Reader’s Links for April 11th, 2024

Posted on by

Each day at just after midnight Eastern, a post like this one is created for contributors and readers of this site to upload news links and video links on the issues that concern this site. Most notably, Islam and its effects on Classical Civilization, and various forms of leftism from Soviet era communism, to postmodernism and all the flavours of galloping statism and totalitarianism such as Nazism and Fascism which are increasingly snuffing out the classical liberalism which created our near, miraculous civilization the West has been building since the time of Socrates.

This document was written around the time this site was created, for those who wish to understand what this site is about. And while our understanding of the world and events has grown since then, the basic ideas remain sound and true to the purpose.

So please post all links, thoughts and ideas that you feel will benefit the readers of this site to the comments under this post each day. And thank you all for your contributions.

This is the new Samizdat. We must use it while we can.

For those interested, please check out https://vladtepesblog.substack.com/ as an another avenue of expression.

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

30 Replies to “Reader’s Links for April 11th, 2024”

  2. Bobble heads bobble for the knob cobber in the House of Commons. Like your favourite old shoes this “far-right conspiracy” dialectic attack has grown too tired and obvious. Time for the garbage.

    • When you stand in the House and call someone a liar, a conspiracy theorist, is that not what Justine calls hate speech? What a diplomat, Canadians should be proud. Should we tolerate him?

  4. One big irony against U.S. complaints is that the coming world recession/depression will fix Red Chinese “overproduction” when world demand for its exports falls off a cliff. Meanwhile, the Chinese don’t even wait for old-bag commie Yellen to leave their country before bringing in Lavrov. As someone who appreciates communication by subtext I must say these diplomats are fluent in that language. Talk about shouting a message.

    https://youtu.be/qHcpzJLJizk?si=xO1t3D9E6QeYzUGo

  11. “Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.”
    – Dietrich Bonhoeffer

    Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 Vaccine Injuries & Deaths – 4 tragic stories with videos and pictures
    Dr. William Makis MD – April 11, 2024

    Scroll down to “Claim my free post” Button
    Continue reading this post for free,
    courtesy of Dr. William Makis MD.
    https://makismd.substack.com/p/mrna-injury-stories-state-of-nevada

    Tonja Marie Johnson of Las Vegas, Nevada
    April 27, 1966 – August 31, 2023
    https://www.affordablecbs.com/obituary/tonja-johnson

  13. Checking a previous Zoltan Pozsar interview to see if what he said is still relevant. It turns out to be even more clear and concise now with a modicum of retrospect, and the emerging market, war, and T-bill events. He is the first 20 minutes. He describes the transition of countries settling trade balances in currencies other than USD, mentioning the stealing of Russian reserves as a catalyst:

    https://duckduckgo.com/?q=zoltan+pozsar&atb=v314-1&iax=videos&ia=videos&iai=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DVr1ZSZqevwc

  16. Trump Impeachment Manager Threatened with Defamation Charges
    by Guest Contributor Apr. 11, 2024 10:45 am10 Comments

    Guest by post by Bob Unruh

    ‘I strongly suggest that you do not treat this lightly, congressman’

    Comments by members of Congress, even stupid and irrational, mostly are protected by the “speech and debate” clause of the Constitution – as long as the comments are part of the legislative process.Guest by post by Bob Unruh

    But now a letter from a legal team representing congressional witness Tony Bobulinski is charging that U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin, the Democrat from Maryland most famous for leading the impeachment case against former President Trump, stepped outside of that authority when he publicly slammed the witness, who has provided key evidence to Congress in its investigation into the evidence for impeaching Joe Biden.

    In fact, according to the letter from lawyers Jesse Binnall and John C. Sullivan, representing Bobulinski, Raskin “mocked” various witnesses to Congress and posted a “freeze frame” that shows Bobulinski, with the chyron, “A disgruntled Wannabe Business Partner Turned Trump World Hype man.”

    Raskin further publicly described Bobulinski as “a bitterly frustrated would be business partner who collaborated with the Trump campaign” and a “dubious” witness. And he called Bobulinski a “political pawn” and accused him of lying.

    The letter warns Raskin, “You are not entitled to any immunity for your defamatory statements. The Speech and Debate Clause comes from Article I, Section 6, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution, and it includes, in relevant part: ‘for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.’”

    But that only protects activities “undertaken in the House and Senate,” and provides no immunity “beyond its carefully defined scope,” the lawyers warn. “Anything that is not a legislative activity will not be protected.”

    The letter warns Raskin, “Your statements are derogatory falsehoods, rendering them legally actionable. Your pattern of maliciously defaming Mr. Bobulinski is well-established and will not be tolerated.”

