thelibertybeacon--2020-08-14--KEN’S CORNER: Liberty & Mandated Vaccination

Let us study the idea/concept of a mandated vaccination in a Constitutional Republic .
It isn ’ t an easy task .
As always , to get to the truth , one must hit that ball back and forth , and when the dust settles , hopefully the truth will not only be visible , but we will have the ability to recognize it when seen .
One might think the argument a simple matter to consider , and yet there is a powerful triangulation that stymies most all civility , and the truth of this matter is covered in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If you want to know the truth , which is not always evident in the world of men , follow the paper trail .
If corporate profit is made , and a parent challenges it , the question must be asked : Was there a standard moral compass for both sides ?
Is a moral compass necessary ?
You see , corporations are structured to protect themselves from this scrutiny .
Corporations are a shell game , with one protected by another in a variety of ways… They are compartmentalized just for that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ idea what the hand of another division is doing ?
Even those who are supposed to be calling the shots from the pinnacles , are one of hundreds of vice presidents , and all have a different job description , responsibilities , and not privy to what other company men are doing .
This way , very few feel responsible for any negative outcome that a corporation might produce .
Since they have no control over the collective , they can relinquish all moral responsibility .
And so , if love and fear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who refuses a vaccine , there must be a counter moral equivalent from the corporate side , something beyond a black bottom line .
If there is not , there is no use debating it… And that is the rub , isn ’ t it ?
And surely , as we throw this ball back and forth , there must be exceptions , but I challenge you to find one .
Why would a company say that they do not buy lumber from the rain-forests , advertise that they are not open on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with family , or promote that they follow the teachings of Jesus Christ , so they can be trusted , if there was even the remote possibility it would harm their profit margin .
Feel uncomfortable asking that question ?
No , that determination was considered , before the statement was promoted publicly .
Its kinda like a group of similar corporations and bankers , who have grown so powerful they can actually crush a country , and out of the dust they impose a puppet dictator instead of a Constitutional Republic , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by God ?
And each division , only knows that the company stock is going up , that their retirement plan is matched , and the yearly bonus has grown faster than inflation… On one side is a parent protecting their children , and the other a conglomerate mandate that all children be required , by pain of fine and or imprisonment , be vaccinated without due process , consideration , self determination or civil liberty… Out of love and fear a parent might risk the virtual forfeiture of any further participation inside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ marked so that they will be identified everywhere they travel , and will be forever labeled as immoral and irresponsible , unless of course , they resend…if they do not resend , there is the distinct possibility that the Government will take their children from them.. it is the price paid for dissonance on one hand , and an unquestioned and dominating authority on the other… .
Civil Disobedience , the Constitution , our civil liberties , freedom , Liberty from tyranny , all morality and ethics , Love and joy , all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ science , all of history and our future , everything both artful or speculated by scientific hypothesis , and our undeniable imagination… all in question by a parent guarding their children… a parent who emphatically says no… and it is well known that they would do anything , anything at all… out of selfless love .
And Big Pharma knows this… and that is where the paper trail both begins and ends… Big Pharma is even bigger then the Military Industrial Complex , and Government whats to control that… oh , really ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that is the classic definition of an oligarchy .
It is a collection of Pharmaceutical corporations with a singular mindset , working in conjunction… and by the use of media , and corporate lawyers , they pay billions for their drug adds , at the same time lobbying congress to support them in their monetary-big-Parma endeavors .
Lobbying is not a plea for help ; it is bought and paid for…It may or may not surprise you to know that “ Obamacare… ” …you know the one that had to pass so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Well , now the thousands of pages are found to be full of doublespeak , and convoluted lawyer loop-holes , and has a Big Brother Parma-fingerprint on every page .
They finally had enough for both sides to vote it in , and what prey-tell changed their minds , not actually knowing what was in it ?
What could change the mind of a man who is bought and paid or ?
So lets hit the ball back for a moment… Why would a loving woman take a stand against another loving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with something else , like fear .
And where would she get this fear ?
From a long ago teacher ?
An inner voice of reason ?
What if , is it at all possible , that media propaganda played a part ?
And who controls this media , corporations do , and what is their primary objective ?
Is it a cure for cancer ?
Is it a free drug that cures diabetes ?
No , no more so does a surgeon want to tell you that a topical cream will get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Cutting it out will be far more effective , I ’ m told , and they sleep very well justifying that it is… Isn ’ t Anti-vaccination parents deemed by Pro-vaccinated parents to be dangerous and irresponsible ?
And that without a particular vaccination , as all others are required by law to do… that they… individually , along with their entire family , will be scorned as irresponsible to the collective needs of our civilization , and the decision to withdraw from the system irresponsible .
Some , but not all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chance is worth the risk , even in the wake of admitting that the increase in autism is not readily understood .
Thought to be about a one in thousand chance a generation ago , it is now about one in a hundred chance a child will develop autism , and though is looks to be escalating , the trigger is not known .
