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 "Featured Story" (Page 72)

Joe Biden Tells Crowd To “Choose Truth Over Facts”

Westlake Legal Group cry-620x349 Joe Biden Tells Crowd To “Choose Truth Over Facts” Joe Biden Insanity Front Page Stories feelings Featured Story Facts Campaigns 2020

Facts don’t care about your feelings. Ben Shapiro seems to have trademarked this phrase but it didn’t begin with him. For quite a while there has been a very real but perplexing battle between ideas and emotions.

This rift is never more evident than when there is a shooting crisis in this country – which happens far too often. The reason it happens has little to do with how many guns there are in the country. Facts and statistics back up the claim that not only are gun homicides trending downward (and have been for some time) but in areas with the strictest gun laws, gun crimes actually tick up.

That’s a verifiable fact, supported by the government’s own data. But some people have a presidential campaign to run and they’re not goin to let a few facts get in the way of an applause line.

Joe Biden was on a campaign stop Thursday when he was recorded telling his audience to choose “facts over truth”.

Seriously.

If that was the shot, here’s the chaser…a helpful little reminder about AOC’s similar sentiments. Thanks to Ryan Saavedra of The Daily Wire for gracing us with these clips.

To recap: Being “right” isn’t about having the right information, it is about donning the pre-approved emotional response to a perceived crisis. How do you have “truth” without “facts”? Don’t facts literally define the truth?

This is what America is up against come 2020. A binary choice between the current crazy but bizarrely effective president and the “Facts? What facts?” crowd.

 

The post Joe Biden Tells Crowd To “Choose Truth Over Facts” appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group JoeBidenDemDebate-300x153 Joe Biden Tells Crowd To “Choose Truth Over Facts” Joe Biden Insanity Front Page Stories feelings Featured Story Facts Campaigns 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

TV Host Fingers the Cause of Mass Shootings: ‘Racist Monster’ Donald Trump. But No One Can Answer My Question

Westlake Legal Group cartridges-2166491_1280-620x349 TV Host Fingers the Cause of Mass Shootings: ‘Racist Monster’ Donald Trump. But No One Can Answer My Question white house washington D.C. Uncategorized Texas Television samantha bee republicans racism Race murder Media mass shootings Ivanka Trump Hollywood Guns gun control full frontal Front Page Stories Featured Story Entertainment El Paso donald trump democrats crime Allow Media Exception

 

 

Have you seen Full Frontal, the show hosted by Samantha Bee — who previously made headlines for calling the First Daughter a C-word (here)?

It’s been marketed as a comedy.

Here’s some of what she had to say Wednesday night…it ain’t exactly Carol Burnett.

Samantha wants America to “Get rid of the guns!”

Furthermore, the President is a racist, and his notion that “mental illness and hatred pulls the trigger, not the gun,” is, in her view, absurd.

“We are so sick of living in fear for no g*dd*mn good reason. It’s very clear what the problem is, despite the usual attempts by the President and others to pin the blame elsewhere.”

She thinks responsibility lies squarely with the hollow tube packed with gun powder; or at least the projectiles. And racist monsters:

“[T]he gun did put the bullets into people, mental illness did not. As far as we know, the El Paso shooter wasn’t mentally ill at all. Being a racist monster isn’t a mental illness. In fact, you can be one and be a ‘very stable genius.’”

With that, she displayed a tweet of Trump’s — wherein he referred to himself as a “very stable genius.”



Additionally, she characterized the Republican solution to violence thusly:

“Trump and the Republicans have laid out a clear solution to end gun violence. First, cure the mental illness they invented, then get rid of video games, the internet, plus transgender people, same-sex marriage, drag queens, marijuana, kneeling athletes, and Barack Obama — and while we’re at it, all embrace Jesus Christ as our savior. It’s just that simple! Well, how about this? Get rid of the guns. If not, come November 2020, we’ll just get rid of you.”

Again — not exactly Carol Burnett.

I have a question, respectfully, about outlawing guns.

Some on the Left want no one else to have a firearm.

Okay. Now how do you get the murderers to agree to that?

In all the passionate answers to the problem, I’ve heard no one provide an answer remotely addressing that.

In the meantime, if you’re a fan of hilarious comedy, you can check out Full Frontal on TBS, Wednesday nights at 10:30 EST.

-ALEX

 

Relevant RedState links in this article: here.

