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 "Allow Media Exception" (Page 3)

Hundreds of Fans Protest NBA and China at Nets-Raptors Game, Even Winnie the Pooh Comes Out

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-19-at-11.41.48-AM Hundreds of Fans Protest NBA and China at Nets-Raptors Game, Even Winnie the Pooh Comes Out Sports NBA Human Rights Hong Kong Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post communism China Censorship Allow Media Exception

Screenshot from this video:

The controversy over the NBA and China has followed the Brooklyn Nets back home to the Barclays Center.

Fans are not letting them forget it and let their voices be heard at the Nets-Raptors game on Friday.

Hundreds of fans attended the preseason game wearing black shirts saying “Stand with Hong Kong,” carrying signs, “Fight for Freedom, Stand with Hong Kong” and calling on the NBA to be supportive. Some wore face masks as the protesters in Hong Kong do. At least two of the protesters wore Winnie the Pooh costumes as a way of mocking Chinese President Xi Jinping because he was supposedly upset that someone compared him physically to the cartoon character. There was also a smaller but quite vocal contingent calling to “Free Tibet” sitting in Section 1 diagonally across from the Nets’ bench.

Author Chen Pokong explained why the issue was so important, not just to folks from Hong Kong, but to Americans as well, saying that Chinese government incursion on speech must be stopped now.

From NY Post:

“We want to use our performance art to show our support for Hong Kong and the NBA,” one organizer, author Chen Pokong, 55, told The Post.

“They want to take away freedom of speech and now spread dictatorship to America,” he said of China.

“It seems like NBA people cannot choose their words. So if we don’t stop them, they not only will do bad things in China, they will do bad things in America.”

Hollywood producer Andrew Duncan, who was one of the organizers of the protest, blasted Lebron James. James had attacked Houston Rockets general manager Daryl Morey for a tweet to support Hong Kong. That was the tweet that kicked off the China controversy and demonstrated how much control that China seemed to have over the speech of American businesses and entertainment.

“Lebron needs to take time on this issue,” Duncan declared. “Why is he not supporting democracy? I think the King has made a royal mistake.”

The owner of the nets, Joe Tsai, who is one of the founders of Alibaba, has said that such issues of territorial integrity are “third rail” issues for China that are “non-negotiable.”

That may be true. But it’s their own treatment of the people of Hong Kong that turned a protest against denial of rights into a broader freedom movement. And it’s a “third rail” issue in the United States that our own government, much less foreign governments, don’t have a right to tell us what we can say or how we can think. And until the NBA figures that out, they’re going to hear more of it.

The post Hundreds of Fans Protest NBA and China at Nets-Raptors Game, Even Winnie the Pooh Comes Out appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-19-at-11.41.48-AM-300x175 Hundreds of Fans Protest NBA and China at Nets-Raptors Game, Even Winnie the Pooh Comes Out Sports NBA Human Rights Hong Kong Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post communism China Censorship Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Alan Dershowitz BLASTS The Democrats Impeachment Theory

Westlake Legal Group ali-velshi-impeachment-SCREENSHOT-300x174 Alan Dershowitz BLASTS The Democrats Impeachment Theory white house washington D.C. The Hill Social Media republicans New House investigations of Trump Morning Briefing Mitch McConnell Media Mainstream Media Liberal Elitism Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story donald trump corruption Conservatives Congress communism comedy collusion Campaigns Bill Clinton biden Bernie Sanders Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power 2019

Occasionally you can come across someone who is a traditional liberal that you might not agree on social constructs with but does stay consistent on issues like impeachment. Professor Alan Dershowitz is one of these people in my opinion.

Dershowitz has been on occasion one of Donald Trump’s defenders in the media. He was one of the voices saying slow down on the rush to condemn on the Russia probe. His overall point was that even those that were on Trump’s orbit at one point were indicted on things, none of the indictments ever involved the reason for the investigation. Prof. Dershowitz was right on that.

He also opposed impeaching Bill Clinton in 1998 on the evidence the Congress had than.

Now he is urging caution on the Democrats rushing to impeach based on what we have seen publicly so far.

Just as a refresher, Alan Dershowitz is a lifelong Democrat and voted for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election.

In an opinion piece, Dershowitz wrote for The Hill

Many Democrats, including some constitutional law professors, now argue that President Trump can be impeached without evidence of high criminal acts. Some took the opposite view when President Clinton was being impeached. Hypocrisy aside, there are good historical reasons why the impeachment approach of the Democrats is wrong.

During the debates over the impeachment provisions of the Constitution, two differing views of our structure of government were presented. Some Framers argued that a president should be subject to removal by the legislature if he engaged in malfeasance of office or other comparable noncriminal misconduct. The other Framers took the view that giving the legislature such broad authority to remove a president would turn our country into the kind of parliamentary democracy that existed in England, rather than a republic with a strong executive branch.

