2016.

Trump isn’t bulletproof by any means. He is vulnerable. Joe Biden could still give him a run for his money. Warren, if she managed to topple Biden, would have a maybe primary victory and the full backing of her party and many moderate voters to challenge Trump. He is beatable, and that won’t change. However, the Democrats are also extremely beatable, and right now they are doing a great job of beating themselves.

I don’t expect this story will do any more damage than other stories have. If it’s true, I don’t like that he’s done it and I don’t approve of the tactic. But, if it becomes like every other Trump silver bullet and doesn’t even hit him, much less land a devastating blow, then the people pushing these attacks are going to have to stop and wonder what they’re doing wrong.

Of course, even when they do that, they usually come to the wrong conclusions. That will be the difference between the Democrats and Trump in the coming year.

 

The post Trump Isn’t Bulletproof, But Even With The Ukraine Story He’s Far From Toast appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group trump-obama-judge-300x141 Trump Isn’t Bulletproof, But Even With The Ukraine Story He’s Far From Toast Ukraine Rudy Giuliani Joe Biden Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Louisiana Must Elect Ralph Abraham For Governor

Westlake Legal Group ralph-abraham2 Louisiana Must Elect Ralph Abraham For Governor Ralph Abraham Politics Louisiana John Bel Edwards governor Front Page Stories elections Eddie Rispone conservative Allow Media Exception

Louisiana is in need of a new governor.

At a time when the national economy is doing much better than it had been in the years prior to Donald Trump taking office, unemployment is at an all-time low, wages are up, and people are generally doing better than they were. The same, however, cannot be said for Louisiana.

In 2015, Louisiana elected Democrat John Bel Edwards to be the governor. In the four years that he’s been in office, Louisiana’s population has shrunk amid out-migration and jobs disappearing. The state’s largest industry – oil and gas – is being sued out of the state by the governor’s allies, the trial lawyers. After promising to not raise taxes, he raised taxes (and when a sales tax was about to expire, he bullied the legislature into renewing a portion of it and called it a “tax cut”).

He did raise teachers’ salaries though (by somewhere between $50-80 per month). He also eliminated the budget deficit (created by budgets he voted for as a legislator and using sales taxes he raised and claimed to have cut). So, there’s that.

Louisiana could have done better in 2015, but the state’s GOP took for granted that Louisiana is a red state and assumed that three Republicans fighting each other wouldn’t be a problem. Then, Edwards won and Louisiana has suffered.

The state has another chance this year. So far, and with the primary less than a month away, Edwards has been unable to poll above 50%. Under Louisiana’s jungle primary rules, that means he would be in a runoff with the second-place candidate. All of the polling suggests that Congressman Ralph Abraham is the best candidate to take Edwards on in the November run-off.

The other Republican in the race, Eddie Rispone, is a good, conservative guy. He is a very successful businessman and has been supportive of conservatives and conservative causes for years. However, the way he has run his campaign suggests he lacks the ability to properly lead the state. Abraham, on the other hand, is a successful leader in Louisiana.

Rispone’s campaign has targeted Abraham for missing votes as a congressman. Abraham has missed those votes because he is running for governor. Furthermore, being in Washington D.C. is not the only way a congressman can represent his or her constituents (one could argue that it is, in fact, the least effective way to do so). Being someone whose office is reachable and makes every effort to help constituents, who has given up speaking at political events in order to be in his district when natural disasters strike, and who has literally served his country through the armed forces is someone who has done far more to represent his district than a capitol city businessman who makes donations to candidates.

Rispone, as someone who wants to lead the state, has staffed his campaign with out-of-state strategists who have thoroughly mishandled Rispone’s messaging.

The consulting firm Leverage Public Strategies, out of Birmingham, which has been paid upwards of $50,000 since April according to campaign finance reports, is owned by Blake Harris, the political consultant who currently serves as the chief of staff to Tennessee governor Bill Lee, and Heather Wilson – not the same Heather Wilson who recently served as the secretary of the Air Force. Neither, to the best of our knowledge, has ever worked a race in Louisiana.

Ditto for Bryan Reed of Arlington Heights, Illinois, who has been paid $60,000 since April as the campaign manager.

