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 > Posts tagged "2018"

Video: Pelosi Gives Bizarre Hot Take on NC-9 Bellwether Race, Says Dem Who Lost Election “Won the Campaign”

Westlake Legal Group NancyPelosiAPimage-620x317 Video: Pelosi Gives Bizarre Hot Take on NC-9 Bellwether Race, Says Dem Who Lost Election “Won the Campaign” washington D.C. republicans Politics North Carolina Nancy Pelosi Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections donald trump democrats Dan McCready Dan Bishop Culture Congress Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020 2019 Elections 2019 2018 elections 2018

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of Calif., speaks during her weekly media availability on Capitol Hill, Thursday, June 27, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

After Republican State Senator Dan Bishop won Tuesday night’s hotly contested special election for North Carolina’s 9th congressional district, the spin from the mainstream media and Democrats was both predictable and hilarious.

The race had been billed as a bellwether race for 2020 for months in advance of election day. If Democrat Dan McCready won, it would be a repudiation of President Trump. If Bishop won, it would … mean nothing.

In the aftermath of Bishop’s victory, journalists and liberal commentators switched gears by saying the race contained a mixture of good news and bad news “for both sides.” Also, they asserted Bishop’s win was also a repudiation of Trump or something because the Republican candidate didn’t win the solidly red district by overwhelming numbers.

Like I said: Predictable and hilarious.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (CA) gave what was perhaps the most bizarre spin on what happened when she spoke about McCready’s loss on Thursday, telling reporters McCready “won the campaign” but lost the election:

“I’m very proud of Dan MCready. He’s a great patriot, he’s an independent voice for the district he would have represented,” Pelosi said in press conference on Thursday.

The California Democrat said because MCready performed better than past Democratic candidates in previous elections, “he won the campaign. He didn’t win the election, he won the campaign.”

Watch:

As Bonchie noted the day after the election, the election was actually not good news at all for Democrats.

I speak from firsthand experience when I tell you the atmosphere in this state, in the district, was that McCready was going to win in spite of polls showing a close race. Bishop was the underdog. He was outspent. He had much less time to campaign for the seat than McCready. Bishop was hammered by Democrats and local (liberal) newspaper editorial boards for his support of Trump.

Democrats were mad as hell over the tainted results of the November 2018 race that led to fraud indictments against an ABM ballot harvester affiliated with the original Republican candidate Mark Harris. There was a lot going against Bishop, even in a district that had been in Republican hands since the mid-60s.

He won it anyway, and in the process flipped two counties that had gone for McCready in 2018.

This election does not mean that 2020 will be a cakewalk by any stretch for Republicans in 2020. It means there is a lot of work to be done between now and then in Congressional districts across the country. The fight is on.

But spinning McCready’s loss as a “campaign win” is about as pathetic as it gets for Pelosi. Stacey Abrams must be proud.

——-
— Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter. –

The post Video: Pelosi Gives Bizarre Hot Take on NC-9 Bellwether Race, Says Dem Who Lost Election “Won the Campaign” appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group NancyPelosiAPimage-300x153 Video: Pelosi Gives Bizarre Hot Take on NC-9 Bellwether Race, Says Dem Who Lost Election “Won the Campaign” washington D.C. republicans Politics North Carolina Nancy Pelosi Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections donald trump democrats Dan McCready Dan Bishop Culture Congress Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020 2019 Elections 2019 2018 elections 2018   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

California’s New Use Of Force Laws Are The Result Of Politically Fostered Mistrust Of Police

Westlake Legal Group legal-broken-gavel California’s New Use Of Force Laws Are The Result Of Politically Fostered Mistrust Of Police Use of Force Uncategorized republicans racial profiling Politics police shootings police brutality police Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story elections donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power 2020 2019 2018
California’s New Use Of Force Laws Are The Result Of Politically Fostered Mistrust Of Police

The State of California just enacted new Use Of Force legislation for its law enforcement officers. On Monday, according to the San Fransisco Chronicle

Gov. Gavin Newsom signed AB392, which directs police to “use deadly force only when necessary in defense of human life” and, when possible, to use techniques to de-escalate a confrontation before shooting.

The bill does not explicitly define “necessary,” though courts could consider the actions of both the officer and the suspect when determining whether a shooting was justified. The law will take effect Jan. 1.

According to the Los Angeles Times, this was the result of a widening gap between police departments and the minority communities they serve, a gap exacerbated by police shootings seen by some as racially motivated. From the Times

SACRAMENTO —  After an emotional fight that laid bare the chasm between California’s communities of color and police, Gov. Gavin Newsom Monday signed Assembly Bill 392, creating what some have described as one of the toughest standards in the nation for when law enforcement officers can kill.

Intense private negotiations and public outcry influenced the final language of the legislation, which will take effect on Jan. 1. Recent fatal police shootings of unarmed black men, in particular, prompted activists to seek changes in rules that in some cases were more than a century old. Though the final bill doesn’t go as far as some wanted, supporters say it’s a first step in changing the culture of policing in California.