That is why every advocate of impeachment should pass the “shoe on the other foot” test. Would you support impeachment against a president of your own party if she or he were accused of this conduct? Unless the answer to that question is yes, it would be unprincipled to engage in this process of impeachment taking place on Capitol Hill.

The very notion that with what has been released so far is enough to impeach is nonsensical. Dershowitz in the article correctly points out impeachment is a political process, not necessarily a legal one and should be taken up very carefully. That the Democrats running for President have all called for Trump’s impeachment is incredibly amusing in light of the “shoe on the other foot” theory.

Would any of them want such an incredibly low threshold to get impeached if they held the job?

Possibly the Democrats in their secret hearings that they refuse to let the public see will come across something that will convince America Trump has to be removed before the 2020 election. So far, they are being tight-lipped about what has been said in these hearings which leads me to believe they don’t have much and Adam Schiff once again sold Nancy Pelosi down the river.

I’m not going to hold my breath though that they find the silver bullet and Speaker Pelosi should look at getting better friends in Congress.

Check out my other posts here on Red State and my podcast Bourbon On The Rocks plus like Bourbon On The Rocks on Facebook and follow me on the twitters at IRISHDUKE2 

The post Alan Dershowitz BLASTS The Democrats Impeachment Theory appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group ali-velshi-impeachment-SCREENSHOT-300x174 Alan Dershowitz BLASTS The Democrats Impeachment Theory white house washington D.C. The Hill Social Media republicans New House investigations of Trump Morning Briefing Mitch McConnell Media Mainstream Media Liberal Elitism Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story donald trump corruption Conservatives Congress communism comedy collusion Campaigns Bill Clinton biden Bernie Sanders Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power 2019   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Poor Adam Schiff, What a Difference a Report in the New York Times Can Make

Westlake Legal Group smug-schiff-620x317 Poor Adam Schiff, What a Difference a Report in the New York Times Can Make whistleblower Nancy Pelosi Impeachment of President Trump Impeachment Inquiry Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats corruption Congress Campaigns Allow Media Exception adam schiff Abuse of Power 2020

(AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)

Poor little Adam Schiff. He thought he had all of his ducks in a row. Then the New York Times had to go and report that a member of his staff had been in contact with the whistleblower before he filed his complaint.

Prior to this revelation, Schiff had insisted that the whistleblower testify under oath before the House Intelligence Committee which he chairs. Ever since news broke that the whistleblower had prior communications with his committee, he’s been trying to avoid it.

Having observed Schiff in action, we can only conclude that he doesn’t want Republican members of Congress to be able to question the whistleblower about his contacts with Schiff’s staff or the media. Also, knowing Schiff, I wouldn’t be surprised if he himself met with the whistleblower before the complaint was submitted.

On September 24th, he tweeted that they’d been “informed by the whistleblower’s counsel that their client would like to speak to our committee and has requested guidance from the Acting DNI as to how to do so. We‘re in touch with counsel and look forward to the whistleblower’s testimony as soon as this week.”

Schiff contacted the acting Director of National Intelligence, Joseph Maguire, on September 26. He wrote:

Do I have your assurance that once you work out the security clearances for the whistleblower’s counsel, that that whistleblower will be able to relate the full facts within his knowledge that concern wrongdoing by the president or anyone else, that he or she will not be inhibited in what they can tell our committee, that there will not be some minder from the White House or elsewhere sitting next to them telling them what they can answer or not answer? Do I have your assurance that the whistleblower will be able to testify fully and freely and enjoy the protections of the law?

On September 29, Schiff made it clear he expected the whistleblower to testify “without a minder from the Justice Department or from the White House to tell the whistleblower what they can or cannot say. We’ll get the unfiltered testimony of that whistleblower.”

Shortly afterwards, Schiff was asked on MSNBC if he’d had any knowledge of the whistleblower before the complaint was submitted and he said no.

On October 2, the New York Times published the story that the whistleblower had contacted a House Intelligence Committee aide. The report said the whistleblower had first expressed his concerns to a CIA colleague and asked him to convey them to the C.I.A.’s top lawyer. It’s unclear if the issue was ever raised with the CIA’s lawyer or if it had been and he didn’t think the whistleblower had a case. Either way, nothing came from that effort, so the whistleblower reached out to Schiff’s aide. The Times writes that “in both cases, the original accusation was vague.” In fact it was so vague, and after reading a transcript of the call, many of us, like the FBI’s top lawyer, still don’t see what his concern was.

The report said the staffer told Schiff about the whistleblower, but did not reveal his identity. Sure.