See 3 more pieces from me:

Georgetown Students Recoil At Trump’s Racist Statement On Immigration – Until They Find Out Obama Said It (Video)

Women In Vancouver Lose Their Businesses As A Man Tries To Legally Force Them Into Waxing His LadyScrotum

Actress Alyssa Milano Compares Mike Pence To Heinrich Himmler, Spotlighting A Growing & Dangerous American Ignorance

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

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

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

The post TV Host Fingers the Cause of Mass Shootings: ‘Racist Monster’ Donald Trump. But No One Can Answer My Question appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group cartridges-2166491_1280-300x169 TV Host Fingers the Cause of Mass Shootings: ‘Racist Monster’ Donald Trump. But No One Can Answer My Question white house washington D.C. Uncategorized Texas Television samantha bee republicans racism Race murder Media mass shootings Ivanka Trump Hollywood Guns gun control full frontal Front Page Stories Featured Story Entertainment El Paso donald trump democrats crime Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

TV Host Fingers the Cause of Mass Shootings: ‘Racist Monster’ Donald Trump. But No One Can Answer My Question

Westlake Legal Group cartridges-2166491_1280-620x349 TV Host Fingers the Cause of Mass Shootings: ‘Racist Monster’ Donald Trump. But No One Can Answer My Question white house washington D.C. Uncategorized Texas Television samantha bee republicans racism Race murder Media mass shootings Ivanka Trump Hollywood Guns gun control full frontal Front Page Stories Featured Story Entertainment El Paso donald trump democrats crime Allow Media Exception

 

 

Have you seen Full Frontal, the show hosted by Samantha Bee — who previously made headlines for calling the First Daughter a C-word (here)?

It’s been marketed as a comedy.

Here’s some of what she had to say Wednesday night…it ain’t exactly Carol Burnett.

Samantha wants America to “Get rid of the guns!”

Furthermore, the President is a racist, and his notion that “mental illness and hatred pulls the trigger, not the gun,” is, in her view, absurd.

“We are so sick of living in fear for no g*dd*mn good reason. It’s very clear what the problem is, despite the usual attempts by the President and others to pin the blame elsewhere.”

She thinks responsibility lies squarely with the hollow tube packed with gun powder; or at least the projectiles. And racist monsters:

“[T]he gun did put the bullets into people, mental illness did not. As far as we know, the El Paso shooter wasn’t mentally ill at all. Being a racist monster isn’t a mental illness. In fact, you can be one and be a ‘very stable genius.’”

With that, she displayed a tweet of Trump’s — wherein he referred to himself as a “very stable genius.”



Additionally, she characterized the Republican solution to violence thusly:

“Trump and the Republicans have laid out a clear solution to end gun violence. First, cure the mental illness they invented, then get rid of video games, the internet, plus transgender people, same-sex marriage, drag queens, marijuana, kneeling athletes, and Barack Obama — and while we’re at it, all embrace Jesus Christ as our savior. It’s just that simple! Well, how about this? Get rid of the guns. If not, come November 2020, we’ll just get rid of you.”

Again — not exactly Carol Burnett.

I have a question, respectfully, about outlawing guns.

Some on the Left want no one else to have a firearm.

Okay. Now how do you get the murderers to agree to that?

In all the passionate answers to the problem, I’ve heard no one provide an answer remotely addressing that.

In the meantime, if you’re a fan of hilarious comedy, you can check out Full Frontal on TBS, Wednesday nights at 10:30 EST.

-ALEX

 

Relevant RedState links in this article: here.

See 3 more pieces from me:

Georgetown Students Recoil At Trump’s Racist Statement On Immigration – Until They Find Out Obama Said It (Video)

Women In Vancouver Lose Their Businesses As A Man Tries To Legally Force Them Into Waxing His LadyScrotum

Actress Alyssa Milano Compares Mike Pence To Heinrich Himmler, Spotlighting A Growing & Dangerous American Ignorance

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

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

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

The post TV Host Fingers the Cause of Mass Shootings: ‘Racist Monster’ Donald Trump. But No One Can Answer My Question appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group cartridges-2166491_1280-300x169 TV Host Fingers the Cause of Mass Shootings: ‘Racist Monster’ Donald Trump. But No One Can Answer My Question white house washington D.C. Uncategorized Texas Television samantha bee republicans racism Race murder Media mass shootings Ivanka Trump Hollywood Guns gun control full frontal Front Page Stories Featured Story Entertainment El Paso donald trump democrats crime Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Inconvenient Truth: ABC News Journo Accidentally Reports Trump Will Criticize *Anyone*, Not Just Persons of Color

Westlake Legal Group DonaldTrumpAPphotoJune2019-620x317 Inconvenient Truth: ABC News Journo Accidentally Reports Trump Will Criticize *Anyone*, Not Just Persons of Color white house washington D.C. Social Media republicans Race Politics North Carolina Media journalism Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Culture Allow Media Exception

President Donald Trump walks across the South Lawn as he arrives at the White House, Sunday, June 30, 2019, in Washington.(AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

Without a doubt, one of the most enduring falsehoods myths Democrats and the mainstream media have perpetuated about President Trump for the last 3 years (including during his presidential campaign) is that he only criticizes people who don’t look and like him and who don’t share his political views.

In other words, he reserves his ire only for Democratic women, black people, Latinos, etc. The reason for that, they say, is because he’s a white nationalist who wants to suppress minority voices.