    The lawyers explain that they will file litigation over Raskin’s public and social media statements “if you fail to delete and publicly retract recent defamatory statements and publications you made about Mr. Bobulinski, including on X (formerly Twitter). Be further advised that you should identify and preserve all hard copy and electronically stored documents, information, and data that relate, in any way, to the subject matter of your incessantly malicious defamatory conduct. It was a mistake to believe that your publications were made without consequence. It must, and will, stop immediately.”

    The lawyers also cite “evidence” of Raskin’s “malice,” in that he’s following a “blind adherence to a preconceived narrative.”

    Bobulinski, a onetime business associate of Hunter Biden, has provided testimony to Congress that confirms the influence peddling operations run by the Biden family, which generated millions for family members, was focused on access to Joe Biden, who was, in fact, party to those operations.

    Bobulinski, during his appearance in Congress, called leftists in the body liars, and a ruling from the committee found that he was not out of order in doing so.

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/04/trump-impeachment-manager-threatened-defamation-charges/

  17. BREAKING: Biden Regime Approves Expansion of Background Checks for Gun Shows and Online Firearm Sales (VIDEO)
    by Jim H?ft Apr. 11, 2024 10:15 am173 Comments

    Biden’s Justice Department has announced the implementation of the “Engaged in the Business” Final Rule on Thursday.

    This rule seeks to redefine what it means to be engaged in the business of selling firearms, a measure that extends the requirement for a federal firearms license to individuals selling guns at shows and online for profit.

    This expansion of background checks is yet another overreach by the Biden regime, infringing on Second Amendment rights.

    The Final Rule aims to close the so-called “gun show loophole,” ensuring that all gun dealers, regardless of where they sell firearms, comply with federal background check requirements.

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/04/breaking-biden-regime-approves-expansion-background-checks-gun/

  18. Six European Nations Sign an Agreement To Protect the North Sea Offshore and Underwater Energy Infrastructure From ‘Hostile Attacks’
    by Paul Serran Apr. 11, 2024 7:30 am79 Comments

    Among the many different ways in which the war in Ukraine has disrupted the geopolitical realities in Europe, energy is certainly one of the most critical.

    Nations have been scrambling to provide a steady power supply for both industrial needs and to keep the population warm and the lights on.

    The massive sanctions against Moscow also meant that many in the old continent had to find new suppliers to substitute the inexpensive Russian gas.

    In this context, the North Sea stands out as a vital area of interest.

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/04/six-european-nations-sign-agreement-protect-north-sea/

  21. Rantz: Dance team told American flag shirt made some feel ‘triggered and unsafe’ in Seattle

    Apr 11, 2024, 5:40 AM | Updated: 5:40 am

    Members of a regional women’s country line dance team said they were effectively kicked out of a Seattle dance convention after organizers claimed their American flag-themed shirts made some attendees feel “triggered and unsafe.”

    The Borderline Dance team was invited to the Emerald City Hoedown in Seattle this past weekend. They said the organizers, the Rain Country Dance Association (an LGBTQ+ dance community), have been inviting them to come to its dance convention for years and they were finally able to accommodate. But when they arrived this past Saturday at the event, they said they didn’t get the greeting they were expecting.

    https://mynorthwest.com/3956973/rantz-seattle-dance-america-flag-shirts-unsafe-triggered/

  22. Read more: https://www.ammoland.com/2024/04/who-will-atf-shoot-next/#ixzz8X6lFMyUR
    Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
    Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

    Who will ATF Shoot Next?
    Ammoland Inc. Posted on April 11, 2024 by Lee Williams
    ATF Agents IMG ATFHQ-IG Public Domain
    ATF Agents IMG ATFHQ-IG Public Domain

    The ATF went to Bryan Malinowski’s West Little Rock home last month, spoiling for a gunfight, and they got one. Now, a good man is dead – the latest victim of ATF’s overly aggressive tactics and complete disregard for the sanctity of human life.

    ATF has yet to comment officially on the March 19 killing, other to claim Malinowski fired first. But Malinowski’s family recently released a statement which confirms what everyone already knew: It is extremely unlikely that the 53-year-old airport executive knew he was trading gunfire with federal agents. It is far more likely Malinowski believed he was defending himself and his wife from armed home invaders.

    “Bryan Malinowski was asleep but rose to the sound of the door crashing and located a firearm. His wife believed the noise must have been intruders and she fully believes her husband thought the same. He loaded a magazine into a pistol and emerged from the master bedroom into a hallway leading indirectly to the front entryway. He reached a corner in the hall and looked around it to see several unidentifiable figures already several steps inside his home,” Malinowski’s family said in the statement. “We do not know who shot first but it appears that Bryan shot approximately three times at a decidedly low angle, probably at the feet of the intruders who were roughly 30 feet away.”