He was forced to qualify his earlier denial to MSNBC and after that, “Schiff stopped demanding the testimony, and last Sunday he claimed it was no longer needed. While the extent of their coordination is unknown, the major problem was that the discussions were undisclosed by both Schiff and the anti-Trump complainant. Schiff had publicly denied any such interactions while the bureaucrat failed to mention the contacts when specifically asked about them on a government form.”

Another major change that took place after the story in the Times, is that the Democrats became very secretive to the extent that they wouldn’t allow Republican members of Congress to sit in on the depositions or even view the transcripts. In this way, they could cherry pick the most damaging information to leak to the media.

Last Sunday, Schiff told CBS News, “Given that we already have the call record, we don’t need the whistleblower who wasn’t on the call to tell us what took place during the call. We have the best evidence of that.”

Given that we already have the call record, we don’t need the whistleblower or his complaint. Since we’re talking about impeaching the President of the United States here, something that doesn’t happen everyday, I think a personal appearance is called for.

As most of us are aware, the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry is not official because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has refused to hold a vote on the House floor. On Friday, she announced that she “would not be holding a vote anytime soon.”

She has several good reasons for not doing so. It would hurt House Democrats from purple districts where support for Trump is strong.

Once a formal floor vote is taken to open an impeachment inquiry, the Republicans, who have been shut out of the process entirely, would gain the power to subpoena and to question witnesses.

The Federalist’s David Marcus points out another reason why Pelosi might be holding back.

Once the gavel falls on an actual impeachment, the House, the only chamber the Democrats hold, becomes irrelevant. That is a political disaster, and it is why the Democrats are still very unlikely to actually pull that trigger.

The ball will move into the Senate’s court and Pelosi and the House will have no more control over it. That’s a very big deal, because from the day they took over the House the Democrats have been able to frustrate Trump with impeachment talk any time they want to step on his initiatives or triumphs. Once a vote is held, that is over.

What’s a Speaker to do?

The post Poor Adam Schiff, What a Difference a Report in the New York Times Can Make appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group smug-schiff-300x153 Poor Adam Schiff, What a Difference a Report in the New York Times Can Make whistleblower Nancy Pelosi Impeachment of President Trump Impeachment Inquiry Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats corruption Congress Campaigns Allow Media Exception adam schiff Abuse of Power 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Liberals Try Smearing Gabbard Over David Duke Endorsement. But One Inconvenient Fact Nukes Their Argument.

Westlake Legal Group TulsiGabbardDemDebate4APimage-620x317 Liberals Try Smearing Gabbard Over David Duke Endorsement. But One Inconvenient Fact Nukes Their Argument. washington D.C. Veterans twitter tulsi gabbard Social Media Politics North Carolina Minnesota Media Ilhan Omar Hawaii Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post Endorsements elections democrats Culture Congress Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020

Democratic presidential candidate Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-HI, speaks during a presidential primary debate hosted by CNN/NYT at Otterbein University, Tues., 10/15/19, in Westerville, Ohio. (AP Photo/John Minchillo)

As Bonchie wrote Friday, Hillary Clinton came out of far left field with provocative comments she made, without evidence, on a recent podcast with former Obama senior adviser David Plouffe suggesting Russia was “grooming” 2020 presidential contender Rep. Tulsi Gabbard to be a third party candidate in order to spoil chances for the eventual Democratic nominee.

She also referred to Gabbard and 2016 Green Party nominee Jill Stein as “Russian assets”, per this recap of the podcast from Fox News:

“I’m not making any predictions but I think they’ve got their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate,” Clinton said, in apparent reference to Gabbard. “She’s the favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far.”

She then accused Stein, who ran against her and Donald Trump in 2016, of also being an asset of Russia: “That’s assuming Jill Stein will give it up, which she might not because she’s also a Russian asset.”

Gabbard pushed back with a blistering response, calling the failed 2016 Democratic presidential nominee “the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long.” Gabbard also challenged Clinton to stop “cowardly [hiding] behind your proxies” and join the presidential race so they could face each other directly.

Sadly, Clinton’s pathetic broadside of Gabbard inspired other Democrats and supporters of other presidential candidates to revive the old smear about how racist David Duke’s February endorsement of Gabbard somehow Means SomethingWestlake Legal Group 2122 Liberals Try Smearing Gabbard Over David Duke Endorsement. But One Inconvenient Fact Nukes Their Argument. washington D.C. Veterans twitter tulsi gabbard Social Media Politics North Carolina Minnesota Media Ilhan Omar Hawaii Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post Endorsements elections democrats Culture Congress Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020   , even though she has repudiated it several times.

