When leftist protesters breach the fence around SCOTUS during their protests over abortion, will we see 30,000 armed troops deployed? Will those breaching the fence be called insurrectionists? Will they be held without bail for over a year, awaiting a trial that never seems to come? Will it be called a “threat to our Democracy?” Will they be charged with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business?
I think we all know the answers.
A SWAT team driving around in an unmarked van was taking random potshots at people on the street with rubber bullets.
Someone fires a shot or two in return, then immediately surrenders when he sees that they are cops. The cops swarm him.
It turns out that the group of people that the cops were shooting at were the business owner and some employees who were protecting the business from looters.
For over an hour, those cops had been driving around, randomly shooting at pedestrians they saw on the street. In the officer’s bodycam footage, officers armed with less-lethal launchers can be seen crowded in an unmarked, white cargo van. The van was equipped with police lights but the officers didn’t use them. As cops can be heard explaining, the van was the lead vehicle in a caravan of other, marked cars, and the cops wanted to use that stealth to their advantage. At one point an officer in the van asks for the trailing patrol cars to stay far behind “so we can… utilize 40s.”
Advance to 41 seconds. The man had already surrendered when the cops came up and began kicking, punching him, and slamming his head into the pavement. They fractured his eye socket. The officer doing the beating, Officer Stetson, wrote in his report that he struck Stallings to gain control of him, even though he was flat on the ground and not moving, and claimed Stallings wasn’t complying. The video shows that to be a lie.
The man, Jaleel Stallings, was charged with eight felonies, including attempted second degree murder of a LEO and first degree assault. Despite the large amounts of mitigating video evidence in the case, the charging attorney still wanted to throw the book at him, asking him to plead guilty to counts carrying 13 years in prison. Instead, he demanded a jury trial and was acquitted of all charges by the jury. He used self defense as his defense, and it worked.
His lawyer has since released the video showing that the cops went hunting that night. They even planned it out, and all of it was caught on their bodycams.
Discussing it while driving around, one supervisor said, “We’re going hunting. Fuck these people.”
During their “patrol” their bodycams even revealed them slashing people’s tires:
One of the officers admitted in court during the trial: “We went out that evening and concealed our presence so people wouldn’t flee and we’d be able to get close enough to shoot them… and we were actually having fun shooting them”
This behavior is indefensible. The cops here were just plain wrong, and were worse than the rioters that were burning the city.
I count no fewer than ten cops in a relatively small box. They are either engaged in beating up and cuffing the one suspect, or milling around while not really paying attention to their surroundings.
These are the actions of people who don’t really think that there is a threat.
Now imagine that the people they are abusing are mad enough to fight back. Imagine that the people who are fighting back have some military experience.
For those of you familiar with ambushes: What could a four man fire support element do if they were in an overwatch position 100 yards or so away and this was a planned ambush? How hard would it be to lure police into a kill box and then overwhelm them with large amounts of fire before disengaging and disappearing before the cops could organize an effective counter?
The police need to be very careful to stop treating the citizens they are sworn to protect as if they were the enemy, because the citizens might just eventually begin acting like it.
Communications between Donald Trump and his staff were being electronically monitored both while he was a candidate and while he was President. They probably are still being monitored. It doesn’t matter that the monitoring was incidental, it was happening.
At any rate, all of this has been going on while Trump was under Secret Service protection. With that in mind, there are only two possibilities:
The Secret Service was aware of the monitoring and allowed it to happen, or:
The Secret Service never detected the intrusion, interception, and monitoring of some of the most secret and supposedly guarded communications in the entire nation. If someone could read White House communications without the knowledge of the Secret Service before passing that information to Hillary, then any other nation (or even large company) with sufficient money and technology could do so as well.
So which is it: Is the Secret Service untrustworthy, or incompetent? In either case, they are wholly incapable of protecting the White House. The even more interesting question is who was behind it? Was it Hillary? Obama? Someone else?
Answer that question, and you will also know who is now calling the shots.
Remember my post from yesterday? The one where I told you that the left was accusing Republicans of plotting to overthrow the government, even though it was the Democrats that did so? In that post, I made the claim that things would get so bad as to seem surreal.
I am right again. The latest is that a retired Federal judge (a Bush appointee) claims that 2020 was a dry run for Trump and other Republicans to shift the 2024 election in their favor, regardless of the actual results. The judge claims:
January 6 was never about a stolen election or even about actual voting fraud. It was always and only about an election that Trump lost fair and square, under legislatively promulgated election rules in a handful of swing states that he and other Republicans contend were unlawfully changed by state election officials and state courts to expand the right and opportunity to vote, largely in response to the Covid pandemic.
