All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Last week
  2. The "number" of "right wing terrorist" arrested was THREE and the "quite a few gun carrying felons" arrested was again THREE, the same people. Misinformation much? Although I haven't read anything about the three men arrested being felons (where did you get your information?) but the three now face felony charges including illegal alteration of a firearm and providing firearms to a foreign national in the country illegally - one of the three arrested being the foreign national. Less credible, less than honest sources are quick to sling the term "right wing", the three are reported to be affiliated with a group called "the BASE", an anti-semitic, anti-government neo-Nazi group considered to be white nationalists, they have no known or published political affiliation "right", "left" or otherwise with members opposed to anyone of any political persuasion who they consider "Jew" or "non-white". There is a lot of information about the group online from the ADL. Like other accelerationists, The Base encourages the polarization of political parties with the end goal of exacerbating tensions, which in turn will hasten societal collapse. To that end, Spear noted, “In our case, we want to survive, but we hope to also influence the political landscape and be able to use any power vacuum that does emerge to our advantage politically, by trying to assume control over that territory.” It looks like the attempted polarization of political parties, ie: espousing hate and vitriol against opposing political parties and members of opposed political parties is exactly the type of strategy "accelerationists" like the BASE approve of and use regularly... sound familiar? CNN: FBI arrests 3 alleged white supremacists. They planned to attend Virginia pro-gun rally, official says The men, who the Justice Department says are members of the international white supremacist group known as The Base, were believed to be planning to attend a pro-gun rally in Virginia's capital of Richmond on Monday that is expected to draw a significant crowd of extremists, according to a law enforcement official. They're charged with multiple firearms and immigration-related offenses and at court appearances Thursday afternoon, a federal judge ordered that the men remain in custody ahead of a detention hearing next week. https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/16/us/fbi-alleged-extremist-group-members-arrested-before-virginia-rally NBC: Days before Virginia gun rally, FBI arrests 3 alleged white supremacists The three suspects have been under FBI surveillance for months, officials said, and agents made their move ahead of a gun rights rally in Virginia next week. Two of the suspects — Brian Lemley, Jr., 33, of Elkton, Maryland, and Newark, Delaware; and William Bilbrough IV, 19, of Denton, Maryland — were charged with transporting and harboring aliens and conspiring to do so, according to the complaint. In addition, Lemley was charged with transporting a machine gun and disposing of a firearm and ammunition to an alien unlawfully present in the United States. That person was identified as Canadian national Patrik Mathews, 27, allegedly a main recruiter for The Base. He was charged with being an alien in possession of a firearm and ammunition. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/days-virginia-gun-rally-fbi-arrests-3-alleged-white-supremacists With more than 20,000 people of all ages, sexes, races and political walks attending the Richmond rally saying that mass violence at the rally was averted by the arrest of three people seems to be a bit of a stretch... It may be accurate, but no more or less accurate a supposition than my guess that violence was probably averted by the absence of hundreds or thousands of "left wing" reactionary groups like Antifa, Communist and Socialist and Anarchist factions. You'd lose that bet since I even mentioned the three specific parts of the new Virginia laws that people were protesting and posted links to the three specific legislative measures... The Daily Wire: NARRATIVE FAIL: Minorities, LGBT Community, Women Show Up In Force At Pro-Gun Rally {and none of the predicted "violence" from the pro-gun demonstrators} https://www.dailywire.com/news/narrative-fail-minorities-lgbt-community-women-show-up-in-force-at-pro-gun-rally
  3. If as you clearly posted the only outside sources referenced was FOX news you might have a claim to posting accurate information, however since there have been articles and videos posted from many sources including sources thought to have a left leaning bias like Democracy Now along with other sources CNN NBC ABC CBS BBC NPR The Atlantic U.S. Senate Library U.S. Library of Congress U.S. House Oversight Committee U.S. Senate Records Office govtrack.org GALLUP polls Foundation, Legal Information Institute Council of Foreign Relations NY Times New York Post Congressional Research Service Gateway Pundit C-Span Reuters Polotico Fortune Washington Free Becon Zero Hedge USA Today Washington Examiner Washington Journal Open Secrets Democracy Now Wikipedia The Scoop SAGE Journals And Yes FOX news along with other sources... Your suggestion that only biased or Right leaning biased sources were referenced is not only misleading, but totally inaccurate, but then that's something we've come to expect. As for the forum being "no value to locals anymore" - The Politics section is just one part of the forum, anyone who wants to avoid discussions with a political flavor can click on the Calendar, General Discussion, Local Events or any other section? When was the last time you posted an other than derogatory topic in any section - more than a year ago? When was the last time you posted other than a derogatory remark about another forum member? No slam -
  4. ever consider the reason there wasnt the violence predicted was because the FBI and State law enforcement arrested a number of right wing terrorist who were planning to attend as well as quite a few gun carrying felons . Im betting you guys didnt even read the laws passed that strted the hoopla funnier still is Ive seen Don suggest some of them himself