I logged on to Twitter first thing this morning and saw that “David Duke” was trending. When I clicked on the trending link, it was filled with unhinged liberals trying to convince people that Duke’s endorsement of Gabbard meant she was a racist candidate:

Westlake Legal Group TwitterScreengrabTulsi Liberals Try Smearing Gabbard Over David Duke Endorsement. But One Inconvenient Fact Nukes Their Argument. washington D.C. Veterans twitter tulsi gabbard Social Media Politics North Carolina Minnesota Media Ilhan Omar Hawaii Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post Endorsements elections democrats Culture Congress Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020

Source: Twitter screen grab.

That’s just a small sampling. There are many more.

The only problem with liberals who are telling us that Duke’s endorsement Means SomethingWestlake Legal Group 2122 Liberals Try Smearing Gabbard Over David Duke Endorsement. But One Inconvenient Fact Nukes Their Argument. washington D.C. Veterans twitter tulsi gabbard Social Media Politics North Carolina Minnesota Media Ilhan Omar Hawaii Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post Endorsements elections democrats Culture Congress Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020   is that these same liberals have conveniently forgotten (or perhaps didn’t know, because it was not widely reported at the time by the LSM) that Duke also endorsed Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) back in March:

In a Thursday podcast at his site, the former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard spoke out strongly in favor of the Muslim Congresswoman who has accused Jewish lawmakers of dual loyalty, attributed support for Israel to foreign money, and said Israel has “hypnotized” the world.

“By defiance to Z.O.G. Ilhan Omar is NOW the most important Member of the US Congress!” Mr. Duke wrote on his site, using the acronym for “Zionist Occupation Government,” a term anti-Semites use to refer to the U.S. government as secretly controlled by Jews.

So going by the left’s standards, if David Duke endorsing Gabbard means she’s a racist, then Duke endorsing Omar means she’s an anti-Semite, right? Isn’t that how this works? Your rules, liberals. Your rules.

That said, there’s plenty of evidence Omar is an actual anti-Semite, regardless of Duke’s praise of her this year. On the other hand, there’s zero evidence Gabbard is a racist.

Liberals who disagree with Gabbard on policy should stick to that, rather than lob false accusations of racism and Russian grooming that they can’t back up.

——-
— Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 16+ 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 Liberals Try Smearing Gabbard Over David Duke Endorsement. But One Inconvenient Fact Nukes Their Argument. appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group TulsiGabbardDemDebate4APimage-300x153 Liberals Try Smearing Gabbard Over David Duke Endorsement. But One Inconvenient Fact Nukes Their Argument. washington D.C. Veterans twitter tulsi gabbard Social Media Politics North Carolina Minnesota Media Ilhan Omar Hawaii Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post Endorsements elections democrats Culture Congress Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Gay Breakfasts, Indignant Crime, and Rebellious Broccoli: Are We Doomed?

Welcome to Are We Doomed? the weekly column in which I will take the latest news and try to determine if it’s all downhill from here.

It Turns Out Armed Robbery is Dangerous

23 year-old Roosevelt Rappley attempted to commit armed robbery of a Dollar General store recently, and ended up getting shot in the process. His siblings were very  upset about it. They don’t think that it should be dangerous to commit armed robbery.

He’s got some responsibility, but not all,” Rappley’s sister said. “Right and wrong is wrong, that was wrong for that clerk to shoot my brother in the chest.”

“Yes, he’s robbing them. Oh, well! Call the police, that’s what you’re supposed to do. You’re not supposed to take matters into your own hands!” she continued.

 

Verdict: If this is the level of personal responsibility that’s expected in the world, we’re doomed.  Also, if you’re going to commit armed robbery, why would you choose a Dollar General?

Is Your Breakfast Gay Enough?

On GLAAD’s Spirit Day on October 17, Kellogg’s announced a new cereal- All Together. It’s one big cereal box with little boxes of Corn Flakes, Froot Loops, Frosted Flakes, Frosted Mini Wheats, Raisin Bran, and Rice Krispies inside.

Newsbusters reports:

Kellogg’s chief diversity officer (why does a cereal company need such a thing??) Priscilla Koranteng said, “At Kellogg, we are firmly committed to equality and inclusion in the workplace, marketplace and in the communities where we work and live.” As part of the Spirit Day partnership, Kellogg’s is donating $50,000 to GLAAD.

Pinksite News says that, with this new offering, you can “start your day with maximum gay.”

Verdict: What does sexuality have to do with cereal? Why does it have to be socially aware? Can’t it just be…breakfast? It’s not like cereal has been historically heterosexual. It hasn’t spoken up for traditional marriage or shared an opinion on what bathroom anyone should use. Cereal having a sexual preference spells doom.

Criminal Broccoli

At an animal rights protest in London, a man was arrested. A man dressed as a giant broccoli, who shouted “give peas a chance” as he was carted away in handcuffs.

Then, there was this super awkward interview.

Verdict: This is more funny than doom to me, but maybe that in and of itself is a sign of doom. This is a tough call.