It’s not true, for reasons I’ve explained previously during the media/Democrat backlash to his tweet criticisms of The Squad and Rep. Elijah Cummings last month:

It just so happens that the four people who are saying awful things about America are WOC. It’s a mistake to think he’d hold back if they happened to be white. Think of all the people he’s targeted during his administration – even in his own party. Many have been white.

Saying he targets The Squad because they are WOC is as foolish as saying Pelosi dissed them because they are WOC. They just happen to be the loudest ones in the crowd, & loud folks tend to get noticed more. This is not about race, no matter how badly politically opportunistic people want it to be.

[…]

If the left wants to say he’s a jerk to people, fine, but saying this is about racism is inflammatory and wrong.

Again, he’s an equal opportunity “disser.” He was like this in 2016 against Republicans and Democrats alike, and he hasn’t changed. And won’t.

On Wednesday, when the incendiary accusations against Trump and Republicans of being terrorist enablers with “blood on their hands” were at a fever pitch – and Trump was was responding to them, ABC News‘s White House reporter Meridith McGraw compiled a list of people the President had criticized so far that day:

Wait, what? Impossible:

This is what I call “accidental journalism” – when a member of the mainstream media accidentally reports an inconvenient (to the left) truth about a Republican.

————–
— 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 Inconvenient Truth: ABC News Journo Accidentally Reports Trump Will Criticize *Anyone*, Not Just Persons of Color appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group DonaldTrumpAPphotoJune2019-300x153 Inconvenient Truth: ABC News Journo Accidentally Reports Trump Will Criticize *Anyone*, Not Just Persons of Color white house washington D.C. Social Media republicans Race Politics North Carolina Media journalism Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Culture Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

A Woman at the El Paso Memorial Gets Harangued by Chanters Over Her MAGA Hat: ‘The Hat is Hate!’

Westlake Legal Group people-2575608_1280-620x410 A Woman at the El Paso Memorial Gets Harangued by Chanters Over Her MAGA Hat: ‘The Hat is Hate!’ Uncategorized memorial mass shootings Front Page Stories Featured Story El Paso donald trump democrats dayton crime Beto O'Rourke Allow Media Exception #MAGA

 

 

At a memorial for murder victims in El Paso Wednesday, a woman in a MAGA hat received the brunt of anti-Trump hysteria.

What’s worse, by the way: People who know better saying ridiculous things about the President, or people who should know better believing them?

Either way, there was a group of — presumably — the latter at the service.

Subsequently, there arose the absurdity that Donald Trump is responsible for the evil which occurred Saturday morning, leaving 22 lost in its wake.

See for yourself:

Some chanted, “That hat is hate! That hat is hate!” One woman yelled, “We don’t negotiate with terrorists!”

This was just gross. Using tragedy to wage political war…at a time when the wounds are fresh…at a memorial…is beyond inappropriate.

But Democrats began jumping while there was still smoke coming out of the gun.

Witness:

Cory Booker Makes A Fool Of Himself, Refuses To Accepts Trump’s Condemnation Of White Supremacy

Tucker Carlson Lambasts Demagoguing Democrats & Hits On What Men Are Missing; This Is What The World Needs – Now

Putting Partisanship Above Her Community’s Pain, Dayton Mayor Encourages People To Protest Trump’s Arrival

Sister Of El Paso Victims Pleads With ‘Pure Evil’ Democrats To Stop Shamefully Using Their Deaths To Assault The President

And:

Furthermore, consider this: There’s a tragedy in Baltimore (the city’s general condition), and Trump has no right to speak against it because he has no right to criticize (here); there are tragedies in El Paso and Dayton (murders), and Trump has no right to speak against them because he caused them — so says the criticism against him. Neither of these makes more sense than the other.

Some tweeters stood up to the chanters:

But at least one user clung to the idea that MAGA = KKK:

Ridiculous.

-ALEX

 

Relevant RedState links in this article: here, here, herehere, and here.

Relevant RedState links in this article:

 Holy Moley, We’re Toast: ATL’s Democratic Socialists Conference Delivers The Most Bizarre 49 Seconds You’ll Hear All Month

Ilhan Omar’s 9/11 Remark Convinced A Veteran To Run For Office. Now He’s Gunnin’ For Her Seat

Author Of Seminal Christian Dating Guide Makes A Massive Announcement. His Old Church Responds

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

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

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

The post A Woman at the El Paso Memorial Gets Harangued by Chanters Over Her MAGA Hat: ‘The Hat is Hate!’ appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group people-2575608_1280-300x199 A Woman at the El Paso Memorial Gets Harangued by Chanters Over Her MAGA Hat: ‘The Hat is Hate!’ Uncategorized memorial mass shootings Front Page Stories Featured Story El Paso donald trump democrats dayton crime Beto O'Rourke Allow Media Exception #MAGA   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