Then there’s the ad team of Something Else Strategies of Easley, South Carolina, which since April has reeled in just over $200,000 to produce Rispone’s TV ads which everybody has complained about. One employee of Something Else, Mandy Fraher, lives on the Northshore and has run a Louisiana race; she was the campaign manager for John Kennedy’s failed Senate race against Mary Landrieu in 2008 and, to the best of our knowledge, has not been involved in an in-state race since. How much involvement Fraher had in the production of those commercials we don’t know.

Brian Sanderson, of Three Oak Group based in Ocean Springs, Mississippi, has also never worked a Louisiana race before to the best of our knowledge. Sanderson, who so far has been paid about $42,000, is an alumnus of the Haley Barbour political machine in the Magnolia State.

To the best of our knowledge Grand Rapids, Michigan political consultant Jordan Gehrke hasn’t run a Louisiana race before, either. He’s been paid $183,000 since April to do a “statewide modeling program” which we’re assuming is what’s driven the strategy behind those ads.

His messaging plan, from the start, has been “I support Donald Trump and I will oppose sanctuary cities and political correctness.” Of those three issues, approximately zero of them matter when it comes to the economic issues stated toward the beginning of this column. As a businessman, Rispone should be extremely capable of talking about Louisiana’s terrible business climate, shrinking population, and diminishing job opportunities. But, he has let the out-of-state consultants make a lot of money off of him (yes, him directly – he loaned his campaign millions of dollars to self-fund his own campaign).

If your job as Louisiana’s governor is to put Louisiana first, you don’t do that by hiring people who aren’t from Louisiana and who don’t seem to know the issues affecting the state. You also don’t make the mistake most Democrats make when they try to make every little political issue about Trump in some way. Especially when a recent poll gives Trump a 54% approval rating in the state.

If this were just electability, then I could point out that it’s likely that Rispone peaked at 19% in the polls. One released yesterday had him at 16%. Barring him just cleaning house and starting over with a new consulting staff, it doesn’t look like he’ll break 20% (and, if he does, it won’t be much higher than that). But, this is more than just electability.

This is about leadership, and his hiring decisions seem very questionable and very much not Louisiana First. Abraham, however, has represented the people who have sent him to Congress very well, has served our country, and is the most capable conservative in the race for governor. Louisiana should vote for him on October 12, and put him into a run-off against Edwards. The Republicans have more than enough voters to make him the governor, but that support has to start now. Please vote for Abraham for governor, and make a donation to help him get to the capitol.

The post Louisiana Must Elect Ralph Abraham For Governor appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group ralph-abraham1-300x190 Louisiana Must Elect Ralph Abraham For Governor Ralph Abraham Politics Louisiana John Bel Edwards governor Front Page Stories elections Eddie Rispone conservative Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Think You’ve Heard the Stupidest Thing Ever? I Disagree. Witness the Woke’s New Condemnation of Ikea

Westlake Legal Group meatballs-1994807_1280-620x399 Think You’ve Heard the Stupidest Thing Ever? I Disagree. Witness the Woke’s New Condemnation of Ikea woke virtual signaling Uncategorized Sweden Social Justice outrage Ikea Front Page Stories Food Featured Story environment Culture cultural appropriation Allow Media Exception

 

 

So there you are, thinking you’ve heard of the stupidest thing possible. But then I swoop in with this.

Do you appreciate affordable, well-designed furniture? Are you a fan of modern, minimalist decor? Do you hanker for a hunka Ikea?

Well, your favorite Swedish slinger of Lingonberry soda is in trouble.

In fact, its worse than you may imagine. The assembly-required home goods haven recently had the nerve to…**Trigger Warning**…serve peas.

Yes — it’s that horrible.

Peas, I said.

Calm yourself…

It all started when the backer of the Billy Bookcase decided to be a jerk and serve similar chicken.

Jerk chicken, in case you didn’t know, is a marinated Caribbean dish, and the maker of your favorite fake-fur rug paired it with white rice and the aforementioned panic-inducing spherical seeds.

You see, Ikea should be sensitive to the fact that the Scotch-bonnet-peppered meat isn’t traditionally teamed with dadgum green peas! It’s supposed to be kidney beans in coconut milk, ya neanderthals:

Shame on Ikea for feigning a penchant for diversity.