First Responder Manicures

While medical personnel tended to a woman at the scene of a car accident recently, Utah firefighters Shift Battalion Allen Hadley and Captain Kevin Lloyd noticed that her daughter, though uninjured, was scared. She also happened to have a bottle of nail polish. So, while waiting for her mom to get the medical care she needed, the two men, who both had little girls of their own at home, offered to let her paint their nails.

Before long, she was  calmed down and focused on the task at hand (pun intended). The story of these guys taking such good care of the little girl at the scene quickly went viral.

This is how amazing our firefighters are. Our A shift Battalion Chief and Captain were on the scene of a motor vehicle…

Posted by North Davis Fire District on Saturday, October 12, 2019

Verdict: Zero doom. We’re going to be ok.

The post Gay Breakfasts, Indignant Crime, and Rebellious Broccoli: Are We Doomed? appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-18-at-9.27.07-PM-300x218 Gay Breakfasts, Indignant Crime, and Rebellious Broccoli: Are We Doomed? LGBT gay rights gay Front Page Stories Featured Story dollar general crime cereal armed robbery Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Sheriff Sends Beto to the Burn Ward Over His Threat to Send Law Enforcement to Gun Owner’s Homes

Westlake Legal Group gs-beto-orourke-620x413 Sheriff Sends Beto to the Burn Ward Over His Threat to Send Law Enforcement to Gun Owner’s Homes sheriff Politics law Guns gun control Front Page Stories Fourth Amendment Featured Story elections democrats Beto O'Rourke ar-15 Allow Media Exception 2020

Beto O’Rourke by Gage Skidmore, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0/Original

While on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, Democratic 2020 candidate and wannabe tyrant Robert “Beto” O’Rourke made it clear that in an America where he’s president, he will send law enforcement to the homes of people who choose not to participate in the mandatory buyback program and take their gun by force.

O’Rourke told “Morning Joe” host Joe Scarborough that in the instance of a gun owner keeping his AR-15 to himself, then he can count on a visit by someone with a badge and a gun.

“In that case, I think there would be a visit by law enforcement to recover that firearm and to make sure that it is purchased — bought back — so that it cannot be potentially used against somebody else,” said O’Rourke.

(READ: Beto Clowns Himself Explaining How He’ll Punish “Buyback” Reluctant Gun Owners With “Consequences”)

It would appear that law enforcement has some things to say about that, and O’Rourke may not like what they have to say.

In fact, according to Townhall, San Juan County Sheriff Shane Ferrari said if O’Rourke thinks law enforcement is going to cooperate with “President O’Rourke” to strip the people of their legally owned firearms, he’s “delusional.”

“Mr. O’Rourke is delusional in regards to his gun control ideas,” Ferrari told Townhall.

“The biggest fear of any free society is the government at your door wanting to take away your rights by force. I do not see the men and women of law enforcement sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution doing this,” Ferrari continued.”In an act of desperation, Mr. O’Rourke is shamefully using tragedies our country has experienced and fear for his political gain. The very foundation of law enforcement is public trust. Frankly, no one should trust a man who talks out of both sides of his mouth.”

Eddy County Sheriff Mark Cage also made it clear that O’Rourke is out of bounds.

“I’m not sure whether his statements are naive or just plain ignorant and arrogant. Maybe it’s all three,” said Cage. “The thought of anyone utilizing my sheriff’s office or any other law enforcement agency in this country as their personal Gestapo to go door to door violating citizen’s rights is disgusting, unrealistic and downright un-American.”

Cage noted to Townhall that “bloodshed would be inevitable,” and added that “some of my constituents are already adopting the mantra of ‘Come take mine Beto!’…His rhetoric has gotten old and I look forward to the day when he shuts up.”

Weld County Sheriff Steve Reams questioned the constitutionality of O’Rourke’s threat and noted that the entire situation puts both his officers and the citizen in harm’s way.

“I think that you have to be concerned for the safety of the citizen [too] because, at that point, they don’t know if law enforcement is coming to protect them or disarm them and that creates a very tense situation,” Reams told Townhall.

Reams is more or less correct. More than just a few Americans will be hiding their rifles from the government if ever there should be a law passed that bans them. The proof that Americans are okay with this lies in the fact that the purchase of firearms, including AR-15’s, skyrockets whenever the threat of a ban even so much as peaks its head out.

In order to confiscate so many guns, O’Rourke would have to send law enforcement from home to home to search it. Seeing as how you need a warrant for that, just going to search that many homes would be a very long and arduous task, not to mention a dangerous one for everyone involved.

If O’Rourke wants to truly make sure all the guns are confiscated, he’d have to eliminate the Fourth Amendment, which will likely never happen. So calling him “delusional” is more than just a jab, it’s likely an accurate descriptor.