  5. well don considering you and rc have killed the forum its really not much more than your echo chamber now if I was worrdied about your moderation Id go change it back but dont fool yourself t its no longer a family forum its maybe our people posting regurgitted fox with a sprinkling of local every couple weeks . sadly its of no value to any locals anymore but feel free to pleasure yourselves as you wish
  6. Red Flag laws are relatively new, but it has always been within the purview of law enforcement to take weapons away from individuals who are in possession of a weapon if they are determined to be a danger to themselves or others. What the Red Flag laws do is temporarily remove firearms from the individual's household (not in the individual's immediate possession) if the courts rule it is in the best interest of public safety... As such I sorta' doubt there is a lot of data available one way or the other. After all if an individual is brandishing a firearm and threatening to shoot people, it makes no sense to remove the firearm they currently have in their possession and leave an arsenal of other firearms that the individual could easily gain access to in the person's home. One thing that seems to be standard, despite the demographics, is only if the courts have determined someone to be a threat may the firearms be kept from the individual... If however the individual can prove to the courts they are not a threat to themselves or others then the firearms must be returned, whether or not this coincides with law enforcement wishes. My thoughts, if an armed person acts crazy and dangerous - presume they are for the sake of public safety - until it can be proved they aren't. Some people arrested for DUI are required to take "driving courses" before they can drive again - some people who have displayed threatening behavior and violence in public are required to take "anger management" classes as a condition of their continued probationary freedom - why not require a person who has brandished a firearm and threatened to use it, to appear before a judge and probably take a psych evaluation to determine if they actually are a threat to public safety? Just my thoughts on the matter ~
  7. I have some issues with “red flag laws” Among them: Solid data supporting a significant reduction in shootings, directly attributable to the affected demographic, specific to individual or combinations of infractions listed by the law. Lack of uniformity state by state. Equal application and implementation throughout a range of demographics, including occupation, gender, race and socioeconomic status. About 10% of states have existing red flag laws. Some states have had some form of red flag laws since the turn of the century (about 20 years). Beyond the number of guns confiscated, (excluding suicide) is their existing data that supports the premise ?
  8. I'm not opposed to individual states all passing laws prohibiting the wearing of "masks" at public protests... Want to wear a mask - don't go to the protest... Want to go to a protest - don't wear a mask... Go to a protest and wear a mask - get arrested. How hard can it be? And I agree RC, the much hyped "guns are bad" narrative that some in the news media and anti-gun advocates try to push as fact, took a gigantic hit at the Virginia gun rally... More than 20,000 people, many of them armed and some even carrying "assault rifles" and not a single incident. Of course one of the things being protested at the Virginia gun rally was a recently passed "Red Flag" law permitting the law enforcement/the courts to temporarily take away firearms from people deemed dangerous to themselves or others. According to the Democrat (now in the majority) Legislators, "the bill had been carefully crafted to preserve due process and protect individual rights", but not having researched the bill myself I'm not aware of the Virginia legislator's definition of "preserving due process" and "protecting individual rights". Personally I have absolutely no opposition to "Red Flag laws", anyone with a single honest bone in their will readily admit there are some people who just should not be allowed to possess firearms. However just who gets to make that determination and on what basis ("dangerous to themselves or others" can sometimes be a bit vague) since it seems to be the prevailing opinion of some that anyone with an opposing political view, or by some accounts a supporter of president Trump is someone considered "dangerous to others" - whether or not they actually are so hopefully level heads, actual facts and common sense prevails in these instances. Again speaking just for my self, I personally also don't have a problem with another part of the new Virginia law that limits the purchase of firearms to "One Handgun A Month". Given that perhaps this will also directly or indirectly effect instances of gun trafficking where people purchase firearms in one state then take them to another state to sell. Actually this is something I'd like to see other (or every) state commit to. I highly doubt anyone needs to purchase more than one firearm a month for their own "personal protection". The third bill SB35, which would allow localities to ban guns from public events, in my opinion only makes for a hodge-podge of confusion for a legal firearms owner who in all likelihood would not know if their firearms were allowed until they arrived, making instances of some people having to inadequately storing their firearms in their unattended vehicles should they attend these events... Me I'm not a big fan of firearms being insecurely stored in unattended places, whether that be in private residences or vehicles. But for me the happiest part of all this is in the absence of "counter protesters" from some of the more violence prone leftist factions and anti-gun lobbyists, the event went off without a single instance of violence completely destroying the narrative that "guns" and "gun owners" are dangerous to public safety and prone to violence.