    ATF agents shot Malinowski in the head with a carbine at least once. He lingered for two days and then died from his wounds. ATF did not immediately release his body, so the family was not able to donate his organs.
    Tactically Unsound

    The Malinowski family described ATF’s tactics as “reckless and incompetent, and completely unnecessary.”

    In their statement, the family points out that ATF had Malinowski under surveillance for days. They had surreptitiously installed a GPS tracker on his vehicle, and undercover ATF agents had made several controlled buys from him at gun shows. More importantly, they knew where he worked and where he lived. They didn’t need to raid his home at zero dark thirty.

    “At this stage there is no publicly available evidence showing whether agents knocked on the door or announced their presence, adequately identifying themselves,” the statement reads. “Bryan’s wife Maer only heard loud banging immediately followed by the crash of the front door being forced open.”

    ADVERTISEMENT
    SCROLL DOWN TO CONTINUE READING

    ATF had a host of less-lethal arrest options available, any one of which would have spared Malinowski’s life.

    They could have arrested him at the Clinton National Airport, where he served as executive director. They could have pulled him over on his way home and arrested him in his vehicle. They could have called Malinowski’s attorney and told him to turn in his client.

    If agents were dead set on confronting Malinowski at his home, a callout would have been much safer for all involved. Once the home was surrounded, agents could have contacted Malinowski on his cellphone – they knew the number since they had a warrant to search his phone – and ordered him to come out with his hands up. If he didn’t answer his phone, a bullhorn would have sufficed.

    A video from a neighbor’s doorbell camera shows that agents arrived at Malinowski’s home in 10 separate vehicles. If they would have activated the emergency lights in all of these squad cars, Malinowski’s entire neighborhood would have been bathed in red flashing lights. Malinowski would have known immediately there were law enforcement officers stacked outside his home and not criminal home invaders.

    Finally, agents could have simply slowed down and waited for Malinowski to answer the door, rather than breaching and storming in, which caused the armed confrontation.

    “Absent exigent circumstances (danger of losing evidence-drugs down the toilet; propensity for violence or escape) case law requires law enforcement officers to give dwelling occupants a reasonable time to come to the door and let them in,” Malinowski’s family said in their statement.

    Unfortunately, ATF’s raid planners chose the most dangerous option – the one tactic most likely to end in gunfire – that any seasoned tactical officer would utilize only as a final course of action, after all else had failed.
    Potential Charges

    Malinowski did not have a Federal Firearm License, yet he routinely sold firearms at gun shows. In their search warrant affidavit, ATF suspected he was “a person engaged in the business of selling firearms,” which his family points out is difficult to define.

    “A private seller may do so until such time they cross a subjectively defined barrier becoming ‘a person engaged in the business of selling firearms.’ As stated, there is no bright line test. It is a subjective test. A citizen’s ability to sell firearms without a license is sometimes referred to as the ‘gun show loophole,’” their statement reads. “Mr. Malinowski’s family and close friends don’t think he had any inkling ATF was concerned about his gun show sales. They are all confident that he would have never jeopardized his career in airport management by knowingly flaunting a regulation pertaining to his weekend hobby.”

    Malinowski’s attorney correctly noted that if he had been convicted of his crime, Malinowski would likely have received probation or even pre-trial diversion, not a prison sentence, but such speculation is moot. Malinowski will never have the opportunity to answer ATF’s accusations.

    “It would be grossly improper for anyone to suggest any U.S. citizen guilty of any crime based only on the contents of an affidavit in a warrant application. Even so, in the search warrant affidavit Bryan Malinowski is never accused of knowingly selling any gun to anyone he shouldn’t have. It only suggests he (perhaps unknowingly) crossed a subjective line which put him in a different class of weekend gun seller and obligated him to buy a $200 FFL license,” the family stated.
    Takeaways

    If a tactical team botched a raid this badly at any real law enforcement agency, careers would end and heads would roll.

    At ATF, who knows?

    If there even is an internal review, the outcome will be preordained. Awards, commendations and promotions will be showered upon all participants. Never mind that a life was taken – an innocent man was killed because ATF leadership is obsessed with using their SWAT teams.

    These type of needless killings will continue. That much is certain. ATF has never learned from its mistakes. Neither Ruby Ridge nor Waco taught them anything about the proper application of force.

    In a similar raid last year, more than a dozen ATF agents wearing tactical gear and armed with AR-15s stormed the rural Oklahoma home of Russell Fincher, a high school history teacher, a Baptist pastor and a parttime gun dealer. Thankfully, no one was injured or killed during the confrontation. However, at the time we predicted that if ATF continued deploying its SWAT teams haphazardly, without direction or proper planning – escalating rather than de-escalating situations – someone would be killed. Eight months later, Malinowski was shot to death in his home.