Is it as simple as one person not being able to put their feet in another person ’ s shoes ?
Surely , you would think differently , question @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your child contracted autism , and on the very day you got a shot… and in your studies , found that some statistics said that one child in every on hundred children might get autism , and another stating there was a one in a hundred chance .
Throwing the dice is not the same as a solid statistic , but that is precisely what confuses truth… and without truth you are nothing but a slave with no future you can call your own .
Your child had a slight fever , some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that is enough to show that each individual reacts differently to the shot !
If there are differing reactions , who would not concede that some people may be more susceptible than others ?
The nurses , practitioners of many kinds , and doctors that I know , some in my family , and some who I see professionally , overwhelmingly agree that vaccinations are a powerful force for good .
Now this may be entirely true , or not… shouldn ’ t we consider that the primary reason for this strong supportive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for their entire career , believed that vaccinations are a power for good , and that even the mere suggestion that it is not is an affront not only to their intellect , their professionalism , but a moral and ethical affront as well ?
Who , with so much education , making daily life and death decisions , would readily admit the remote possibility that they have been duped .
Surely , a doctor three hundred years ago would look at how medicine is being practiced today as magic .
And surely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compilations having the ability to save all data , making it easily accessible to all those working on similar projects , that we are doubling our store of knowledge in most all of the sciences , every 2.2 years ?
Could there be , Lord forbid , something that might curb this expansion of knowledge ?
Perhaps a reluctance to relinquish power , control , and a black bottom line .
Those who are questioning these vaccines , are not doing it for any other reason but that they love their children , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is glaringly noticeable that only a few men are taking up this issue , from the media to the courts , and that is the rub .
Both sides should be seen to have the same general motivation , a love for our children and a need to see them safe .
And one might think that would be enough to work together , but it is not .
• None There is the trust issue .
Both big corporations and government , all modern governments , work together for a common cause @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with some Western corporations , and central banks too .
Do you think that Western inventions are protected by law beyond the borders of China , Russia , or India ?
International law ?
Ever wonder why our country is so opposed to being under the jurisdiction of a system of international law ?
No , it has nothing to do with your right to bear arms , but of arms and drug trafficking .
If you really want truth , do a bit of homework using this question : “ What does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Iran , Saudi and Israel , Cuba and North Korea , have in common ?
” Want a hint ?
Its Profit .
Corporate profit .
• None If you vaccinate your children , and it works , then they surely must be safe from those who are not vaccinated .
Unless , of course , the vaccination did not work .
So what moral justification does one woman have over the other ?
Both are loving and caring , responsible parents , who want to do what is right .
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the argument so cut and dry ?
• None Read the Public Health Service Act ( PHSA ) .
And how it deals with something they term “ Quarantine.
” Any resistance , as they can proclaim martial law , is futile , with unconstitutional draconian enforcement backed by the military .
Yes , we trust them .
We trust everything that is said on the black box too .
They have never lied to us !
Out of manufactured fear , one woman would destroy another woman for taking a stand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she holds for her kids .
Note : I know a woman in Crowley , LA , who has been raising a child who was normal the same day it was inoculated , over forty years ago .
“ While we were driving home , I saw the change in her .
I saw her alert , with sparkling eyes who saw me and reacted to me , and I watched them turn dull and without light before we got home .
She didn ’ t die that day , only her future @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years old .
There is no way anyone can tell me that shot had nothing to do with it .
It can ’ t be proved , so they told me , but I live with it every day , and I know damned well the shot did it.
” This year she will be 48 .
She still plays with the same teddy bear , has never learned to read , and is barley potty trained .
She can not be trusted alone , and has to be monitored from the time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and put to sleep .
She is diagnosed with having autism , and no one can explain how or why .
Don ’ t we have an obligation to ask these questions ?
Any loving and responsible parent would .
It is said that we will be required to have the Covid Vaccine .
That we will be required to have a certificate to travel by plane , to attend school , to eat in a restaurant , to go to a ball game , to get married , by penalty of law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rive – We in the Liberty movement have been fighting to take back this country for more than a decade , peacefully and with the love of God and country in our hearts .
Our banner has been trampled on and displaced by a multitude of distractions , further eroding our nation and the cause for Liberty .
And so , as we are pulled by forces we can not fathom , powerful entities with unlimited resources stolen from our future , unaccountable trillions printed out of thin air and put on our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most pitiful of all questions any patriot might ask in the final hour : Are we going to fight for our master ’ s tyranny , or are we going to demand the return of our civil liberties and Constitution ?
Are we going to choose The Banner of Liberty , or the shackles of voluntary servitude ?
Will it be a war for corporate profit , or a war to regain our ability to self govern , as the blood and toil of our forefathers presented to us , their children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that decision is emanate .
I fear that any decision will be a hard one , but my greatest fear of all is that the decision has already been made for us .