He goes on to claim that “Republicans have grown increasingly wary of the Electoral College with the new census and political demographics of the nation’s shifting population.”
That is complete and utter horseshit. This very blog has documented the Democrats’ efforts to get rid of the Electoral College since 2016. In fact, just a few weeks before the 2020 election, CNN was campaigning for packing SCOTUS to eliminate the Electoral College.
You’re going to have to get rid of the Electoral College, because the people — because the minority in this country decides who the judges are and they decide who the president is. Is that — is that fair?” Lemon said.
Cuomo responded by noting a constitutional amendment — which requires two-thirds approval from Congress and three-fourths approval from states — is required to eliminate the Electoral College.
Lemon shot back, “If Democrats, if Joe Biden wins, Democrats can stack the courts and they can do that amendment and they can get it passed.”
No, it isn’t about the Electoral college. It isn’t about 2020. This is about power. It’s about twisting and rewriting the past to hide the Democrat’s obvious shenanigans in the 2020 election. It’s about suppressing the Republican vote in the 2024 election. The left is laying the groundwork for the elimination of any real choice in the 2024 election.
The left continues accusing Republicans of plotting to overthrow the government, even though it was the Democrats that did so. The election was falsified, and now anyone who opposes or exposes what the left did is going to be ousted from power. Perhaps it will be a few Republicans, perhaps all Republicans who aren’t RINOs, or perhaps it will be the entire party.
This will all come to a head before the election. Hang on, shit is going to seem surreal.
If you remember, there was a member of Antifa who was caught bringing explosives to a Tampa area political rally. He was found to be in possession of Antifa materials, pipe bombs, and other materials. He was charged with loitering or prowling, making a destructive device, and two counts of possession of destructive devices. That was January.
He reached a plea deal where he pled no contest to the second degree misdemeanor of loitering, received 6 months probation and had to pay a total of $575 in court costs and fines. All other charges were dropped. Why? Because the ATF ruled that none of these were explosive devices:
Watch this video of Antifa using fireworks as antipersonnel devices (at the 1:52 mark, you see a thrown firework explode in the crowd at a rally for a political candidate):
In Florida, a person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.
So is it reasonable for a person to believe that fireworks are capable of causing death or great bodily injury? I would argue that, being thrown deliberately into a crowd
If not, is it reasonable for a person to believe that the “unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb” is a forcible felony that must be stopped?
For reference: destructive device is defined as any bomb, grenade, mine, rocket, missile, pipebomb, or similar device containing an explosive, incendiary, or poison gas and includes any frangible container filled with an explosive, incendiary, explosive gas, or expanding gas, which is designed or so constructed as to explode by such filler and is capable of causing bodily harm or property damage.
Now the law goes on to say that fireworks are not considered to be destructive devices. I would argue that, once a firework is being used as an antipersonnel device, it has been redesigned. In fact, there is a case in Florida where a person used fireworks as destructive devices and tried to make the argument that since they were only fireworks, they were exempt. The appeals court ruled that the way a firework is used can make it a destructive device.
The analysis of Mitchell’s conduct would be more difficult had he used the devices as fireworks. But taping a firework on a window is not typically the manner by which one explodes fireworks for visible and audible effect. Rather, it evinces a purpose to destroy property. The devices in his possession were powerful enough to fall within the definition of a destructive device as one capable of causing bodily harm or property damage.
Although I am not a lawyer, I believe that in Florida, it is lawful to use deadly force to prevent individuals from using fireworks as weapons by throwing them into a crowd.
What say you?
Amidst the highest level of inflation since Jimmy Carter, the current resident of the White House is considering throwing gasoline on the fire by waving his executive pencil and forgiving $10,000 in student loan debt per borrower.
The administration claims that this will forgive $321 billion in loans, but my back of the napkin figures place that at closer to $400 billion. In any case, that means that another $350 billion or so dollars will suddenly be added to the dollars circulating through this inflationary economy in a time when we should be tightening economic purse strings, not spending like there is no tomorrow.
Inflation will continue to get worse. It’s like a couple of 14 year old kids are playing with a can of gasoline and some matches. In the house.
Just stumbled upon a new (to me) website. It keeps a running total of shootings in Chicago. The website is no fan of Lightfoot or Chicago.
We are six months out from an election, so you know what that means.
Antifa is attacking political opponents again. Keep in mind that Portland is listed as a Zone 5 area and should be considered to be behind enemy lines.