The Story Of 8chan Shows Why There Is No Alternative To the Leftwing Social Media Giants

Westlake Legal Group social-media-4-620x413 The Story Of 8chan Shows Why There Is No Alternative To the Leftwing Social Media Giants voxility twitter Stormfront Social Media patrick crusius Google GAB Front Page Stories Featured Story facebook El Paso Shooting Cloudflare BitMitigate Alphabet Allow Media Exception 8chan

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

I’ll disclose my bias upfront. I think Twitter, Google (and by Google I actually mean Alphabet), and Facebook are profoundly evil corporations that epitomize Lord Acton’s admonition, “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” They have eluded liability under the safe harbor provision of the Communications Decency Act and ruthlessly targeted conservative voices they think are hitting too close to home. They have even blocked the parody site Babylon Bee because the jokes were too close to being actual news.

They have branched out from merely ripping off your personal information and selling it for a profit to actively interfering in the politics of the United States. A prime example of this is the decision by Twitter to suspend the Twitter account of Mitch McConnell’s reelection campaign for encouraging violence when it tweeted a video of leftwing wackos, at least one of which appeared to be very chummy with Elizabeth “Ol’ 1/1024” Warren, at McConnell’s home shouting obscenities and threats of physical harm. This behavior is not new. During the 2018 campaign, Facebook pulled ads by Elizabeth Heng because she made reference to the fact that her parents had escaped from the Khmer Rouge genocide.

In short, I’m 100% in favor of the Department of Justice’s Anti-Trust Division putting them out of business. I’m in favor of sending as much of their staff to prison and homeless shelters as can be done legally.

When one points out the fact that these companies are so dangerous is because they have a monopoly and that if you want to use any of the major social media outlets you have to tailor your content to fit their ever morphing rules, (did you know that Facebook will flag your story as “click bait” if the headline asks a question?) you are often told “hey, we’re conservatives and they are private corporations and they can do what they want” and “well, just create a start-up and compete with them.” My contention is “screw them if they want to meddle in politics” and “you will never be allowed to compete with them.” Some small number of these people actually believe that the social media behemoths will stand idly by and let a start-up begin taking market share (naive or idealistic?). Most of them, though, belong to anodyne, milquetoast Vichy Republican outlets who actually aren’t threatened by the new rules because their real motivation is being invited to the right parties and the grift (as Ace says, “the shame is part of the kink“).

In a very short while after the Patrick Crusius, the El Paso shooter, was identified, it was a reported that he was a visitor to 8chan, a message board that is very close to an absolute free speech area. Let me digress for a moment. I’m pretty close to a free speech absolutist. If someone says something that hurts your feelings, there are lots of avenues open to you to relieve the pain, but one of them is NOT silencing the stuff you don’t want to hear. My view on this extends to people espousing racial superiority (I really don’t care which race they are talking about) and racial animus. As I posted earlier in the week, I don’t care what you think and believe, I only care about how you act.

To get back to the story, the 8chan message boards were supported by Cloudflare. In the aftermath of the shooting, Cloudflare withdrew its support from 8chan and took it offline. 8chan quickly lined up another vendor, BitMitigate, and were back online.

But later in the morning, internet infrastructure provider Voxility announced that it would be cutting off support for BitMitigate and its parent company Epik in response to the decision to provide service to 8chan.

“We do not tolerate hate speech in any form,” Voxility spokeswoman Maria Sirbu said in an email. “This is a firm stand from our team, and we will not reinstall services for Epik/BitMitigate under (any) circumstances.”

Epik and BitMitigate rented dedicated servers from Voxility, Sirbu said, and used them to sell hosting services to third parties. She said Voxility learned approximately three weeks ago that Epik was providing services for neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer, and responded by cutting access to IP addresses related to the website.

After learning that BitMitigate had begun providing security services for 8chan, Voxility made the decision to cut Epik’s access off entirely and drop them as a client, Sirbu said.

Bitmitgate’s security services also ran on server space rented from Voxility, according to BitMitigate founder and former owner Nicholas Lim, so Voxility’s decision will halt all of the subsidiary’s operations unless Epik decides to seek out an alternate server host and is able to find one.

By late Monday morning, 8chan had gone down again, and BitMitigate’s own website was also unreachable — likely a result of Voxility’s decision, Lim said.

So 8chan, a backwater only visited by a very small number of people, and quite possibly anti-free-speech advocates stalking the board to try to get evidence to shut the board down might well have outnumbered actual participants, could not be ignored. Because one of its visitors committed a crime, it had to be destroyed. The social media start up Gab has likewise found itself forced, on pain of loss of internet access, to take down accounts and posts by order of companies providing services to it.