Not to mention that while O’Rourke would sit safely in the White House, law enforcement officers and civilians would be putting each other’s lives at risk in order to defend freedoms. So not only is he delusional, he’s foolish in thinking that this will stop the violence. It will only create more.

 

 

The post Sheriff Sends Beto to the Burn Ward Over His Threat to Send Law Enforcement to Gun Owner’s Homes appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group gs-beto-orourke-300x200 Sheriff Sends Beto to the Burn Ward Over His Threat to Send Law Enforcement to Gun Owner’s Homes sheriff Politics law Guns gun control Front Page Stories Fourth Amendment Featured Story elections democrats Beto O'Rourke ar-15 Allow Media Exception 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Hunter Biden Was Hired to “Protect the Company,” Never Even Actually Worked In Ukraine

Westlake Legal Group JoeBidenAPimage-620x317 Hunter Biden Was Hired to “Protect the Company,” Never Even Actually Worked In Ukraine Zlochevsky Russia Reuters Protect the Company Politics Obama media bias Joe Biden hunter biden Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story donald trump democrats corruption Burisma Board Director Allow Media Exception 83K

Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden speaks at a campaign event Friday, Sept. 27, 2019, in Las Vegas. (AP Photo/John Locher)

And no, that’s not a point in his favor because he was still raking in gobs of cash from the company.

News has come out that Hunter Biden, while being paid $83,000 a month by a corrupt Ukrainian gas company named Burisma, never even actually visited the company on business. He was on their board for five long years, yet never made one appearance at the place that was shoveling him an enormous about of money for doing essentially nothing.

Nothing suspicious about that at all, right?

Biden got $50,000 a month in salary and never had to come to the home office? That’s quite a gig, especially for a corporate board director. Normally, those positions involve responsibility for overseeing the operations of the organization and ensuring regulatory compliance, which is tough to do when one never sets foot in the country where the corporation operates.

Even more unsurprisingly, one of the people Reuters interviewed (who is the source for Ed Morrisey’s above article at HotAir) admitted that Hunter Biden was hired to try to protect the company from ongoing investigations.

Oleksandr Onyshchenko, a businessman and former member of the Ukrainian parliament who knows the Burisma founder, said it had been Zlochevsky’s idea to appoint Biden as a director. “It was to protect (the company)” at a time when it was facing investigations, said Onyshchenko, who left the country in 2016. In the run up to Biden’s appointment, a popular uprising led to the removal of the Russian-backed Yanukovich in February 2014.

Zlochevsky was tightly connected with the former regime in Ukraine and was seen as corrupted by Russian influence. It was that person, after the ouster of his former government, who thought “hey, let’s hire the U.S. Vice President’s son, pay him a ridiculous sum, and never even have him visit the company or sit in a board meeting.” There’s so much smoke there that I’m choking as I write this.

The reason Hunter Biden was hired is incredibly obvious and it didn’t even take the above admission to see it. Burisma wanted a sort of human shield, betting that Joe Biden would do whatever it takes to protect his son. In the end, the former VP did just that, ensuring the prosecutor that was looking into Hunter Biden was fired and he used the threat of withholding one billion dollars in aid to do so.

If any part of this story had the name Trump in it, it’d not only be bandied about as the worst scandal in 50 years, it’d be headlining the “impeachment inquiry” currently going on.

————————————————

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 Hunter Biden Was Hired to “Protect the Company,” Never Even Actually Worked In Ukraine appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group 17329344-1af8-4a1f-8631-ab65d20076a0-1-300x153 Hunter Biden Was Hired to “Protect the Company,” Never Even Actually Worked In Ukraine Zlochevsky Russia Reuters Protect the Company Politics Obama media bias Joe Biden hunter biden Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story donald trump democrats corruption Burisma Board Director Allow Media Exception 83K   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

It’s Back! Joe Biden Gets the Bad Lip Reading Treatment In Hilarious New Video

Westlake Legal Group biden-pointing-620x317 It’s Back! Joe Biden Gets the Bad Lip Reading Treatment In Hilarious New Video Politics Joe Biden Front Page Stories Featured Story elections democrats comedy Candidates bad lip reading Allow Media Exception 2020

Former Vice President Joe Biden mimics shooting a gun as he speaks at the Chuck Hagel Forum in Global Leadership, on the campus of the University of Nebraska-Omaha, in Omaha, Neb., Thursday, Feb. 28, 2019. (AP Photo/Nati Harnik)

One of the best parts of the election season is when the YouTube channel Bad Lip Reading does little parody episodes of the ads from presidential candidates, and it looks like the mysterious man from Austin, Texas, is going to continue with the Democrats, just as he did the Republicans in 2016.

This time, it’s Joe Biden whose up to bat.