    Who holds ATF accountable? The Biden-Harris administration certainly won’t. ATF leadership is operating under the administration’s explicit orders. Their agents have become foot soldiers in Joe Biden’s war on our guns.

    Unless the agency and its leadership are held accountable, only one question remains: Who will ATF shoot next?

  23. Read more: https://www.ammoland.com/2024/04/will-ny-be-the-state-that-destroys-all-government-gun-permitting-schemes/#ixzz8X6mNrGfW
    Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
    Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

    Will NY be the State that Destroys All Government Gun Permitting Schemes!?
    Ammoland Inc. Posted on April 10, 2024 by Roger Katz

    Opinion
    After decades of denying the individual right to bear arms and three landmark Supreme Court cases in the Twenty-first century refuting that myth, New York is now in the crosshairs.
    dumb guns self destruction democrats war on guns fail iStock-demaerre 501363876.jpg
    iStock-demaerre 501363876.jpg

    “Woe unto them that decree unrighteous decrees, and that write grievousness which they have prescribed” ~ Isaiah 10 (KJV)

    For decades, many people serving in the Federal or State Governments across the land, as well as many academicians, have wrongly postulated that the Second Amendment right of the people to keep and bear arms does not refer to an individual right but a collective right.

    This misperception is grounded not on sound legal and logical analysis but on bias—a personal animus directed toward armed self-defense.

    More particularly, this hostility derives from a stark abhorrence of the well-armed citizenry as a check on government tyranny.

    It isn’t the prospect of tyranny or government encroachment on the sovereignty of the American people over the government that troubles proponents of the “collective rights” argument, but rather the fact that the armed citizen can effectively resist that tyranny.
    Over the past decades, the Federal Government has amassed incredible power—an unconstitutional usurpation of power.
    ADVERTISEMENT
    SCROLL DOWN TO CONTINUE READING

    While this troubles many Americans, it troubles few others who find it tolerable, acceptable, and even commendable since it is presumed essential to the end goal of governmental power absolutism, which is considered a good thing to some. This quest is borne of an attitude.

    This attitude results from strict adherence to a sociopolitical-economic philosophy that is at odds with our Nation’s history, heritage, and core values, as reflected in the Articles of the Constitution and, more directly, in our unique Bill of Rights—a set of Natural Law Rights, emanating from the Divine Creator—fundamental, unalienable, unmodifiable, unbroken, persistent, and eternal.

    Many Americans and many State Governments correctly understand this and realize the need for America’s armed citizenry, no less today than in the past, as our Country is awash in violent crime.

    As an uncaring Federal Government amasses more power unto itself, it uses none of that power and authority to serve the American people but, instead, to harm the people, in service to itself to secure ends antithetical to those of the people—consolidating power to cement its tyranny over the people.

    A Tyrannical Government will not tolerate the armed citizenry.

    Not until the first decade of the Twenty-First Century did Americans who cherish their natural law right to armed self-defense successfully challenge the erroneous collective rights idea of the Second Amendment, which had held stubbornly sway for so many years and decades and impliedly embraced a notion of the Government as sovereign over the people rather than the Government beholden to the people with the people as the sole sovereign over the Government.

    A dangerous transformation of the role of the Government and its relationship to the people has gradually taken shape. It is one at odds with the concept of a Free Constitutional Republic.

    A backlash was brewing. And it came none too soon in the face of a torrent of bizarre and unconscionable political and societal notions thrust on the public psyche through a concerted and diabolical propaganda campaign meant to confound the citizen’s rational thought processes and fracture his moral sense.

    In the 2008 landmark case, District of Columbia vs. Heller, the U.S. Supreme Court responded to Americans’ justified outrage at states’ continued defilement of the natural law right to armed self-defense.

    Through comprehensive elucidation, the High Court had, at long last, made unambiguously and unequivocally plain that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is an individual right—a right unconnected to a person’s service in a militia.

    A basic rational, common-sense understanding of the need to protect oneself with effective means from aggressive assault only buttresses the Court’s legal and logical analysis in Heller.

    Many States that traditionally abhor the idea of civilian citizen possession of firearms balked and, looking for an “off-ramp,” claimed the Heller decision does not apply to them.

    Americans then challenged that idea, and the U.S. Supreme Court again responded by ruling in a second landmark case, McDonald vs. City of Chicago.

    In that 2010 case, the Court made plain that the fundamental, unalienable right to keep and bear arms applies to the States no less than it does to the Federal Government. No Government of men can lawfully countermand Divine Law, but some States dared to do so anyway. They continued to frustrate the exercise of the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

    This required the U.S. Supreme Court to step in yet again.