Though 8chan and Gab represent an extreme example, they provide a good model for why creating a social media network that allows free speech within the constraints of what is legally permissible rather than what is socially acceptable to a 26 year-old gay trans woke hipster in a long-term relationship with xis gerbil (NTTAWWT) is simply not possible. 8chan was shut off from internet access by a vendor. Not by market forces. By a vendor. A new vendor was found. The new vendor was shut down by one of its vendors for providing services to 8chan. There was a time when this might have been called “restraint of trade” but if you say the wrong thing, then no one cares.

If you think this can’t happen to conservatives, you’re delusional. Look at how the concept of “white supremacy” has been broadened to include all of Donald Trump’s supporters and donors:

You, my friend, are a white supremacist to these people. And your right to political speech is just as endangered by Vichy Republicans as it is by the left.

In this case, 8chan needed a service vendor to allow it to operate on the internet. That vendor walked. The replacement vendor was dependent upon a third party for leased servers and they were shut down because they provided a service to 8chan.

The fact is that in the current environment, you can’t start a competing social media network that allows opinions that the left finds offensive unless you have the financial wherewithal to own, outright, all the hardware, software, and can provide all the necessary services to keep that network online if Big Tech disapproves of what you’re doing.

And, if you can, how do you stay in business? Who controls most of the internet advertising sales? And if an internet service company can be shut down because of its unpopular client, how many companies will permit their ads to appear on your network after Google warns them off?

No, my friends, there are two ways forward. Either we comply with situationally malleable rules designed to shut us down and accept our role as serfs or we use every tool at our disposal to either tame or destroy these corporations which are literally trying to rule the country.

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

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

The post The Story Of 8chan Shows Why There Is No Alternative To the Leftwing Social Media Giants appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group social-media-4-300x200 The Story Of 8chan Shows Why There Is No Alternative To the Leftwing Social Media Giants voxility twitter Stormfront Social Media patrick crusius Google GAB Front Page Stories Featured Story facebook El Paso Shooting Cloudflare BitMitigate Alphabet Allow Media Exception 8chan   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Why the “It’s Easier to Murder People With a Gun” Argument Doesn’t Work

Westlake Legal Group Gun-620x349 Why the “It’s Easier to Murder People With a Gun” Argument Doesn’t Work United Kingdom self-defense Politics New York murder mass shooting London knife crime Guns gun control gun Front Page Stories Featured Story crime CDC Allow Media Exception

My colleague, Kira Davis, reported on a story earlier today about a stabbing spree that occurred in California, killing four people and injuring two. If a gun was a weapon of choice here, this would classify as a mass shooting, but due to it being a knife, it won’t get a quarter of the attention.

I’m going to cut straight to the point here and address the argument that usually arises when this point is made.

“Brandon, a gun will make it way easier to kill people than a knife. More people would have died if the killer had a gun,” is usually the comeback I get after noting that a killer will kill whether he has a gun or not.

And they’re not wrong. Guns make it far easier to kill people than using knives.

When it comes to these stories, though, there’s a complete disregard for how guns play a part in the lives of the law-abiding. When we see a complete absence of firearms in a society, we see that the violent suddenly have an advantage. To see this, we need only look to London.

The United Kingdom has oppressive restrictions on firearms to the point where they might as well be completely banned. They did this in order to make the populace safer, but the exact opposite happened. London’s knife crime skyrocketed with the best use of self-defense now out of reach.

It skyrocketed so high that last year, London’s murder rate surpassed New York, with knives being the favored weapon. As a result, the U.K. has tried to launch cringe-worthy campaigns to dissuade knife crime and even asked private citizens to give up their knives, including “knife bins” where you can dispose of your cutlery. In one case, at least, these knife bins ended up being a gift to violent criminals.

All of this is, of course, assinine, as it just encourages the law-abiding to further make themselves vulnerable to violent criminals. London has since seen a year on year 50 percent rise in knife crime. Regardless, you have U.K. authorities patting themselves on the back and proudly promoting the fact that they confiscated honing rods and pliers, which aren’t even knives but are being considered weapons.

It’s easier to kill more people with a gun, but people with guns are far less brave about using them if they’re unsure who else has a gun in the vicinity. This is why those who tend to commit mass murder do so in places that are “gun-free zones” or areas where there’s less likely to be a gun to threaten them in return.

With knives, the aggressor is going to have the advantage. He’s already prone to violence while most peaceful people aren’t. In a knife fight, the bad guy may very well win here. It’s hard to miss with a knife too. Knife fights aren’t like anything you see in the movies with people looking for openings for jabs and slashes. It’s quick, brutal, chaotic, and painful.

A gun, however, changes things a bit. Missing, especially in the heat of the moment, is more likely, especially if the target is moving. With a gun, you’re not relying on strength and brutality. It requires finesse and a measure of calm. You’re trying to put a small chunk of metal into a distant target. Speed is still a great asset, but chaotic speed won’t work here. It has to include precision and discipline.

Villains in this situation are on a more even playing field with their would-be victims. Even if they do get the jump on a couple of people and shoot them, a person wielding a gun nearby may be all it takes to stop them without having to risk his person in a physical confrontation like you would a knife fight.