The Times goes on to say that this should not have any deleterious effect on day-to-day policing in large metropolitan areas.

The new language will require that law enforcement use deadly force only when “necessary,” instead of the current wording of when it is “reasonable.” In large urban law enforcement departments that already train for de-escalation and crisis intervention, day-to-day policing will probably not noticeably change.

I’m not so sure, mainly because this procedural change isn’t the only thing going on in the arena of community-police relations. In many locales, there has been a loss of trust between the communities and the police that serve them. In certain departments, this could be a self inflicted wound. In my brief, 10 year experience in law enforcement, the Sheriff’s Office I worked for was well regarded in the Black neighborhoods while the City PD, wasn’t so well thought of. A typical comment from residents was, “County don’t play.” And we didn’t. We went by the rules and enforced the law, no favorites…and the community knew it. They didn’t always like us, but they did trust us.

In other locales, race baiters have used demonstrably false statements to inflame unfortunate incidents, into a full blown race riots. Such was the case in Ferguson, MO, where Michael Brown, a black man who had just finished robbing a convenience store attacked a white police officer responding to the robbery call. The officer fearing for his safety, shot and killed Brown as he continued to attack him. The officer was cleared by a grand jury after several witnesses and laboratory results confirmed his version of the events; that Brown had attacked him and tried to get his firearm.

That didn’t stop the race hustlers such as Al Sharpton from inciting riots that featured violence and property damage to the point that the National Guard had to be called out. Ferguson Police Department is now under a Federal consent decree due to an investigation by the Obama/Holder DOJ.

The final straw in California, was the shooting death of Stephon Clark by Sacramento Police in 2018. At the time of the shooting, Clark was unarmed, but was holding a cellphone which the Police thought was a gun. The officers were not charged.

California cities aren’t the only areas that are in the throes of an anti-police societal shift. Others we’ve seen in the news, Detroit, New York City and President Trump’s favorite example of Democrat governance, Baltimore, Maryland. It’s this societal shift, not police procedure restrictions that is the biggest danger in California’s new law.

Police Officers are professionals. Given certain legal constraints, the vast majority of these dedicated public servants work within those constraints and are able to effectively police their communities. This new law, in and of itself, is unlikely to change that. It’s the societal environment that resulted in its passage that is the problem.

Police in many locales aren’t generally trusted…and it’s not always their fault. I had the opportunity to speak with David Webb on his Tuesday morning show on Sirius XM. The subject was the Eric Garner incident in New York City, where Mr. Garner died as a result of the struggle that ensued when Police Officers attempted to arrest him on outstanding warrants.

Mr. Webb opined that Mr. Garner would certainly be alive today, if he hadn’t resisted lawful arrest—and he’s right. However, that’s not the entire story of mistrust. That particular story starts with civil authorities at all levels passing legislation that is meant to feel good but makes no sense to the populace it is inflicted on.

In Garner’s case, it was feel good cigarette taxes that are so onerous, they have fostered a burgeoning industry in bootleg smokes sold as singles. Like most folks, I believe in obeying the law (well except for highway speed limits) even if I think a particular ordinance is stupid. Moreover, “broken windows” policing, a proven method, says that even minor, infractions of “stupid” laws need to be addressed. Which, as a result of a neighborhood complaint regarding Garner’s activities, the Police were doing.

As I indicated to Webb, there’s an old military leadership adage—Never give an order, that you know damned well will not be obeyed. If the Soldier disobeys, he’s in trouble. You have to punish him. You are in trouble as a leader for punishing the Soldier for what he, his buddies and you all know…is BS. Many of the city ordinances in New York City are just that…an insult to the citizenry they are inflicted on…I mean really…a limit on the size of fountain drinks?

Our society is based on voluntary compliance with the law. Generally speaking, most of us support obedience all of our laws even when we might disagree with a few of them. But there comes a point when societal segments have had enough silliness and their respect for the law in general wanes. This is exacerbated when politicians like Bill DeBlasio New York) and Stephanie Rawlings-Blake (Baltimore) throw their own law enforcement agencies under the bus. What’s worse, we even have Democrat Presidential candidates calling Michael Brown’s death a “murder.” This after, the officer in question was fully exonerated.

How are citizens expected to respect Law Enforcement when their nominal superiors don’t? Why should police officers go out of their way via “self initiated activity,” when the payoff for being proactive is being excoriated by your ultimate boss, the Mayor. So they don’t. They answer their calls, try not to get fired and nothing more. Their communities, defend into chaos…just like Baltimore.

In short, requiring police to have a good, articulable reason for using deadly force is the least of their problems. Public distrust, most of it fostered by corrupt politicians using them as scapegoats and the subject of feel good legislation, is definitely at the tippy top.

David Webb can be found on Sirius XM Channel 125 9-12AM M-F

Mike Ford, a retired Infantry Officer, writes on Military, Foreign Affairs and occasionally dabbles in Political and Economic matters.

Follow him on Twitter: @MikeFor10394583

You can find his other Red State work here.