    In a third landmark case, New York State Rifle and Pistol Association (NYSRPA) vs. Bruen, the High Court made plain the right to armed self-defense, implicit in the words, “right of the people to keep and bear arms,” applies in the public sphere as well as in one’s home.

    The U.S. Supreme Court struck down New York’s “Proper Cause” requirement in Bruen that offended that Truth.

    For well over a century, the New York State Government had maintained that no one has the right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside one’s home. “Proper Cause” was the instrument crafted to deny Americans’ right to armed self-defense outside the home. The New York Government created that standard for uniform application across the State.

    But, the State Legislature never defined what “Proper Cause” meant.

    It was left to the New York Courts to define Proper Cause” that would express the intent (or an intent) of the State Legislature in Albany.

    The Courts said “Proper Cause” means “special need,” which, more precisely, means “extraordinary need” to carry a handgun for self-defense. And, “extraordinary need,” referring to need beyond the ordinary, entailed the notion that a need grounded on basic self-defense when in public is insufficient to justify the issuance of a concealed handgun carry license.

    Since everyone could claim “self-defense,” especially in a major metropolitan area like New York City, prone to criminal violence, a person working or residing in the City would henceforth need to prove to the satisfaction of the licensing official (or officer) why the danger to that person’s life and well-being extended beyond the “ordinary” day-to-day danger of criminal violence that factored into everyone else’s life.

    This inevitably led to the creation of arbitrary standards. Meanwhile, New Yorkers who could not prove “extraordinary need” for a handgun would face and have faced violent, life-threatening assaults.

    It was then left to the various jurisdictions in New York to devise operational rules to effectuate the court definition of a “special” or “extraordinary” need sufficient to justify the issuance of a coveted unrestricted New York concealed handgun carry license.

    The principal jurisdiction in the State, the major municipality, New York City, devised elaborate operational rules, effectively restricting to a bare minimum the number of people who could legally carry (concealed) a handgun for self-defense.

    This was the intent of the NYPD Licensing Division, which the Municipal Government authorized to craft rules to effectuate “Proper Cause” for issuing a concealed handgun carry license that would permit the licensee to carry a handgun on his person in the City lawfully.

    Other jurisdictions never bothered to craft operational rules. In those jurisdictions, the licensing official would issue concealed handgun carry licenses to favored people. Generally, that would mean Government officials such as judges or powerful, wealthy, connected people.

    These ideas of issuing concealed handgun carry licenses to a privileged few or creating arbitrary rules benefitting some people to the exclusion of many others are anathema to the Second Amendment’s import.

    These ideas undermine the import of the “Common Man” by creating a “privileged” subset of people whom the Government bestows the “right” to armed self-defense.

    “Proper Cause,” as crafted and applied, is antagonistic and antithetical to the rulings and reasoning of the U.S. Supreme Court majority in the prior two landmark Second Amendment cases.

    The High Court was not amused at New York’s continued irascibility and defiance of the most basic of natural law rights.

    It saw New York’s “Proper Cause” requirement for what it was: an unconstitutional, unconscionable Government intrusion on an American’s fundamental, unalienable, enduring right—one deliberately, callously, and insidiously designed to frustrate the legitimate need of the average person, the “Common Man,” to protect his or her life against a dire threat.

    Carrying a handgun is the most effective means to deter a life-threatening assault, bar none.

    Long acknowledged as infinitely better than a knife, a whistle, martial arts, and, more recently, pepper spray, a handgun has, for the last two centuries, served the “Common Man” well as the singularly most effective means presently available for countering a deadly, aggressive assault on life where that threat remains commonplace and omnipresent, now as in the distant past—in the public sphere. This isn’t difficult to understand. It is simply common sense.

    As one academic scholar pointed out in a law review published in 2015, seven years before the Bruen decision came down,

    . . . [R]ecognition of the right to bear arms in public makes sense, while limiting the right to the home does not. People often need to defend themselves against criminal offenses outside the home. Most robberies, rapes, and assaults occur outside the home. A ban on possession of handguns outside the home would be even more burdensome than the ban struck down in Heller: there the Court noted that homeowners could still keep shotguns or rifles in the home, which is not the case outside of the home.

    Some argue that, even if the Second Amendment was historically understood to protect the right to bear arms in public, it does not protect the right to bear handguns in public because effective handguns did not exist until around 1835. This argument is ‘frivolous’ after Heller, however, which states ‘the Second Amendment extends . . . even [to] those [arms] not in existence at the time of the founding.’ Alternatively, the very existence of state legislation prohibiting concealed carry, or public carry entirely, reveals a longstanding tradition of states being able to regulate the right. While it is true that state laws barring concealed carry have been upheld under the Second Amendment, these laws were typically only upheld where the ability to open carry was not infringed. [ Note: New York’s municipalities do not permit “open carry” of handguns, only “concealed carry”—and then, only if the civilian citizen has secured a valid concealed handgun carry license, which he must always have with him].