  9. IMO, there are important take-aways from the event. When people can be identified so as to hold them accountable for their actions, there behavior is a bit significantly more civil. I think the rally bolsters the claims of law abiding gun owners when they rallied tens of thousands of owners, many of them sporting firearms ranging from handguns to a 50 caliber Barrett M82A1 rifle, with no shots fired, not one of those firearms acted on its own to injure or kill anyone. Responsible gun owners, even when aggravated that the state is attempting to usurp a US Constitutionally protected right made the choice not to use their weapon to shoot anyone. The contention that "guns don't kill, evil or mentally ill people do," prevails. IMO, those rally goers served the country well and recognition for their efforts is due.
  10. It wasn't my intention to provide content provoking your self pleasure, sadly, it appears another lobotomy may necessary to bring about success.
  11. I had a hard time believing that anyone could compel Hunter to disclose any information that would incriminate himself or Joe. I suspect that when enough corruption evidence is collected, Hunter will have his own day in court. I also suspect that when that cork is popped, the scandal will have an amazing expansion rate.
  12. Despite early predictions by Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, and anti-gun rights advocates of violence and mayhem... CNN: Virginia gun-rights rally concludes peacefully despite earlier fears of extremist violence https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/20/politics/virginia-gun-rights-rally-richmond/index.html What was missing from the mix that prompted widespread civil unrest, violence and the death of of a woman at a Charlottesville rally three years ago? The presence of counter protesters in the form of Antifa and those who seem to be prone to violence against people and things they oppose... According to CNN, "About 22,000 people attended the rally, according to the Virginia Division of Capitol Police. That includes about 6,000 people in the official rally area and 16,000 outside many of them armed" and "Speakers at the event concluded their remarks around noon, and crowds began (peaceably) dispersing shortly afterwards". Local anti-gun counter protest groups decided not to show up, leftist anarchists and Antifa members stayed away as well despite the lamestream media predicting the gathering would be overflowing with "white nationalists", and "white supremacists" hell bent on violence. So maybe it's time someone takes the opportunity to consider just where the real problem that leads to civil strife and violence lay? Those on the so called "Right", those advocating for their 2nd Amendment rights, free speech, and their own personal ideologies no matter how misguided they might be... or those from the so called "Left" who oppose those with opposing ideologies and just happen to be around when things take a violent turn... I've said it before and I'll repeat myself... If those wanting to express themselves, regardless of their personal views, aren't met with extremist opposition and threats of violence - chances are they will probably speak their piece (as a right afforded to them by the 1st Amendment) and disperse without violence... But if they are denied their Constitutional right to "peaceably assemble" and freely express their grievances, there has been and likely will be violence. Oh yeah, according to Virginia state law enforcement there was one arrest... CNN: "A 21-year-old woman was arrested and charged after having been warned two times not to wear a bandana over her face and then arrested when an officer saw her wearing it a third time, police said."
  13. So you just stopped in to insult people and toss out some more inappropriate language. To "stir the pot" I see... No surprises here ~
  14. They needed ya back stamp the **** is losing members Don and Rc havent had anyone but each other to stroke for close to a month ****Edited by moderator to remove profanity - This is a forum open to people of all ages - and as such, even though this is a forum that highly values one's freedom to express themselves, at the start of the year I will attempt to better "moderate" content by removing profane content when and if, it is posted.
  15. you two got that **** going quick now switch hand and pretend atoz is helping . we all know Iran was just an attempted diversion from trump criminal behavior ****Edited by moderator to remove profanity - This is a forum open to people of all ages - and as such, even though this is a forum that highly values one's freedom to express themselves, at the start of the year I will attempt to better "moderate" content by removing profane content when and if, it becomes necessary.
  16. I highly doubt they will actually let Hunter Biden go be a witness. Bolton is a seasoned vet who knows his way around a hearing, Hunter Biden is a looser cannon than his pops. Sounds like it was floated by Ted Cruz and a naïve Democrat or two may have taken the bait. Cooler Democrat heads will prevail and will never allow Hunter Biden get anywhere near a microphone while his pops is running for office.