Let the outrage begin!

It’s shameful cultural appropriation, and they didn’t even hire any Caribbeans to guide them in their theft:

As you can see above, the store’s repented.

How could those white people have ever thought this was okay??

At least one person defended the home of the Klippan loveseat, Färgrik mug, Riktig Ögla curtain rings, Flärdfull candle, Knutstorp chair, and Ödmjuk teapot:

The store can use the support; it just can’t seem to catch a break with the Painfully Conscious — Ikea even made CheatSheet’s list of “5 Stores Where You Should Not Buy Furniture.”

The SuperWoke list excoriated the furniture retailer for having the nerve to:

  • Use wood
  • Not be located as pervasively as McDonalds

See for yourself:

However, the larger concerns around Ikea have more to do with environmental and other costs, not necessarily the furniture itself. “Can we afford to keep shopping at places where an item’s price reflects only a fraction of its societal costs?” one Atlantic column asked in 2009.

Seven years and counting after the article was published, it appears we can. But it doesn’t necessarily mean we should. For one, IKEA has pushed many transportation costs onto the consumers themselves, likely without them even thinking about it. The average consumer drives 50 miles round trip to make it to the assembly-required mecca, often far away from city centers so the business can avoid higher taxes. At the time the article was written, the retailer was also the third-largest consumer of wood, used in the particleboard now ubiquitous with the brand.

But the bigger issue, as the Atlantic points out, is that the cheaper furniture invites us not to invest or repair the items. When a bookcase breaks or a dresser becomes unusable, we throw it away instead of repairing it, like we would an heirloom armoire. It might get recycled, or it might not. Either way, we’re using more natural resources without adding lasting value. For those reasons, “IKEA is the least sustainable retailer on the planet,” said Wig Zamore, a Massachusetts environmental activist who worked with IKEA and supports some of the company’s regional green initiatives.

Did the person who wrote that article stop to think that perhaps people drive far to get to Ikea because they love it so much?

Perhaps the author could’ve also considered that if you open a store in New Jersey, it’ far from New York; if you open one in New York, it’s far from New Jersey.

All places are close to some things and far from others.

Oh well, who needs reason when you’ve got an outrageous signaling of virtue at hand?

I’m keen on the Swedist store, evil Nazi peas notwithstanding.

The next time you’re there, take my advice: getcha a softserve vanilla cone. Those things are delicious.

-ALEX

 

Relevant RedState links in this article:

See 3 more pieces from me:

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. For iPhone instructions, see the bottom of this page.

If you have an iPhone and want to comment, select the box with the upward arrow at the bottom of your screen; swipe left and choose “Request Desktop Site.” If it fails to automatically refresh, manually reload the page. Scroll down to the red horizontal bar that says “Show Comments.”

The post Think You’ve Heard the Stupidest Thing Ever? I Disagree. Witness the Woke’s New Condemnation of Ikea appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group ikea-4048229_1280-300x200 Think You’ve Heard the Stupidest Thing Ever? I Disagree. Witness the Woke’s New Condemnation of Ikea woke virtual signaling Uncategorized Sweden Social Justice outrage Ikea Front Page Stories Food Featured Story environment Culture cultural appropriation Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

DOJ and the DNI Tell Adam Schiff to FOAD Over Whistleblower Report and Schiff Makes a Toothless Threat to Go to Court

Westlake Legal Group AS DOJ and the DNI Tell Adam Schiff to FOAD Over Whistleblower Report and Schiff Makes a Toothless Threat to Go to Court whistleblower Ukraine republicans Politics Michael Atkinson Front Page Stories Featured Story doj dni Director of National Intelligence democrats Congress California Allow Media Exception adam schiff

The current scandal floating around Washington is something that may or may not have happened. At a classified briefing today, Intelligence Community IG Michael Atkinson was asked about a rumored “whistleblower” case that Adam Schiff believes a) concerns President Trump b) talking to a foreign leader that c) offended said whistleblower. At issue is a law that requires the IC to provide certain investigative reports to Congress under certain circumstances.