    From “The Constitutional ‘Terra Incognita’ Of Discretionary Concealed Carry Laws,” 2015 U. Ill. L. Rev. 909, 944-945 (2015), by Brian Enright.

    The New York Government, like many others, refuses to acknowledge the obvious—obstinately maintaining that “Public Safety” demands the “Common Man” be disarmed for the good of all. Really?

    Tell that to the family of a person whose life was snuffed out because he or she had applied for and was denied a handgun license for self-defense for failure to prove, to the satisfaction of the handgun licensing authority, “Proper Cause,” for issuance of a license.

    Apart from politicians like Kathy Hochul, it is the career criminal, the psychopathic, murderous gang member, and the violent, raging, drug-addled lunatic that delights in the prospect of a disarmed public.

    New York Governor Hochul, no less so than her predecessor, Andrew Cuomo, detests the idea of civilian citizen possession of firearms.

    “Proper Cause” effectively subverted the Second Amendment and rested at the heart of the Handgun Law.

    It was an apt instrument—an expression of and actualization of the State’s belief system—thrust on the “Common Man,” the American citizen who happened to reside or work in New York.

    “Proper Cause” is an irrational response to an equally irrational attitude.

    By robbing the “Common Man” of his access to the best means available for effectuating the natural law right to self-defense, New York denied, in law, the sanctity of innocent human life.

    The State would never acknowledge this, but its Handgun Law entails that conclusion. Without the enactment of “Proper Cause,” New York could not have become an efficient “May Issue” State. It remained so for well over a century. But that smug self-complacency came crashing down.

    In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court released the Bruen decision.

    Hochul was irate and lashed out at the court’s rulings and the Justices. She did so immediately after the decision came down and continues to do so.

    But Hochul feigned indignation. As the consummate politician, she knew she could rely on favorable Press coverage from a sympathetic mainstream media. Like all petty tyrants, her fear isn’t predicated on the ridiculous idea that law-abiding armed citizens are prone to create a “wild-west” atmosphere. There is no evidence for that anywhere. The contrary holds. See, e.g., the article in “Freedom and Prosperity.”

    Presumed concern for ensuring “Public Safety” became the mantra for restricting the exercise of the Common Man’s fundamental, unalienable right to armed self-defense.

    Governor Hochul knew an adverse ruling was coming in Bruen—eight months before the decision was published—and her Government intended to be prepared for that exigency.

    She deciphered this after Oral Argument held in late November 2021.

    In the succeeding months before the publication of the Bruen decision, her government meticulously crafted amendments to the Handgun Law that, when implemented, would provide an adequate, if not ideal, substitute for “Proper Cause.”

    Plainly, Hochul had no intention of complying with the U.S. Supreme Court rulings. The Court’s Article III authority be damned.

    Her defiance of the U.S. Supreme Court rulings amounts to blatant disregard for and contempt for the U.S. Constitution, the foundation of a Free Constitutional Republic.

    The Hochul Government used all the state power, money, and authority it could muster to battle against the weight of the U.S. Constitution and the sacred, inviolate natural law rights of man, upon which our Nation has stood fast since its inception.

    The Hochul Government has devised two mechanisms that, together, substitute for “Proper Cause” that the High Court had struck down.

    These two mechanisms, cunningly crafted, operate in tandem.

    One involves a substantially reworked, heavily bolstered “Good Moral Character” requirement.
    The second involves the imposition of a “Sensitive Place” impediment to legally carrying a concealed handgun.

    The State invoked the “Character” requirement as an imposing hurdle for applicants to overcome to constrain the issuance of concealed handgun carry licenses.

    And, for those individuals who secure a New York concealed handgun carry license (many more individuals than had received such licenses when “Proper Cause” existed), the “Sensitive Place” impediment kicks in. This, a new requirement, severely constrains a licensee’s exercise of armed self-defense when carrying a handgun in public for self-defense.

    Concealed handgun carry, which had been unrestricted in New York for decades for self-defense in the public sphere of life, would henceforth be reduced in status to heavily restrictive lawful use in the public arena for self-defense.

    As the Hochul Government had undoubtedly intended, these amendments would compromise the licensee’s ability to lawfully defend him or herself in public when the need arose.

    Challenges to the constitutionality of the amendments to New York’s Handgun Law came quickly.

    Wending their way up to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, the Court published its decision in December 2023. The case is Antonyuk vs. Chiumento, 89 F.4th 271 (2nd Cir. 2023). The Court mostly sided with the Hochul Government.
    The case is before the U.S. Supreme Court on a Writ of Certiorari. The High Court must take this case up for review, as the Second Circuit’s decision impacts and is inconsistent with Bruen. A loss for NY could see the end of all unconstitutional license or permitting schemes across the nation.