The post California’s New Use Of Force Laws Are The Result Of Politically Fostered Mistrust Of Police appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group legal-broken-gavel-copy-1-300x169 California’s New Use Of Force Laws Are The Result Of Politically Fostered Mistrust Of Police Use of Force Uncategorized republicans racial profiling Politics police shootings police brutality police Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story elections donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power 2020 2019 2018   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Clinton’s Deliberate, Felonious Actions Harmed National Security

Westlake Legal Group hillary-in-jail-620x425-copy-1-300x148 Clinton’s Deliberate, Felonious Actions Harmed National Security Uncategorized republicans Politics Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story elections donald trump democrats Cybersecurity cyber security crime corruption Clinton E-mails cia Barack Obama Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power 2020 2019 2018

Earlier today, my good friend and colleague, Bonchie, penned an excellent article about the latest twist in the Clinton e-mail saga, one that demonstrated just how dangerous her actions were to National Security. Please go have a look.

Because of his timely article, I thought I might once again review just how corrupt the FBI was, especially former Director Comey, when he “cleared” Secretary Clinton of any criminal wrongdoing. Comey’s excuse? Secretary Clinton had no intent to violate the law. Despite the fact that the applicable statute regarding the handling of classified information doesn’t require intent, the explainer below will show that there was indeed such intent and a number of people should be doing hard time.

Let me be clear at the outset; somebody committed a felony, likely several. If as some reports have indicated, there was certain overhead imagery, marked or unmarked on Secretary Clinton’s e-mail server, someone committed a serious crime. The way government information/cyber systems are set up, someone had to take a deliberate series of felonious actions in order for that imagery to get there. Period.

Instead of getting into a detailed primer on Department of Defense and Department of State electronic communications, I’ll give you the short version. This is especially important as it puts to bed the bogus argument that Clinton displayed no criminal intent during her e-mail debacle. It demonstrates that it is absoloutely certain that there were several felonies committed—no doubt whatsoever.

Although the State Department and the Department of Defense use different systems for their unclassified communications, they do share some of the same systems for their classified traffic. The unclassified systems used by Defense and State have e-mail, file sharing and teleconferencing capabilities. Those systems also have access to the Internet. Some agencies allow their employees to use their unclassified computers to conduct limited personal business, such as sending e-mails and looking at RedState online, during their breaks. These employees can also send e-mail to private addressees from this system.

The classified systems the agencies use jointly are:
SIPRNet (Secret Internet Protocol Router Network): used to transmit material that is classified CONFIDENTIAL or SECRET. It may not be used to transmit TOP SECRET material.

JWICS (Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System): used to transmit TOP SECRET information, to include highly classified satellite imagery. The JWICS system is where Private Bradley Manning likely obtained the information he later gave to Wikileaks. This is also the system the State Department uses to routinely receive and access satellite imagery and imagery analysis, along with other TOP SECRET information.

What is important to understand is that, except for extremely rare and tightly controlled circumstances, JWICS, SIPRNet and the in-house unclassified systems do not connect to each other or with outside systems. The only way to get information from one system to another is to use a system I have yet to introduce, the SneakerNet.

“SneakerNet” is IT slang, referring to someone taking information on one system, saving it to portable media, disk or thumb drive and walking (“sneakering”) it over to the other system and uploading it, thereby bypassing the procedural safeguards inherent in separate, unconnected systems. An alternative, using the same concept, would be to print the data from a JWICS terminal (possibly inside the State Department) and then scan the hard copy into an unclassified system. This method would also work were someone get access to a hard copy document or photo handed out at a meeting.

One of the advantages of this unconnected system of systems is that it virtually eliminates “spillage,” the accidental release of one level of classified information into an arena not cleared for it. If there was reconnaissance satellite imagery or analysis of that imagery on Secretary Clinton’s server or any other unclassified system, it is a virtual certainty that someone had to take a series of deliberate and felonious steps to put it there—deliberate and felonious steps.

A photo would have had to have its markings deliberately removed. Then it would have had to have been copied from JWICS onto removable media (or printed out) and uploaded (or scanned) to either an unclassified computer & e-mailed to Secretary Clinton, or directly uploaded to her server. In the case that what was on her server was merely a written assessment of what the imagery shows, the above still pertains. Someone had to make a series of deliberate decisions and steps to either copy or transcribe the assessment from JWICS and send it via a nonsecure e-mail to Secretary Clinton.

Secretary Clinton is on the e-mail record as directing staff to do just that. A few years ago, National Review published an article entitled: Clinton Pushed Aide to Strip Markings from Sensitive Documents, Send through ‘Nonsecure’ Channel. From that article (Emphasis mine)

During a 2011 e-mail exchange, Hillary Clinton urged top aide Jake Sullivan to strip classified talking points of all markings and send them through “nonsecure” means after a secure fax line failed to function. On the night of June 16, 2011, Sullivan told Clinton that important talking points on an undetermined issue would be faxed to her the following morning. When Clinton informed Sullivan that the talking points had not yet materialized, he began a frantic search for the problem. “They say they’ve had issues sending secure fax,” he wrote to Clinton 15 minutes later. “They’re working on it.” “If they can’t, turn into nonpaper with no identifying heading and send nonsecure,” Clinton replied.