The Washington Post has reported this:

Trump’s interaction with the foreign leader included a “promise” that was regarded as so troubling that it prompted an official in the U.S. intelligence community to file a formal whistleblower complaint with the inspector general for the intelligence community, said the former officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.

It was not immediately clear which foreign leader Trump was speaking with or what he pledged to deliver, but his direct involvement in the matter has not been previously disclosed. It raises new questions about the president’s handling of sensitive information and may further strain his relationship with U.S. spy agencies. One former official said the communication was a phone call.

The best guess is that the foreign leader was Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and the “promise” was of better relations with the US if the Ukraine reenergized its investigation into Joe Biden’s role in influence peddling to aid his son, Hunter, when he was a director (how did that happen, right?) of Ukraine’s largest national gas company and his intervention to get the prosecutor looking into Hunter Biden’s corruption fired. This is Joe Biden’s quote:

“I remember going over (to Ukraine), convincing our team … that we should be providing for loan guarantees. … And I was supposed to announce that there was another billion-dollar loan guarantee. And I had gotten a commitment from (then Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko) and from (then-Prime Minister Arseniy) Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor (Shokin). And they didn’t. …

“They were walking out to a press conference. I said, nah, … we’re not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, ‘You have no authority. You’re not the president.’ … I said, call him. I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. … I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a bitch. He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time.”

This is Schiff’s letter to Atkiknson earlier in the month demanding to see the complaint.

Things got a lot hotter today when Atkinson refused to confirm or deny any part of the story. What is clear from the letter Atkinson sent to Schiff on September 17, is that the Department of Justice and the Director of National Intelligence are directing him to not talk to Schiff and that he’s not happy about it.

Westlake Legal Group ic-ig-whistleblower-letter-620x421 DOJ and the DNI Tell Adam Schiff to FOAD Over Whistleblower Report and Schiff Makes a Toothless Threat to Go to Court whistleblower Ukraine republicans Politics Michael Atkinson Front Page Stories Featured Story doj dni Director of National Intelligence democrats Congress California Allow Media Exception adam schiff

Schiff, being the needle…ummm…pencil neck that he is threatened legal action.

Schiff is just blowing smoke and he knows it. A rabidly anti-Trump national security lawyer from LawFareBlog gives this analysis:

Absent knowing what happened that got panties wadded, I’m not going to waste a lot of time wondering about it. I will note that it is entirely unsurprising that as riddled as the IC is with hard core #Resistance members and as much information as has been leaked with the express purpose of damaging Trump the release of another “foreign meddling” allegation into a presidential election is hardly shocking. And, given that Rudy Giuliani was in Ukraine just a few weeks ago, allegedly to dig up stuff on Biden, the conversation that is rumored to have taken place between Trump and the Ukraine president would also be unsurprising. I’m not sure it is a good look, but I’m not sure that Joe Biden running interference for his kid and getting an noted anti-corruption prosecutor fired is a particularly good look either.

The fat guy who is married to Kellyanne Conway is squirting blood out of his whatever:

As are a lot of others on the left.

The bottom line here is that unless the whistleblower goes directly to Schiff, and faces the music for doing that because that will not be a cost-free endeavor, then Schiff can scream all he wants but nothing happens. If the whistleblower does out himself, then we have another circus on our hands.

=========
=========
Like what you see? Then visit my story archive.

I’m on Facebook. Drop by and join the fun there.
=========
=========

The post DOJ and the DNI Tell Adam Schiff to FOAD Over Whistleblower Report and Schiff Makes a Toothless Threat to Go to Court appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group AS-300x187 DOJ and the DNI Tell Adam Schiff to FOAD Over Whistleblower Report and Schiff Makes a Toothless Threat to Go to Court whistleblower Ukraine republicans Politics Michael Atkinson Front Page Stories Featured Story doj dni Director of National Intelligence democrats Congress California Allow Media Exception adam schiff   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump Wins a Major Victory Over California’s Unconstitutional Garbage

Westlake Legal Group 02f7c7e0-4bf6-401e-9693-e92c39291877-620x317 Trump Wins a Major Victory Over California’s Unconstitutional Garbage voting unconstitutional Struck down republican voters Primary ballot Politics judge Gavin Newsom garbage Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story donald trump disenfranchisement democrats California blocked 2020

Democratic Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks at his gubernatorial campaign’s primary night watch party in San Francisco, Tuesday, June 5, 2018. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)

Several months back, the freedom loving legislators out in California decided it’d be totally constitutional to pass a law keeping Donald Trump off their state ballot if he doesn’t turn over his tax returns to them. In what was practically an extortion attempt, they sought to disenfranchise millions of Republican voters based on an arbitrary requirement above and beyond what federal law requires. It’s wasn’t quite a poll tax, but it’s wasn’t much better.