    Given the present and considerable danger to safety and well-being in New York and in various municipalities and States across the Country resulting from unchecked unvetted illegal entry of aliens into our Country, and to demoralized, handcuffed police departments across the Country, and to a flaccid, flawed criminal justice system, violent crime has metastasized at a geometric progression as the hardened, violent criminal has grown ever more confident.

    Innocent people become the playthings of vicious criminals and lunatics. This doesn’t perturb Kathy Hochul and Albany.

    Armed self-defense has become more important today to safeguard survival given a fragmenting society.

    But many New Yorkers have no intention of playing the victim in a Country transformed into a Beehive. The average person’s life means nothing to people like Hochul, Biden, and other Political Progressives and Marxists.

    With the ominous specter of Government autocracy becoming more evident every day, the citizen must be more cognizant of the predatory Government man-beast, no less so than he must be cognizant of the predatory criminal beast who preys on him at random and with abandon.

    While most States have acceded to the dictates of the natural law right of the citizen to take up arms in his defense and that of his family, especially in such dangerous times as these now upon us, several States have not deigned to accede to or even to acknowledge the natural law right to armed self-defense.

    Ironically, it is these latter States that also hamstring their police departments and kowtow to the criminal element and the Radical Left lunatic fringe to the detriment of the law-abiding, rational, and responsible citizen. New York is one of these jurisdictions.

    Governor Hochul and the Democrat Party-Controlled Legislature in Albany have abdicated their responsibility to the American citizen who resides and/or works in New York or otherwise does business in the State.

    It is bad enough that the Hochul Government has effectively washed its hands of New Yorkers. Worse, the Hochul Government won’t allow the American citizenry to provide for its defense against a society that has run amok.
    The New York Government’s antipathy toward armed self-defense, as evidenced in word and deed, must not be perceived in a vacuum.

    The Government’s public policy and the accompanying statements reflect a general suspicion of, a contemptuous attitude toward, and an abject disregard for the safety and welfare of the American people who reside and work in New York.

    This isn’t something that just happened recently. What exists today in the State is a product of what occurred in the past—the far-distant past.

    New York’s abhorrence of the right of the people to keep and bear arms is worth scrutiny, for New York is a microcosm of the view held by the present Biden Administration toward this most important of all natural law rights and mirrors much of the same antagonism toward the natural law right codified in the Second Amendment expressed by Governors in similar jurisdictions.

    We delve deep into this in the next several articles in the lead-up to the most important U.S. Presidential election in our lifetime. Will Tyranny continue to prevail and worsen or will the Country return to sanity and its historical roots? Woe to all of us if this Country continues down the present path.

  24. Biden: ‘Absolutely’ More ‘Executive Action’ Gun Control Measures Coming
    By
    John Boch –
    April 10, 2024 31
    Joe Biden Angry
    (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)
    ?Previous Post
    Next Post?

    President Joe Biden sat down with Univision TV for an exclusive interview in his effort to pander to Spanish-speaking voters in America. The interview is all about distracting from Biden and his allies’ support for defunding the police, soft-on-crime policies and a mass invasion of illegals into our nation on his watch.

    Univision, clearly part of the establishment media, teed up a softball question for President Puddin’ Brain about gun control. Of course, Biden appealed to fears and emotions. And just as the set-up was based upon a faulty premise, so was Biden’s answer.

    Here’s the question from Univision’s Democratic-operative with a byline Enrique Acevedo:

    [G]un violence remains the number one cause of death for children in America.”

    Bzzt. False Enrique. First of all, it’s not ‘gun violence’ but gang violence. Next up, his utterly false claim that violence involving firearms is the number one cause of death for children in America.

    From Medline:
    Death among children and adolescents
    The information below is from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Accidents (unintentional injuries) are, by far, the leading cause of death among children and teens.

    THE TOP THREE CAUSES OF DEATH BY AGE GROUP

    0 to 1 year:

    Developmental and genetic conditions that were present at birth
    Conditions due to premature birth (short gestation)
    Accidents (unintentional injuries)

    1 to 4 years:

    Accidents (unintentional injuries)
    Developmental and genetic conditions that were present at birth
    Homicide

    5 to 9 years:

    Accidents (unintentional injuries)
    Cancer
    Developmental and genetic conditions that were present at birth

    10 to 14 years

    Accidents (unintentional injuries)
    Suicide (intentional self-harm)
    Cancer

    If truth was on his side, why does the Univision hack have to lie? But The Narrative(tm) is far more important than the facts. He continues…

    Latinos have made it a top priority across the country, especially in places like El Paso and Uvalde in Texas.