What this means, is that the conversation about this being a mistake, accident, or minor error in judgment, is a flat out lie. In my humble opinion, this lie should be rolled into an obstruction of justice charge—yet another felony. If I, or anyone else with a TS clearance had treated classified information in such a fashion, we’d still be in Fort Leavenworth. Given the disclosures in Bonchie’s article, showing that Classified e-mail migrated from Clinton’s unsecure server to another G-Mail account, it’s readily apparent that the criminal crone from Chappaqua along with her coterie, needs to be locked up—and they need to do hard time.

Disclosure: The last time I personally used any of these systems was in 2012. Systems and procedures have likely changed since then.

Mike Ford is a retired Infantry Officer who writes on Military, Foreign Affairs and occasionally dabbles in Political and Economic matters. He has when required, held a TS-SCI Clearance.

You can find his other Red State work here.

He is also (reluctantly) on Twitter: @MikeFor10394583

The post Clinton’s Deliberate, Felonious Actions Harmed National Security appeared first on RedState.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

The Democrats Are Insane

Westlake Legal Group 2019-supreme-court-620x317 The Democrats Are Insane Uncategorized second amendment gun control Front Page Stories Featured Story Democrat tyranny Academia Abuse of Power Abortion 2A 2020 2019 2018

The justices of the U.S. Supreme Court gather for a formal group portrait to include the new Associate Justice, top row, far right, at the Supreme Court Building in Washington, Friday, Nov. 30, 2018. Seated from left: Associate Justice Stephen Breyer, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice of the United States John G. Roberts, Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Associate Justice Samuel Alito Jr. Standing behind from left: Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Elena Kagan and Associate Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

The Democrats Are Insane

As noted yesterday by my colleague Sarah Lee, the Democrats have once again threatened to pack the Supreme Court if it rules “improperly” on gun control. From Fox News

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/senate-dems-deliver-stunning-warning-to-supreme-court-heal-or-face-restructuring

Several high-profile Senate Democrats warned the Supreme Court in pointed terms this week that it could face a fundamental restructuring if justices do not take steps to “heal” the court in the near future.

We’ve been to this rodeo before under Franklin Roosevelt and we all know what “heal” means. “Vote our way—or else.” Interpreting the constitution according to the clear text and intent of the Founders and Framers is according to the Leftists, some sort of disease that needs to be eradicated. More from the article, emphasis mine.

The ominous and unusual warning was delivered as part of a brief filed Monday in a case related to a New York City gun law. Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, Richard Durbin, D-Ill., and Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., referenced rulings by the court’s conservative majority in claiming it is suffering from some sort of affliction which must be remedied.

Here is the actual language used by these Leftists

The Supreme Court is not well. And the people know it,” the brief said. “Perhaps the Court can heal itself before the public demands it be ‘restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics.’

This is yet another case of Democrat projection. The Quinnipiac poll they cite, claims that the majority of Americans believe the Supreme Court is increasingly motivated by politics. And they are right! But it’s the Democrats who insert politics into everything, including judicial appointments. Just look at what they did to Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavenaugh in order to keep a court make up favoring them.

What has them enraged, is that real Americans are fighting back against their nonsense and it’s driving them insane. They see President Trump making inroads with “their” minority base of Blacks and Hispanics. That’s why all of the sudden, racism has now become the number one threat to our society…or so they say.

This latest ploy by the Democrats is just more of the same, as they know that the Supreme Court might be slipping away from them for at least a generation. Inserting such a non-too-veiled threat in a brief in a gun control case not only demonstrates their panic at the direction the Court is going, but also reflects their darkest desire—to take firearms away from law abiding citizens—by force if necessary. Their message is quite clear, and directed primarily at Chief Justice Roberts, “Vote our way, or the court, whose reputation you turn yourself and the Constitution inside out to protect, will be totally destroyed.”

There’s a very good chance that Chief Justice Roberts will succumb to this threat, for the “good of the court and its ‘reputation.’” What he fails to realize, is that no matter what he decides on any of these cases, if given the chance the Leftists are going to attempt to pack the court. They cannot afford to let it continue to become more conservative. They have seen the writing on the wall. President Trump is going to be reelected, thus likely giving him the opportunity to select another conservative Associate Justice, maybe two. They will do as they have since the 2020 election, disregard the clear will of the voters and do whatever it takes to come out on top.

These people never quit. They are flat out insane. If they cannot win at the ballot box, they attempt to subvert the simple exercise of properly elected government by bogging it down with legal injunctions. When those ultimately fail at the highest level, they threaten to radically alter the make up of the Supreme Court to get their way. Along the way, they radicalize their base followers to the point that they commit unspeakable violence as in El Paso and Dayton and Charlottesville—then they blame Conservatives.

This nonsense has to stop. 2020 needs to be a blowout for Republicans. If we allow the Democrats to regain power, they will surely destroy the Republic. This isn’t just about the Second Amendment. This is about Democrat desire to disarm the populace as their first step on the road to absolute control.