This is especially great for women. In fact, earlier I wrote a story about a clearly trained 14-year-old girl who defended her home with a gun from burglars. If all she had was a knife, it’s far more likely that she would have been overpowered, and possibly suffered great harm as a result.

According to CDC studies, people utilize guns for the defense about as much if not far more often than they do offensively. Guns aren’t only great to use when you’re getting shot at, they tend to stop violence from happening in the first place. The threat of a firearm is far more worrisome than someone physically confronting you. Dealing death at a distance puts far less stress on the defender than having to risk it all in a physical confrontation.

London is proof positive of this. Violent criminals utilize knives so much that they out-murder the most populated city in America that doesn’t have the restrictions the U.K. does when it comes to firearms.

Does a gun make it easier to kill more people quickly? Yes. It also stops killers from killing quickly too, and that goes undiscussed. Guns are so effective at stopping killers that in their absence, killers kill more. Mass shootings are terrible and horrific in the sudden loss of life, but compared to the overall murder rate that happens without guns, I vote to keep the firearms around.

The post Why the “It’s Easier to Murder People With a Gun” Argument Doesn’t Work appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Gun-300x169 Why the “It’s Easier to Murder People With a Gun” Argument Doesn’t Work United Kingdom self-defense Politics New York murder mass shooting London knife crime Guns gun control gun Front Page Stories Featured Story crime CDC Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Hillary Clinton Has Some Surprising Advice for House Dems: ‘Stop Grandstanding’ Over Impeachment

Westlake Legal Group hillary-clinton-american-federation-of-teachers-620x360 Hillary Clinton Has Some Surprising Advice for House Dems: ‘Stop Grandstanding’ Over Impeachment Timothy Naftali Richard Nixon Library New House investigations of Trump Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Featured Story Congress Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power

In July 2018, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sat for an interview with NYU clinical associate professor, Timothy Naftali, at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum in Yorba Linda, CA. This was part of “An Oral History of Richard Nixon” project. (The interview can be viewed here.)

The sit-down received very little attention at the time, but was recently republished. I found the transcript to be both surprising and interesting. (And I am not a fan of the former First Lady…at all.)

Considering the difficulty Clinton has had in coming to terms with her bitter loss to President Trump, I did not anticipate the sober message she is conveying to House Democrats. Her cautious tone was unexpected.

In a nutshell, her message was to, “steer clear of politics, don’t hold press conferences and avoid leaks.”

She did not mention President Trump. She discussed her experience working for the House Judiciary Committee as a young lawyer during the debates among members over whether or not to impeach then-President Nixon. She had been one of the recent law school graduates who had been hand-picked by John Doar, the Committee’s lead impeachment staffer. Doar was a “Republican who had served as a civil rights chief during the Kennedy and Johnson administrations.”

Clinton began this job in January 1974. She was 26-years-old and had graduated from Yale Law School the previous May. She said she and her fellow staffers worked 16-18 hours each day, weekends included.

This experience instilled in her an understanding of the gravity of impeachment. She told Naftali:

Impeachment is such a serious undertaking. Do not pursue it for trivial partisan political purposes. If it does fall to you while you’re in the House to examine abuses of power by the president, be as circumspect and careful as John Doar was. Restrain yourself from grandstanding and holding news conferences and playing to your base. This goes way beyond whose side…you’re on or who’s on your side. And try to be faithful purveyors of the history and the solemnity of the process.

Clinton recalled she and her colleagues “transcribing a White House audio tape of Nixon listening to other tapes — committee aides called it the “tape of tapes.””

So, we would sit there with the headphones on, just exhaustingly listening, trying to make out words. Some of the transcription already occurred, but some of it was garbled, it was not at all clear. But the tape of tapes was a big revelation to me. I had no idea that he would be taping himself listening to tapes and then coming up with rationalizations. So, he would call somebody into the room, and he would say, ‘I want to play this for you. Now when I said that, here’s what I meant.’ So, it was really a shocking experience.

I think for me it was listening to the tapes, and particularly the so called tape of tapes because it was almost a textbook example of someone trying to get stories straight and getting other people to get their stories straight.

She describes Doar’s warnings to the staffers to maintain “poker faces in hearings and meetings with lawmakers.” Clinton explained:

He said, ‘Don’t talk to anybody. Don’t make facial expressions. Don’t portray any opinion. We were there just to make a presentation to the members of the committee.’ So, it was a matter of honor that we would maintain the secrecy that was so critical for this, for this whole investigation.

I think that, first of all, there are no cell phones, that makes a big difference. But I think he, by just force of character, made it clear to all of us.

Doar also instructed them to ignore reporters and above all, not to leak information to the press. She said, “We would just walk by.” Clinton said they “did not know where this was going to end up.”