This led to Republicans suing to block the move.

The 15-page court filing alleges five counts of illegal action by California officials in enacting the tax returns law. Trump’s attorneys contend a state can only issue “procedural regulations” governing its election for president. Even if the state did have a role, the attorneys wrote, California’s law “does not serve a compelling state interest and, in any event, is not narrowly tailored to that interest.”

Now, we’ve got a decision that’s been handed down and it’s not good news for Gavin Newsom and crew.

A federal judge on Thursday handed President Donald Trump a victory in his effort to keep his financial information secret, siding with his campaign’s effort to block a California law aimed at forcing him to release his tax returns.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Morrison England Jr. comes as the president faces multiple Democratic-led efforts to force him to reveal his returns. Also Thursday, Trump sued to block New York prosecutors from their push obtain the returns as part of a criminal investigation.

You can almost feel the sadness in ABC News’ write-up. They had to get their jab in there about the judge being a Bush appointee, although I’ve been assured there are no such thing as Bush, Obama, or Trump judges. Funny how that rule goes out the window when it’s a Republican appointed to the bench.

Trump has bucked decades of precedent by refusing to release them, arguing they are under audit.

The above statement is irrelevant. A state simply can’t add additional requirements for being president outside of what the constitituion requires. What’s to stop a state from passing laws that keep Democrats off the ballot? Or certain age ranges? Oddly enough, CA’s former governor, Jerry Brown, got this right. He vetoed a similar bill in 2017, arguing it was a dangerous precedent.

Former Gov. Jerry Brown, a Democrat, vetoed similar tax return legislation in 2017, arguing it would create a slippery slope of putting extra requirements on presidential candidates.

Of course it’s a slippery slope. It’s none of Gavin Newsom’s business who his citizens choose to vote for and it’s certainly not his job, nor the job of the Democrat dominated legislature, to put barriers up in order to stop them from voting for a certain person. Is Donald Trump over 35 and a native born citizen? He’s eligible, period. Arguments about tax returns are not an excuse to deny voters the right to vote for who they want. This is no different than Jim Crow era laws keeping black Americans off ballots because they didn’t meet certain, extra-constitutional criteria. Even if you think Trump should release his tax returns, that can’t be used to deny people their right to vote for their preferred candidate.

This ruling happened at the District Court level within the Eastern District of California, so you can bet it will be appealed and end up at the Ninth Circuit. They’ll likely overturn the ruling and then the Supreme Court will have to smack them down yet again. That cycle has become fairly predictable, as we now live under Trump law, i.e. everything Trump does must be opposed regardless of the legal facts at play.

This ordeal doesn’t hold much practical value because Trump doesn’t really need to be on California’s primary ballot to win. But this could stop other states from trying similar stunts. Let’s hope sanity prevails here sooner rather than later.

————————————————

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

The post Trump Wins a Major Victory Over California’s Unconstitutional Garbage appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group DonaldTrumpAPphotoJune2019-300x153 Trump Wins a Major Victory Over California’s Unconstitutional Garbage voting unconstitutional Struck down republican voters Primary ballot Politics judge Gavin Newsom garbage Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story donald trump disenfranchisement democrats California blocked 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

DOJ and the DNI Tell Adam Schiff to FOAD Over Whistleblower Report and Schiff Makes a Toothless Threat to Go to Court

Westlake Legal Group AS DOJ and the DNI Tell Adam Schiff to FOAD Over Whistleblower Report and Schiff Makes a Toothless Threat to Go to Court whistleblower Ukraine republicans Politics Michael Atkinson Front Page Stories Featured Story doj dni Director of National Intelligence democrats Congress California Allow Media Exception adam schiff

The current scandal floating around Washington is something that may or may not have happened. At a classified briefing today, Intelligence Community IG Michael Atkinson was asked about a rumored “whistleblower” case that Adam Schiff believes a) concerns President Trump b) talking to a foreign leader that c) offended said whistleblower. At issue is a law that requires the IC to provide certain investigative reports to Congress under certain circumstances.