For those of you who have never seen a Bad Lip Reading video, some footage is taken from various things and dubbed over so that words seem to match up with the lips. The lip-reading is intentionally wrong, so what you end up getting is oftentimes hilarious, nonsensical things being “said” by the speaker.

BLR has done everything from politics to the NFL, and even movies like Star Wars.

It still maintains its hilarity with Biden.

BLR’s take on politicians is one of the best parts of the YouTube channel. Previously, BLR has done some pretty memorable videos, such as the Rick Perry’s “save a pretzel for the gas jets” video.

Debate night between Trump and Hillary…

And Trump’s inauguration…

If the pattern follows, we can probably expect to see more of these come out in the near future with the other Democratic 2020 candidates as the focus. At least we can all hope so.

BLR videos are one of the few things everyone can think are funny, no matter what side you’re on.

The post It’s Back! Joe Biden Gets the Bad Lip Reading Treatment In Hilarious New Video appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group biden-pointing-300x153 It’s Back! Joe Biden Gets the Bad Lip Reading Treatment In Hilarious New Video Politics Joe Biden Front Page Stories Featured Story elections democrats comedy Candidates bad lip reading Allow Media Exception 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Stunning Data from Trump’s Texas Rally Shows American Voters are Smarter than Democrats Think

Westlake Legal Group DonaldTrumpAPimage2-620x317 Stunning Data from Trump’s Texas Rally Shows American Voters are Smarter than Democrats Think Rush Limbaugh President Trump kamala harris Impeachment of President Trump immigration Front Page Stories Featured Story elections donald trump democrats corruption Congress Campaigns Brad Parscale Allow Media Exception 2020

President Donald Trump arrives to speak at a campaign rally, Thursday, Aug. 15, 2019, in Manchester, N.H. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

 

On Friday morning, Trump’s campaign manager Brad Parscale released some very surprising date from the Dallas, TX rally held the night before. First, their data showed that 53,985 voters had attended. The stadium had a maximum capacity of 20,000. The overflow crowd remained outside watching on a giant television screen.

Next, 12% of those who attended indicated they had not voted in the last four elections. Can you imagine if this group were to actually go to the polls next year and cast their ballot for Trump?

The third data point showed that. The significance of this is monumental. I wonder what the percentage of Republicans attending Democratic rallies is. I imagine it would be low to nil.

This tells us that a certain percentage of Democrats are looking at the weak field of candidates and are searching for an alternative. I would guess many of them are turned off by the party’s sharp left turn. It might surprise them to hear that not every Democrat shares their enthusiasm for a socialist America.

Rush Limbaugh discussed this data on his radio show on Friday. He said, “Folks, if this is right — if this is even close — the Democrats can’t win anything with that amount of defection, if that’s really percolating.”

Finally, Parscale finds that 11% of them were Latino. The implications of such a strong Hispanic presence lays to waste the Democratic talking point that Trump’s insistence on building a border wall and taking a tougher stand against illegal immigration is resonating. Admittedly, close to 40% of the state’s population is Hispanic compared to about 18% for the general U.S. population. Still, an 11% Hispanic turnout to a Trump rally is impressive. The Hispanic vote will have a big impact on the results in 2020.

Parscale’s comment on this data was encouraging. He wrote, “These are winning numbers that will help win #FourMoreYears for @realDonaldTrump! We continue to outperform 2016.”

I’ve watched the last two Trump rallies on television and I’ve concluded:

1. There is no way that any of the 2020 Democratic candidates could ever attract the crowd sizes that Trump regularly receives at his rallies.

2. Nor would supporters line up 24-48 hours to hear any of them speak.

3. No one in the current field could generate the level of excitement Trump creates routinely at these events.

4. President Trump connects with attendees on an emotional level.

5. Trump himself loves holding rallies and the crowd feels it, knows it.

Limbaugh can’t get over the energy of these rallies. He told listeners:

It’s just a guy at a podium and a microphone. It’s not like you’ve got Mick Jagger in there strumming and running around singing with the guitars and drums being played.

I mean, it’s just one guy, and yet this kind of charismatic excitement… I’m telling you that there isn’t anybody anywhere in the Democrat Party who could muster anything like that, and yet we are told to believe that the country hates Donald Trump. We’re told to believe the country wants Trump gone. We’re told to believe the country’s embarrassed as hell and regret really regretful of the decision they made back in 2016 — and this is a giant disconnect.

He also thinks Trump will win Texas. He said:

Now, this is Texas. I’ll tell you something about Texas. The Democrats will tell anybody who will listen that they’re gonna win Texas. They’re not gonna win Texas, but they’ve got the Drive-Bys putting it out there as a possibility. They’re doing it on the basis of a lot of people having left — a lot of liberals leaving California, a lot of liberals leaving the Northeast. And then of course the illegal aliens crossing the border. They will find a way to get them to vote. The counties all along the Texas-Mexico border are turning blue. So the Democrats in the media are out there saying, “Hey, Texas is in play.” Well, it’s not in play.