Mike Ford, a retired Infantry Officer, writes on Military, Foreign Affairs and occasionally dabbles in Political and Economic matters.

Follow him on Twitter: @MikeFor10394583

You can find his other Red State work here.

The post The Democrats Are Insane appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group 2019-supreme-court-300x153 The Democrats Are Insane Uncategorized second amendment gun control Front Page Stories Featured Story Democrat tyranny Academia Abuse of Power Abortion 2A 2020 2019 2018   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Delusional: Failed Gubernatorial Candidate Stacey Abrams Tells Voters “You Don’t Have The Right To Vote In GA”

Westlake Legal Group stacey-abrams-finger-SCREENSHOT-620x364 Delusional: Failed Gubernatorial Candidate Stacey Abrams Tells Voters “You Don’t Have The Right To Vote In GA” voting rights Stacey Abrams Politics North Carolina Georgia Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Culture Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020 2018 elections 2018

It’s been seven months since Democrat Stacey Abrams lost the Georgia governor’s race to Republican Brian Kemp fair and square. She has spent her every waking moment since deliberately undermining the election results, trying to convince voters she actually won, and that the election was “stolen.”

As she’s done this, the mainstream media – who are quick to use the “without evidence” tag for any claim Republicans make – have spent little to no time fact checking her claims. In fact, major news outlets like the New York Times have elevated her profile in puff pieces and op/eds.

Democrats, in turn, have taken to promoting these untruths about a “stolen election”, so much so to the point that it’s become a rite of passage of sorts for 2020 presidential candidates to “kiss the Abrams ring.”

Her latest comments on the gubernatorial election, however, are far worse and even more delusional than what she’s said previously.

CNN political Eric Bradner tweeted this Thursday:

As I’ve said before, you’d think there would be some Democrats who would be willing to stage an intervention with Abrams at this point, but they, too, are busy out there perpetuating the myth that the Georgia governor’s race was “stolen.”

Abrams has been fact checked a number of times on her repeated claims, including by Rich Lowry:

They say Kemp’s confessed his true, untoward feelings about voting when he expressed “concern” about Abrams pushing absentee voting.

But the full quote from Kemp speaking at a GOP event is: “They have just an unprecedented number of [absentee ballot requests], which is something that continues to concern us, especially if everybody uses and exercises their right to vote — which they absolutely can — and mail those ballots in, we gotta have heavy turnout to offset that.”

[…]

They allege that Kemp shut down polling places. It’s true, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, that 214 precincts have closed in Georgia since 2012. It’s just not the handiwork of Brian Kemp.

Counties make the decisions about whether or not to shutter polling places. It’s usually cash-strapped rural areas that consolidate precincts to eliminate underutilized polling places and locations that don’t comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

When a controversy exploded over a proposal to close seven of nine precincts in tiny majority-black Randolph County, Kemp came out publicly and opposed the plan. (As it happens, Randolph voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016, but Trump won five of the seven precincts slated for closure.)

As Hot Air‘s Karen Townsend notes, Abrams’s comments do more to divide Americans than unite them::

Abrams is riding her message of victimhood for as long as she can. To this day she claims if it were not for voter suppression she would be the Governor of Georgia. It’s madness and it is the same kind of sore loser behavior exhibited by Hillary and her continued claims that she lost the presidential election due to Russian collusion. Both narratives are just plain wrong and do nothing but divide Americans.

Not only that, but Abrams may find that insisting on telling people their votes don’t count may have the opposite effect of motivating them to go to the polls. It could depress them enough to stay home come election time.

Wouldn’t that be ironic?

————–
—Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter.–

The post Delusional: Failed Gubernatorial Candidate Stacey Abrams Tells Voters “You Don’t Have The Right To Vote In GA” appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group stacey-abrams-finger-SCREENSHOT-300x176 Delusional: Failed Gubernatorial Candidate Stacey Abrams Tells Voters “You Don’t Have The Right To Vote In GA” voting rights Stacey Abrams Politics North Carolina Georgia Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Culture Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020 2018 elections 2018   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

A Republic…If You Can Keep It

Westlake Legal Group JerroldNadlerCBS A Republic…If You Can Keep It Uncategorized republicans Politics Jerry Nadler Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story elections donald trump democrats Congressional investigations Allow Media Exception 2A 2020 2019 2018

Rep. Jerrold “Jerry” Nadler (D-NY-10). Screengrab via CBS – Face the Nation.

Congressman Jerry Nadler Finally figures out that these United States are indeed a republic.

Yesterday, as reported by my good friend Bonchie here at Red State, the House Judiciary Committee voted along party lines, to hold Attorney General Barr in Contempt of Congress for insisting on obeying the law regarding Grand Jury information. Attorney General Barr is refusing to release a totally unredacted report to the committee because to do so, would violate the law…and Representative Jerry Nadler, Chairman of the committee knows this.

What is fascinating to me, is what Nadler said after the vote.

“We’ve talked for a long time about approaching a constitutional crisis, we are now in it.”