I certainly didn’t. I didn’t come into it with any preconceived notion that, OK, this is going to be easy. We’re going to lay out all this stuff then the House will impeach and then he’ll be convicted in the Senate. I certainly didn’t do that. I don’t know anybody who did. And because it was such a historic experience, we all felt the weight of that responsibility. And John made very clear that we would be betraying our duty as lawyers and our historic obligation if we talked.

How politics have changed over the past 50 years. House Democratic leaders such as Jerry Nadler and Adam Schiff can’t seem to get enough of the spotlight. They hold press conferences after committee meetings and appear regularly on cable talk shows along with many other politicians, commentators and strategists. Leaking has become a common practice.

She and her fellow staffers conducted their research and ultimately produced “some rough guidelines that lawmakers could follow as to what constitutes an impeachable offense.”

Once I had done the research it seemed clear to me that the president was not above the law. The president did have certain authorities, certain standing. So it didn’t require that there be a crime charged in order for there to be an impeachable offense. But what that impeachable offense was often keyed to what we think of as criminal behavior.

So obstruction of justice is a crime. And whether a president is ever charged with obstruction of justice or not, the obstruction of an investigation can represent abuse of power that rises to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors and therefore be the basis of an article of impeachment.

Then, as now, there were members of Congress who were reluctant to vote for impeachment “without a guarantee the Senate would back them up with a trial that convicted the president.”

Well, I think that that’s one way of looking at it and it certainly is defensible. But I think another way of looking at it is that if you are persuaded that the president has abused power, committed a high crime or misdemeanor then it’s up to the proof that has to be presented in a trial to determine whether two-thirds of the Senate agrees with that. And remember the senators could bring whatever assessment they wanted to this determination. And you couldn’t second guess that, you couldn’t preempt that. It had to be left to them.

She also told Naftali that “she didn’t celebrate how the Nixon presidency came to its end.”

I was not at all happy or jubilant about him resigning. I thought it was a very sad chapter in our history. I thought the actual departure was a really poignant, painful moment for him and his family as well as for the country. So, I watched it on TV, like I guess everybody else did. And it was a really very unfortunate, sad outcome.

I think it’s important to keep talking about how serious this is. It should not be done for political partisan purposes. So, those who did it in the late 90s, those who talk about it now, should go back and study the painstaking approach that the [Watergate] impeachment inquiry staff took. And it was bipartisan. You had a bipartisan staff and you had both Democratic and Republican members of the committee reaching the same conclusions that there were grounds for impeachment.

The main difference between Watergate and the current efforts to impeach Trump by House Democrats is that in 1972, an actual crime occurred. Although the crime itself was minor, Nixon orchestrated a coverup and prosecutors had real evidence in the form of a recording.

Can a president really be impeached for angry words? For asking a subordinate to fire someone whom he had the constitutional right to fire, even though it wouldn’t have been in his best interest? Moreover, the subordinate refused to follow the order.

If only her Democratic colleagues in the House would listen to these words. But they won’t. Many of them still haven’t let go of the Russian collusion narrative.

Others have, yet they still cling to the obstruction narrative. They will have a tough time trying to prove that a man who was wrongly accused of stealing an election, and spent the first half of his presidency under a cloud of suspicion because of a bogus investigation, obstructed justice.

While most other Democrats have moved on to the “Trump is a racist/white supremacist” narrative, Nadler remains stuck.

Let’s keep him there.

The post Hillary Clinton Has Some Surprising Advice for House Dems: ‘Stop Grandstanding’ Over Impeachment appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group hillary-clinton-american-federation-of-teachers-300x174 Hillary Clinton Has Some Surprising Advice for House Dems: ‘Stop Grandstanding’ Over Impeachment Timothy Naftali Richard Nixon Library New House investigations of Trump Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Featured Story Congress Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

A Teenage Girl Defends Her Home With a Gun Showing What Education and Training Can Do

Westlake Legal Group b6e26156-ced4-48fe-bcc4-defe49363ee6-620x413 A Teenage Girl Defends Her Home With a Gun Showing What Education and Training Can Do teenage Politics mass shootings Kansas Guns gun control Girl Front Page Stories Featured Story crime Burglar Allow Media Exception

In the midst of the once more reawakened gun debate after multiple mass shootings rocked the United States, a small story of a teenage girl defending her home with a firearm in Kentucky is currently going under the radar.

According to WYMT-TV, a 14-year-old in Lawrence County was in her home when two burglars attempted to break in. According to the story, the girl took action and chased the burglars off by firing a pistol in their direction as they were attempting to gain entry:

On Sunday, two men in a white sedan pulled up to a home in Blaine. One got out of the car and repeatedly tried to gain entry by trying to kick in the doors.

Inside the home were three teenage girls who responded by calling 911. They were home alone at the time with their father at work and their mother at the store.

At one point the man who was trying to break in circled around to the backyard and was prepared to bust open a window with a shovel.