The Washington Post has reported this:

Trump’s interaction with the foreign leader included a “promise” that was regarded as so troubling that it prompted an official in the U.S. intelligence community to file a formal whistleblower complaint with the inspector general for the intelligence community, said the former officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.

It was not immediately clear which foreign leader Trump was speaking with or what he pledged to deliver, but his direct involvement in the matter has not been previously disclosed. It raises new questions about the president’s handling of sensitive information and may further strain his relationship with U.S. spy agencies. One former official said the communication was a phone call.

The best guess is that the foreign leader was Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and the “promise” was of better relations with the US if the Ukraine reenergized its investigation into Joe Biden’s role in influence peddling to aid his son, Hunter, when he was a director (how did that happen, right?) of Ukraine’s largest national gas company and his intervention to get the prosecutor looking into Hunter Biden’s corruption fired. This is Joe Biden’s quote:

“I remember going over (to Ukraine), convincing our team … that we should be providing for loan guarantees. … And I was supposed to announce that there was another billion-dollar loan guarantee. And I had gotten a commitment from (then Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko) and from (then-Prime Minister Arseniy) Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor (Shokin). And they didn’t. …

“They were walking out to a press conference. I said, nah, … we’re not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, ‘You have no authority. You’re not the president.’ … I said, call him. I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. … I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a bitch. He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time.”

This is Schiff’s letter to Atkiknson earlier in the month demanding to see the complaint.

Things got a lot hotter today when Atkinson refused to confirm or deny any part of the story. What is clear from the letter Atkinson sent to Schiff on September 17, is that the Department of Justice and the Director of National Intelligence are directing him to not talk to Schiff and that he’s not happy about it.

Westlake Legal Group ic-ig-whistleblower-letter-620x421 DOJ and the DNI Tell Adam Schiff to FOAD Over Whistleblower Report and Schiff Makes a Toothless Threat to Go to Court whistleblower Ukraine republicans Politics Michael Atkinson Front Page Stories Featured Story doj dni Director of National Intelligence democrats Congress California Allow Media Exception adam schiff

Schiff, being the needle…ummm…pencil neck that he is threatened legal action.

Schiff is just blowing smoke and he knows it. A rabidly anti-Trump national security lawyer from LawFareBlog gives this analysis:

Absent knowing what happened that got panties wadded, I’m not going to waste a lot of time wondering about it. I will note that it is entirely unsurprising that as riddled as the IC is with hard core #Resistance members and as much information as has been leaked with the express purpose of damaging Trump the release of another “foreign meddling” allegation into a presidential election is hardly shocking. And, given that Rudy Giuliani was in Ukraine just a few weeks ago, allegedly to dig up stuff on Biden, the conversation that is rumored to have taken place between Trump and the Ukraine president would also be unsurprising. I’m not sure it is a good look, but I’m not sure that Joe Biden running interference for his kid and getting an noted anti-corruption prosecutor fired is a particularly good look either.

The fat guy who is married to Kellyanne Conway is squirting blood out of his whatever:

As are a lot of others on the left.

The bottom line here is that unless the whistleblower goes directly to Schiff, and faces the music for doing that because that will not be a cost-free endeavor, then Schiff can scream all he wants but nothing happens. If the whistleblower does out himself, then we have another circus on our hands.

=========
=========
Like what you see? Then visit my story archive.

I’m on Facebook. Drop by and join the fun there.
=========
=========

The post DOJ and the DNI Tell Adam Schiff to FOAD Over Whistleblower Report and Schiff Makes a Toothless Threat to Go to Court appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group AS-300x187 DOJ and the DNI Tell Adam Schiff to FOAD Over Whistleblower Report and Schiff Makes a Toothless Threat to Go to Court whistleblower Ukraine republicans Politics Michael Atkinson Front Page Stories Featured Story doj dni Director of National Intelligence democrats Congress California Allow Media Exception adam schiff   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com