Nadler then referenced Benjamin Franklin’s response when a Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked him, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.”

Nadler further commented (emphasis, mine)

Now is the time of testing whether we can keep a republic or whether this republic is destined to change into a different, more tyrannical form of government.

I cannot remember the last time a Democrat referred to these United States as a “republic.” All I ever hear is “democracy,” or “our democracy,” which of course, is highly inaccurate. Unfortunately, even some Republicans insist on doing this.

I’ve got to give President Trump credit here. It seems only he can drive die-hard Democrats like Nadler to finally admit we are indeed a republic.

Mike Ford is a retired Infantry Officer who writes on Military, Foreign Affairs and occasionally dabbles in Political and Economic matters.

Follow him on Twitter: @MikeFor10394583

You can find his other Red State work here.

The post A Republic…If You Can Keep It appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group JerroldNadlerCBS-300x163 A Republic…If You Can Keep It Uncategorized republicans Politics Jerry Nadler Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story elections donald trump democrats Congressional investigations Allow Media Exception 2A 2020 2019 2018   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

WATCH: Kamala Harris Undermines Election Results for the 2018 Georgia and Florida Gubernatorial Races

Westlake Legal Group watch-kamala-harris-undermines-election-results-for-the-2018-georgia-and-florida-gubernatorial-races WATCH: Kamala Harris Undermines Election Results for the 2018 Georgia and Florida Gubernatorial Races Stacey Abrams Politics North Carolina naacp Michigan kamala harris Hillary Clinton Georgia Front Page Stories Front Page Florida Featured Story Featured Post elections DETROIT democrats Culture Campaigns California Andrew Gillum Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020 2018 elections 2018

Westlake Legal Group KamalaJussieTweet WATCH: Kamala Harris Undermines Election Results for the 2018 Georgia and Florida Gubernatorial Races Stacey Abrams Politics North Carolina naacp Michigan kamala harris Hillary Clinton Georgia Front Page Stories Front Page Florida Featured Story Featured Post elections DETROIT democrats Culture Campaigns California Andrew Gillum Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020 2018 elections 2018

On Sunday, 2020 presidential hopeful Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) spoke at the NAACP’s 64th annual Fight for Freedom Fund Dinner in Detroit.

During her speech, she it was time to “speak truth” … and then proceeded to tell a couple of whoppers about the election results for the 2018 Florida and Georgia gubernatorial races.

The Detroit News reports:

She also spoke of the Voting Rights Act and laws that “suppress the vote.” She raised the controversy that arose with Georgia Democrat Stacey Abrams, who narrowly lost a bid last fall to become the first black woman elected governor in U.S. history, and Andrew Gillum, the former Tallahassee mayor. Without “voter suppression: Stacey Abams is Governor Stacey Abrams. Andrew Gillum is Governor Andrew Gillum.”

“So the truth is, we need a new voting rights act in this country with automatic voter registration,” Harris said, noting Americans have to “fight back” against Republicans “who suppress” the right to vote.

Watch Harris speak on this issue in the video clip below:

Harris’s comments came on the heels of twice-failed candidate for president Hillary Clinton’s remarks Saturday on her 2016 presidential election loss:

“You can run the best campaign, you can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen from you.”

And both Clinton’s and Harris’s statements were in addition to Stacey Abrams’s continued refusal to concede the Georgia governor’s race. She continues to say that she won, when she knows she didn’t. She’s been debunked over and over again, but continues to make the false claim.

Gillum, too, lost fair and square. His election was not “stolen.”

Remember when refusal to accept election results was a direct threat to democracy or something? Me, too.

As I’ve said before, it’s amazing how quickly their standards change. Always quick to cry foul when they lose. In fact, hotly contested elections are only considered “legitimate” in their eyes when they win.

It just doesn’t compute with them when election results are not in their favor that maybe, just maybe a majority of people truly believed in the other candidate and their ideas more.

The left’s attempts at delegitimizing legitimate election results are part of long-term strategy on their part to motivate minority voters into turning out to vote in critical elections. It’s a shameful tactic, and one that deserves calling out whenever they try it.

Besides, shouldn’t saying such things be considered “incitement”? By the left’s rules of engagement, anything that could motivate someone to retaliate violently should be considered an attempt at inciting voters. Doesn’t suggesting to voters that their votes were “suppressed” fit that description?

———————
Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter.–

The post WATCH: Kamala Harris Undermines Election Results for the 2018 Georgia and Florida Gubernatorial Races appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group KamalaJussieTweet-300x195 WATCH: Kamala Harris Undermines Election Results for the 2018 Georgia and Florida Gubernatorial Races Stacey Abrams Politics North Carolina naacp Michigan kamala harris Hillary Clinton Georgia Front Page Stories Front Page Florida Featured Story Featured Post elections DETROIT democrats Culture Campaigns California Andrew Gillum Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020 2018 elections 2018   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Moral Victory? Stacey Abrams Continues to Falsely Claim She “Won” the Georgia Governor’s Race

Westlake Legal Group stacey-abrams-concession-SCREENSHOT-620x334 Moral Victory? Stacey Abrams Continues to Falsely Claim She “Won” the Georgia Governor’s Race Stacey Abrams Politics North Carolina Georgia Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Culture Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2018 elections 2018

Failed Democratic candidate for Georgia governor Stacey Abrams did a recent interview with New York Times Magazine in which she expanded on the reasons why she continues to falsely claim she won the governor’s race:

NYT: It’s one thing to say you lost that election unfairly, and it’s another to say you won because you increased voter turnout. But can you clarify for me exactly what you’re implying when you say you “won” that election?