Aside from excitement, Trump offers hope, a strong economic record, a far more conservative and fair judiciary, strength against the unrelenting attacks from the left, transparency (like his tweeting or not, we know where he stands), and he acts as a bulwark against socialism.

The legacy of the current Democrats in Congress will be one of hatred, injustice, secrecy, lies, anger, bending the rules and norms to advance their toxic agenda and trying to gaslight American voters.

When asked what specifically Trump has done that rises to the level of impeachment, Democrats have little of substance to offer. The 2020 candidates were questioned about their positions on this issue at CNN’s presidential nomination debate held on Tuesday night. Sen. Kamala Harris answered,  “The reality of it is that I don’t really think this impeachment process is going to take very long, because, as a former prosecutor, I know a confession when I see it! And he did it in plain sight. He has given us the evidence, and he tried to cover it up, putting it in that special server. This will not take very long.”

Harris knows a confession when she sees it? He tried to cover it up by putting it on a special server? After two of Trump’s early conversations with world leaders were leaked to the press, he was forced to take extra precautions. She knows this, but since she can’t point to any valid reason for his impeachment, she was forced to use a debunked talking point.

Later in the debate, Harris said, “When I think about where we are right now, in 2020 I do believe justice is on the ballot.”

If justice is truly on the ballot in 2020, then Trump will win in a landslide.

The post Stunning Data from Trump’s Texas Rally Shows American Voters are Smarter than Democrats Think appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group DonaldTrumpAPimage2-300x153 Stunning Data from Trump’s Texas Rally Shows American Voters are Smarter than Democrats Think Rush Limbaugh President Trump kamala harris Impeachment of President Trump immigration Front Page Stories Featured Story elections donald trump democrats corruption Congress Campaigns Brad Parscale Allow Media Exception 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Hillary Clinton Attacks Tulsi Gabbard and Gets Absolutely Wrecked In Response

Westlake Legal Group hillary-clinton-pointing-harvard-620x317 Hillary Clinton Attacks Tulsi Gabbard and Gets Absolutely Wrecked In Response tulsi gabbard Take Down Russian Agent Russia Politics Pathetic Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Failed Candidate democrats debate Allow Media Exception 2020

Hillary Clinton points to the audience as she is introduced at Harvard University in Cambridge, Mass., Friday, May 25, 2018. Harvard University’s Radcliffe Institute honored Clinton with the 2018 Radcliffe Medal. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa)

After CNN pretty clearly tried to handicap Tulsi Gabbard at the Democrat primary debate earlier in the week, she’s been the topic of several stories. Apparently Gabbard trying to go for the jugular against Elizabeth Warren got the attention of Hillary Clinton. She chimed in during an interview to take a very direct shot at the Hawaii Congresswoman.

Hillary’s spokesman would go on to confirm she was talking about Gabbard later in the day.

I can’t express how intellectually lazy this is. Clinton has turned into a conspiritorial kook who sees Russians behind every corner and under every bed. In this same interview, she asserted that part of why she lost in 2016 were “disappearing videos” from the “dark web.” Yes, she really said that.

That’s called delusion. Disappearing videos that only she knows about but no one can find because they go on the dark web? If this were Donald Trump, the media would be running even more stories pronouncing him mentally ill. Because it’s Hillary Clinton, they’ll ignore the insanity.

The other disgusting part about this is that Gabbard is a veteran. It’s one thing to disagree with here. It’s another for a old, privileged corruptocrat, who’s never done anything outside of getting rich off influence, to call a combat veteran a Russian agent. Especially a combat veteran who fought in the very wars that Clinton helped monger. There’s zero evidence of Gabbard is being controlled by Russia or any other such nonsense.

Tulsi Gabbard is never one to take something lying down though and she decided to go in for choke slam in response.

Holy crap, what a take down.

I don’t know about you, but I’d pay good money to see Gabbard and Clinton take to the same debate stage. Hillary’s too big of a coward to address Gabbard directly though. She’d prefer to snipe from the comfort of friendly lines.

Hillary Clinton is just an awful person. Her excuse tour, where she accuses everyone who has risen above her of being a Russian agent, is just pathetic. I for one hope she is deluded enough to take Gabbard up on her challenge and join the race. It would certainly make things a lot more interesting.

————————————————

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 Hillary Clinton Attacks Tulsi Gabbard and Gets Absolutely Wrecked In Response appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group AP_18202817201422-300x225 Hillary Clinton Attacks Tulsi Gabbard and Gets Absolutely Wrecked In Response tulsi gabbard Take Down Russian Agent Russia Politics Pathetic Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Failed Candidate democrats debate Allow Media Exception 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com