When this was about to happen, the man and his driver started arguing. During that argument, the youngest of the teenage girls in the home, only 14-years-old, found and loaded a 9mm pistol.

Once she noticed the argument between the two men, she fired the gun in their general direction and they left.

This is a great story to add to all the other great stories like it. An armed innocent person overcoming evil by utilizing a handgun isn’t exactly an uncommon story, despite the fact that these local stories often go untouched by the mainstream media.

The thing to focus on is the small details in this particular story, however.

Here we have a 14-year-old girl who knew what to do when her home was threatened. Firstly, she knew where the gun was and how to access it. Secondly, she knew how to load and operate it.

This girl had firearms training, and this training potentially saved their lives.

One of the problems with our society is that when something bad happens, too many within the populace and the politicians who fear their approval points dropping will knee-jerk into crafting laws and banning things. A ban wouldn’t have saved this girl’s life. Training and education did, though.

We should put more of a focus on teaching respect and proper use of guns instead of working to keep them out of the hands of Americans. The United States is so saturated in firearms that restrictions and bans would just make it harder for good people to have access to things the bad guys already do. Training and education will solve many problems, however.

Even law enforcement seems to agree with this.

“Considering that she is 14-years-old, she did a good job. I encourage everyone that can legally carry a firearm, to carry a firearm to protect themselves and their families just in case the need arises,” Lawrence County Constable Daniel Castle.

Consider this.

If we had more training and education, and more people were comfortable around guns even to the point of carrying them on their person, how many of these mass shootings would have actually been as deadly?

The post A Teenage Girl Defends Her Home With a Gun Showing What Education and Training Can Do appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group b6e26156-ced4-48fe-bcc4-defe49363ee6-300x200 A Teenage Girl Defends Her Home With a Gun Showing What Education and Training Can Do teenage Politics mass shootings Kansas Guns gun control Girl Front Page Stories Featured Story crime Burglar Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Poor Little Rich Boy: Self-Loathing Progressive Thinks His Wealth Is Immoral

It never stops being hilarious that the only people who really hate wealth are those that have it.

(But only in between yacht trips and Michelin-ranked dining experiences, one would imagine.)

Vox gives the story today of a young man named Adam who was unaware of his family’s early investment in the burgeoning oil industry that led to him becoming the recipient of trust funds that, according to the relatable graphic novel-esque panel format of the piece, had him receiving loads of cash from BP Oil, Exxon, and Chevron.

Adam is a community organizer and (apparently) a socialist, and he experiences an existential crisis when he finally discovers his “modest” upbringing (because he was surrounded by other wealthy families and his family only sent him to exclusive schools his grandparents paid for and he only vacationed at the local beach *eyeroll*) was actually a front for his extraordinary wealth.

Westlake Legal Group bad-wealth-620x429 Poor Little Rich Boy: Self-Loathing Progressive Thinks His Wealth Is Immoral wealth vox Morality Front Page Stories Featured Story Capitalism

Image: Vox

Adam gets “weird” about wealth once he discovers his family’s dirty little secret. He becomes (gasp!) frugal and tries to give back to the community. And finds jokes about wealthy people uncomfortable. Poor Adam. Never having to worry about paying the rent is hard.

Which leads him to finally ask:

Westlake Legal Group immoral-wealth-620x413 Poor Little Rich Boy: Self-Loathing Progressive Thinks His Wealth Is Immoral wealth vox Morality Front Page Stories Featured Story Capitalism

Image: Vox

He ultimately decides that working to help others less privileged is a good way to offset the guilt he feels about being part of the 1% (although he does wring his hands over what it means to him personally that AOC’s policy advisor wants to abolish billionaires, presumably because he’s a fan because she’s not a total policy failure like Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates (he names them)).

I’m not sure how to help Adam deal with the crushing guilt of having money but I do know there are charitable organizations (Gates knows a few) that might help alleviate his pain. And that his position at “Resource Generation, which helps young people (ages 18-35) with wealth and class privilege to become transformative leaders working toward the equitable distribution of wealth, land, and power” is probably less useful than just contributing several thousands at a time to local homeless shelters or health care and/or educational facilities in lower income neighborhoods.

There are literally thousands of way to give.

Don’t feel bad for being rich Adam. I promise you no one who starts out poor and manages to get where you are through hard work feels bad for you. Just try to find it in your conflicted heart to be grateful you’re in a position to help others — and actually help them — and then enjoy your next vacation.

(My colleague Kira Davis wanted me to tip you off to her new podcast episode where she covers the morality of wealth. Give it a listen.)

The post Poor Little Rich Boy: Self-Loathing Progressive Thinks His Wealth Is Immoral appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group hazardous_to_your_wealth_title-300x169 Poor Little Rich Boy: Self-Loathing Progressive Thinks His Wealth Is Immoral wealth vox Morality Front Page Stories Featured Story Capitalism   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com