Abrams: There are three things: No. 1, I legally acknowledge that Brian Kemp secured a sufficient number of votes under our existing system to become the governor of Georgia. I do not concede that the process was proper, nor do I condone that process. No. 2, I believe we won in that we transformed the electorate and achieved a dramatic increase in turnout. It was a systemic and, I think, sustainable change in the composition of the electorate and in the transformation of the narrative about Georgia and Georgia politics. Three, I have no empirical evidence that I would have achieved a higher number of votes. However, I have sufficient and I think legally sufficient doubt about the process to say that it was not a fair election.

In other words, it was a moral victory or something even though it was actually a stolen race or whatever.

Abrams has been fact checked a number of times on her repeated claims about the election being “stolen”, including from Rich Lowry:

They say Kemp’s confessed his true, untoward feelings about voting when he expressed “concern” about Abrams pushing absentee voting.

But the full quote from Kemp speaking at a GOP event is: “They have just an unprecedented number of [absentee ballot requests], which is something that continues to concern us, especially if everybody uses and exercises their right to vote — which they absolutely can — and mail those ballots in, we gotta have heavy turnout to offset that.”

[…]

They allege that Kemp shut down polling places. It’s true, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, that 214 precincts have closed in Georgia since 2012. It’s just not the handiwork of Brian Kemp.

Counties make the decisions about whether or not to shutter polling places. It’s usually cash-strapped rural areas that consolidate precincts to eliminate underutilized polling places and locations that don’t comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

When a controversy exploded over a proposal to close seven of nine precincts in tiny majority-black Randolph County, Kemp came out publicly and opposed the plan. (As it happens, Randolph voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016, but Trump won five of the seven precincts slated for closure.)

You’d think there would be some Democrats who would be willing to stage an intervention with Abrams at this point, but they, too, are busy out there perpetuating the myth that the Georgia governor’s race was “stolen.”

I’m so old I remember when refusing to accept election results was considered a threat to our democracy.

It’s amazing how quickly their standards change.

—————————————
Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter.–

The post Moral Victory? Stacey Abrams Continues to Falsely Claim She “Won” the Georgia Governor’s Race appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group stacey-abrams-concession-SCREENSHOT-300x162 Moral Victory? Stacey Abrams Continues to Falsely Claim She “Won” the Georgia Governor’s Race Stacey Abrams Politics North Carolina Georgia Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Culture Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2018 elections 2018   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

How the FBI Hid Behind Robert Mueller to Avoid Their Corruption on the Steele Dossier

Westlake Legal Group how-the-fbi-hid-behind-robert-mueller-to-avoid-their-corruption-on-the-steele-dossier How the FBI Hid Behind Robert Mueller to Avoid Their Corruption on the Steele Dossier testimony Steele dossier spying Robert Mueller Politics obfuscation Hiding Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story FBI doj Congress Christopher Steele 2018

Westlake Legal Group COMEY-MUELLER-01-620x326 How the FBI Hid Behind Robert Mueller to Avoid Their Corruption on the Steele Dossier testimony Steele dossier spying Robert Mueller Politics obfuscation Hiding Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story FBI doj Congress Christopher Steele 2018

To this day, the FBI has largely gone unchecked for their use of the Steele dossier to so heavily pursue the Trump campaign (and administration). The document has been exposed as abject garbage, with literally not one of it’s salacious Trump related claims being verified. You know it’s bad when even The New York Times is now deflecting their malpractice by admitting it looks like it was a Russian misinformation campaign.

Last year, as the Republican House was conducting it’s investigations, they managed to bring in several FBI officials for questioning. In one of these sessions, the credibility of the Steele dossier came up as a topic.

“There were meetings with Mr. McCabe about the Russia investigation that involved discussions of the various reports that were generated by Chris Steele that we had received, both with respect to the content of the reports as well as what we had learned about Christopher — we, I’m sorry — the FBI investigative team had learned about facts that might bear on his credibility as a source,” Anderson said in the Oct. 31, 2018 interview, a transcript of which was obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

“And what were those facts? You had mentioned the contents. More specifically, what were these discussions about? But start with the credibility issues,” a congressional staffer asked Anderson.

Anderson did not say when the meetings occurred. Nor did she say what the possible credibility issues might have been.

What was her excuse for not elaborating on those issues of credibility?

When asked for further details, an FBI attorney intervened to say that Anderson could not answer more questions because they “pertain to matters that are being looked at by the special counsel and its investigation.”