    Pretty much nobody labels gun control as America’s top priority at the moment Mr. Acevedo. In fact, according to Pew Research in 2024, it’s not even in the top 20. Not even among Hispanics.

    Your administration called on Congress to pass common-sense gun laws, but that’s unlikely to happen in the next few months. If you’re re-elected, would you consider taking further executive action on this issue?”

    And here’s Biden’s response, just as riddled with falsehoods in support of The Narrative(tm) as the question:

    Absolutely. Look, I, along with Dianne Feinstein, passed the first limitation on assault weapons and the number of bullets that could be in a rifle. The idea anybody needs 100 rounds in a rifle, in an AR-15, I was out in Uvalde. I met with every one of those families. I spent four hours with them. I looked at the pain in their faces. I saw what they felt. I could feel it. And the idea that — and his phrase [in] another context where there was a mass shooting, I think it was in El Paso, he said — they said, what to do about it, and he said, just get over it, you’ve got to get over it, the idea we don’t have background checks for anybody purchasing a weapon, the idea that we’re going to be in a position where he says that — he famously told the NRA that, don’t worry, no one’s going to touch your guns if I — from the very beginning, I used to teach the Second Amendment in law school, from the very beginning, there were limitations. You couldn’t own a cannon. You couldn’t — you could own a rifle or a gun, but there were certain things you couldn’t do. They weren’t weapons of war. And so, look, we passed the first major gun legislation in over 30 years when we passed the law that we recently passed that outlaws weapons that are made that you can’t trace and so on and so forth. And — but it’s not enough. I think we have to do more, and I am absolutely committed. And I’ve asked the Congress, and if I get a Congress and get re-elected, we’re going to do it again. We’re going to make sure we eliminate these weapons.

    Here’s the video…

    Biden also castigated President Donald Trump for Trump’s pledges to defend gun rights for everyday Americans. Yeah, perish the thought that someone would protect and defend fundamental Constitutional rights for the little people.

    In fact, gun rights are the only thing that the little people – you know, the ones like you and me who don’t have Secret Service protection – have for self-defense and personal defense of our lives, our homes and our families.

    https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/biden-absolutely-more-executive-action-gun-control-measures-coming/

    • Biden lied about not being able to own cannons, it was legal then and it is legal now, there are many people who own WWI and WWII cannon.

  25. Taking the Secretary of Defense to Task, Military Chaplains Are Asking the Supreme Court to Simply Enforce the Rule of Law
    by J.M. Phelps Apr. 11, 2024 2:20 pm105 Comments

    Making its way to the Supreme Court of the United States, 38 military chaplains are challenging Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s authority to issue the 2021 COVID-19 vaccine mandate and its implementation, which are largely considered illegal and unconstitutional by those who have sought relief from its tyrannical enforcement.

    The Gateway Pundit spoke to Arthur A. Schulcz Sr., retired Vietnam War veteran, and lead attorney in Alvarado v. Austin. On December 29, 2023, he said, the chaplains filed a petition with the Supreme Court challenging the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals’ dismissal of their claims for an injunction against continued retaliation for requesting religious accommodation and the District Court’s dismissal of their constitutional and statutory claims.

    The Fourth Circuit said the claims were moot, meaning the courts could not provide a remedy because the military had allegedly fixed the chaplains’ concerns regarding the vaccine.

    On March 21, the chaplains filed an application for injunctive relief with the Supreme Court to protect them during the petition process and thereafter. The group of chaplains is calling for the cessation of retaliatory actions used against them for refusing to get the jab on the grounds of religious objection.

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/04/taking-secretary-defense-task-military-chaplains-are-asking/

  26. BREAKING: GOP Rep. Stefanik Reveals There is Incriminating AUDIO RECORDING of Biden Telling His Ghostwriter, “I Just Found All the Classified Documents Stuff Downstairs” (VIDEO)
    by Cristina Laila Apr. 11, 2024 2:00 pm159 Comments

    GOP Rep. Elise Stefanik dropped some breaking news on Thursday during a House Committee hearing on the FBI’s budget with Director Christopher Wray: There is audio of Biden telling his ghostwriter that he ‘just found all the classified documents downstairs.’

    Robert Hur in February released a 345-page report on his investigation of the stolen classified documents.

    Robert Hur found that Joe Biden “willfully retained” classified information, however, he decided not to charge him. Hur said there is evidence Biden retained classified notebooks, “knowing he was not allowed to do so.”

    Biden was not charged even though he willfully retained SCIF-designated classified documents and shared material with his ghostwriter Mark Zwonitzer.

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/04/breaking-gop-rep-stefanik-reveals-there-is-audio/