  17. Joe Biden interviewed by Vice News forum on minority issues in Des Moines, Iowa was asked "what changes he would bring to the ICE agency" "You're going to get fired!... You're fired if in fact you do that. You only arrest with the purpose of dealing with a felony that's committed and I don't count drunk driving (DUI) as a felony. ... I would hold ICE agents accountable if they stepped over my Executive Order which is no arrests of anyone outside of the schools... Look at the, you know, one thing that happening for particularly Latino and Hispanic kids is the incredible pressure on them in terms of their, their sense of security. They go to school wondering if mom comes to pick them up, is she not going to be there because some ICE agent was there to arrest her." First of all there are instances where a charge of DUI is considered a felony... so whether or not Biden thinks "driving drunk" isn't a felony, actual existing laws say sometimes it is. Secondly if any legally present person, including an American citizen has been known or even lawfully suspected of breaking a law it is the right and duty of law enforcement to detain that person and determine if evidence against that individual will either support or oppose the determination as to whether or not a law has been broken... laws are not and should not be different, just because a person is in the country illegally. It is NOT up to the President of the United States to instruct or deter, law enforcement agents and agencies, by Executive Order from doing their sworn duties. No president past, present or future can take something Congress and legal political process has determined to be illegal and a criminal offense and claim it is no longer a crime and instruct agencies to just ignore federal laws regarding federal controlled narcotic substances and immigration laws. Despite former president Obama attempting to do exactly that on multiple occasions with his Executive orders. Biden has openly stated (and I believe him) that if elected, his administration would probably just be akin to a continuation of the so many of the failed, revoked and ruled (by federal courts) "unconstitutional" Obama era presidential policies... and people complain about president Trump having little or no regard for the Constitution and nation's laws.
  18. Reportedly there is a proposed witness trade being mulled over in the impeachment trial. The trade would involve Hunter Biden for the Senate and John Bolton for the House. I'm wondering if invoking the 5th amendment would apply to these witnesses. If it does apply, that could negate the value of the witness.
  19. That meme looks like something that a young millennial friend or one of my kids would post.
  20. I saw a friend posted this on their social media site...
  21. More of those hats, from a different age demographic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNtFu3IDSm0
  22. Looking the hats these youngsters are donning, I'm guessing they are not sheep to be lead.
  23. " When someone wants to take away their right to arm themselves", that is, if you ask this group of young winners.
  24. I do believe that Iran's downing of the aircraft was an accident. Iran seems to have owned up to being at fault and while I am concerned about international intervention in a sovereign nation's business in seeking nuclear weapons, the mistake in bringing down this aircraft is certainly reason to pause.
  25. Iran being Iran... did anyone really expect anything different? After initially stating the Iranian government did not shoot down Ukrainian flight 752, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary the Iranian government admitted it did launch surface to air missiles to shoot down the Ukrainian passenger jet - After initially stating Iran would send the airliner's "black box" to the Ukraine to be independently evaluated by other governments, Iran is now backtracking its promise to send the passenger jet's black box abroad for analysis. FOX News: Iran backs away from plan to send downed Ukrainian jet's black boxes abroad for analysis Hassan Rezaeifar, the {Iranian} official leading the investigation into the Jan. 8 mishap – which killed all 176 people on board the plane -- was quoted by the state-run IRNA news agency Sunday as saying “the flight recorders from the Ukrainian Boeing are in Iranian hands and we have no plans to send them out.” Rezaeifar said Iran is working to recover the data and cabin recordings, and that it may send the flight recorders to Ukraine or France. “But as of yet, we have made no decision,” he noted. https://www.foxnews.com/world/iran-plane-crash-black-boxes
  26. Earlier
  27. Don

    trump puerto rico

    When president Trump Tweeted there were some very corrupt elements in the Puerto Rico government and stated federal relief supplies were being stolen and mismanaged he was ridiculed, slammed in the private news and public media for weeks and weeks and prompted the liberal left to claim for that he should be impeached. As the months passed we heard actual news about various Puerto Rico government officials being fired or resigning because of political graft, the very things president Trump previously tweeted about, leading up to the news about Puerto Rico Gov. Ricardo Rosselló resigning after several days of protests amid a widening corruption scandal involving more government officials. But unlike the press slamming president Trump when he scorns the mismanagement of federal aid and the corruption in the Puerto Rico government, when stories like this emerge - CNN: Puerto Rico emergency director fired after residents discover warehouse full of Hurricane Maria supplies https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/18/us/puerto-rico-emergency-director-fired/index.html At best we get a single 'below the fold' headline then...
  1. Load more activity