Of course. The rush to hide behind Robert Mueller, claiming they can’t speak plainly about Christopher Steele’s failings, has been a mainstay of the FBI’s obfuscation on the matter. Logically, this makes little sense as Steele’s lack of credibility being exposed would have done nothing to obstruct or interfere with Mueller’s investigation. Despite that, Steele has been handled with kid gloves throughout this process.

You’d be forgiven for suspecting the FBI is actually trying to protect him. Their behavior says they are trying to do just that.

Furthermore, we know their excuse was basically nonsense. Mueller’s report is out and the Steele dossier is barely mentioned and only in passing. He wasn’t in fact doing a deep dive into it to report on it’s credibility, stopping the FBI from commenting on it at the time. You’d think the major document that propelled and fueled the Trump investigation for years would be something Mueller would care about, but I guess not.

Here’s the thing though. The Mueller investigation is over. So you’d think the FBI would now be willing to talk about this stuff.

The FBI declined to comment for this article. Anderson, who now works in private practice, also declined to comment.

No comment? What’s their excuse now?

Essentially, what happened here is that the FBI purposely ran out the clock until Democrats took over the House. That was intentional. The constant obfuscation, the dodging of questions, the claiming of different levels of privilege, and hiding behind Mueller were all calculated to ride out the Republican investigations. Given that the DOJ was so toothless under Jeff Sessions, perhaps they thought they’d successfully bury their actions.

That’s hopefully not going to be the case with AG Bill Barr now in charge. He’s already ruffled feathers by stating the plain truth that the Trump campaign was spied on. Whatever investigation he’s started needs to start naming names and doing so soon. Steele is at the center of all this and needs to be thoroughly exposed along with every official who perpetrated this hoax. If the FBI used Steele’s material while knowing he had credibility issues, that makes what happened even worse.

While some on the right are saying Trump should just let this go, I disagree. This goes past strategies for winning in 2020. All of this malfeasance has to be exposed to the sunlight for the betterment of the country. Elections be damned. It’s time for some accountability.

————————————————-

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 How the FBI Hid Behind Robert Mueller to Avoid Their Corruption on the Steele Dossier appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group comey-mueller-300x210 How the FBI Hid Behind Robert Mueller to Avoid Their Corruption on the Steele Dossier testimony Steele dossier spying Robert Mueller Politics obfuscation Hiding Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story FBI doj Congress Christopher Steele 2018   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Dem in Contested NC House Race Says He Believes Omar’s Comments Were Anti-Semitic, Gets Blasted

Yesterday, I wrote about the news that broke this week about Democrat Dan McCready’s quiet refunding in late March of a $2,000 donation he received from Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN-5) in November.

McCready is the Democratic candidate in North Carolina’s 9th Congressional District, the only remaining House race from 2018 that has not yet been decided. A new primary will be held in May and a special election will be held in September after absentee ballot fraud was discovered that benefited the original Republican candidate in the race – Mark Harris.

Harris, who denied knowing anything about the absentee ballot fraud, will not run for the seat again.

McCready took to the Twitter machine last night to explain his decision to refund Omar’s donation. First by asserting that he believed some of her remarks had indeed been anti-Semitical:

… and then condemning any “hateful rhetoric” that she says has been directed towards her in recent weeks:

The thread was seriously ratio’d, with the vast majority of the nearly 1000 responses it has received as of this writing criticizing his decision:

Westlake Legal Group Mccreadyratio Dem in Contested NC House Race Says He Believes Omar’s Comments Were Anti-Semitic, Gets Blasted Social Media Politics North Carolina Minnesota Ilhan Omar Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Dan McCready Culture Congress Campaigns anti-semitism Allow Media Exception 2019 2018

Source: Twitter.

Some called McCready, who is a Marine Corps veteran who fought in the post-9/11 Iraq war, a “coward” for his stance.

In addition to AOC’s Justice Dems BFF Waleed Shahid weighing in yesterday to express his disappointment with McCready, one prominent officer from the North Carolina Democratic Party shared her disgust in two tweets:

Nida Allam is the party’s 3rd Vice Chair. No one else from the official state party has given a public statement on the issue (and I doubt our left-leaning political media here has even bothered to ask).

It remains to be seen if this issue hurts McCready’s campaign over the next several months. Even if the vast majority of the criticism he’s gotten is from people outside of the 9th District, some of those critics could influence others to not donate to his campaign, or press for refunds of their own donations to it.

Democrats really want this seat, especially after what was discovered in the aftermath of the November election. It’s been a reliably Republican seat for decades, but Democrats like their odds this time around.

We shall see.

————————-
Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter. —

The post Dem in Contested NC House Race Says He Believes Omar’s Comments Were Anti-Semitic, Gets Blasted appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group ilhan-omar-300x200 Dem in Contested NC House Race Says He Believes Omar’s Comments Were Anti-Semitic, Gets Blasted Social Media Politics North Carolina Minnesota Ilhan Omar Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Dan McCready Culture Congress Campaigns anti-semitism Allow Media Exception 2019 2018   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com