KEN’S CORNER: Liberty & Mandated Vaccination
“ Where there is Love there is life.” – Mahatma Gandhi
Commentary by TLB Contributing Writer: Ken LaRive
Let us study the idea/concept of a mandated vaccination in a Constitutional Republic. It isn’t an easy task. As always, to get to the truth, one must hit that ball back and forth, and when the dust settles, hopefully the truth will not only be visible, but we will have the ability to recognize it when seen.
One might think the argument a simple matter to consider, and yet there is a powerful triangulation that stymies most all civility, and the truth of this matter is covered in both fear, and outright lies. If you want to know the truth, which is not always evident in the world of men, follow the paper trail. If corporate profit is made, and a parent challenges it, the question must be asked: Was there a standard moral compass for both sides? Is a moral compass necessary? You see, corporations are structured to protect themselves from this scrutiny. Corporations are a shell game, with one protected by another in a variety of ways… They are compartmentalized just for that purpose… Individuals in one division have no idea what the hand of another division is doing? Even those who are supposed to be calling the shots from the pinnacles, are one of hundreds of vice presidents, and all have a different job description, responsibilities, and not privy to what other company men are doing. This way, very few feel responsible for any negative outcome that a corporation might produce. Since they have no control over the collective, they can relinquish all moral responsibility.
And so, if love and fear is the primary motivator of an individual who refuses a vaccine, there must be a counter moral equivalent from the corporate side, something beyond a black bottom line. If there is not, there is no use debating it… And that is the rub, isn’t it? And surely, as we throw this ball back and forth, there must be exceptions, but I challenge you to find one.
Why would a company say that they do not buy lumber from the rain-forests, advertise that they are not open on Sunday because their employees need a day with family, or promote that they follow the teachings of Jesus Christ, so they can be trusted, if there was even the remote possibility it would harm their profit margin. Feel uncomfortable asking that question? No, that determination was considered, before the statement was promoted publicly. Its kinda like a group of similar corporations and bankers, who have grown so powerful they can actually crush a country, and out of the dust they impose a puppet dictator instead of a Constitutional Republic, with civil liberties said to be inspired by God? And each division, only knows that the company stock is going up, that their retirement plan is matched, and the yearly bonus has grown faster than inflation…
On one side is a parent protecting their children, and the other a conglomerate mandate that all children be required, by pain of fine and or imprisonment, be vaccinated without due process, consideration, self determination or civil liberty… Out of love and fear a parent might risk the virtual forfeiture of any further participation inside of that society, branded publicly, marked so that they will be identified everywhere they travel, and will be forever labeled as immoral and irresponsible, unless of course, they resend…if they do not resend, there is the distinct possibility that the Government will take their children from them.. it is the price paid for dissonance on one hand, and an unquestioned and dominating authority on the other…. Civil Disobedience, the Constitution, our civil liberties, freedom, Liberty from tyranny, all morality and ethics, Love and joy, all civility, all politeness, all of science, all of history and our future, everything both artful or speculated by scientific hypothesis, and our undeniable imagination… all in question by a parent guarding their children… a parent who emphatically says no… and it is well known that they would do anything, anything at all… out of selfless love.
And Big Pharma knows this… and that is where the paper trail both begins and ends…
Big Pharma is even bigger then the Military Industrial Complex, and Government whats to control that… oh, really? And what is big government? Well, that is the classic definition of an oligarchy.
It is a collection of Pharmaceutical corporations with a singular mindset, working in conjunction… and by the use of media, and corporate lawyers, they pay billions for their drug adds, at the same time lobbying congress to support them in their monetary-big-Parma endeavors. Lobbying is not a plea for help; it is bought and paid for…It may or may not surprise you to know that “Obamacare…” …you know the one that had to pass so that we could see what was inside? Well, now the thousands of pages are found to be full of doublespeak, and convoluted lawyer loop-holes, and has a Big Brother Parma-fingerprint on every page. They finally had enough for both sides to vote it in, and what prey-tell changed their minds, not actually knowing what was in it? What could change the mind of a man who is bought and paid or?
So lets hit the ball back for a moment…
Why would a loving woman take a stand against another loving woman, unless her mind is filled with something else, like fear. And where would she get this fear? From a long ago teacher? An inner voice of reason? What if, is it at all possible, that media propaganda played a part? And who controls this media, corporations do, and what is their primary objective? Is it a cure for cancer? Is it a free drug that cures diabetes? No, no more so does a surgeon want to tell you that a topical cream will get rid of a planter’s wart. Cutting it out will be far more effective, I’m told, and they sleep very well justifying that it is…
Wait, lets bounce it back again…
Isn’t Anti-vaccination parents deemed by Pro-vaccinated parents to be dangerous and irresponsible? And that without a particular vaccination, as all others are required by law to do… that they… individually, along with their entire family, will be scorned as irresponsible to the collective needs of our civilization, and the decision to withdraw from the system irresponsible. Some, but not all, who are Pro-Vaccination, say the chance is worth the risk, even in the wake of admitting that the increase in autism is not readily understood. Thought to be about a one in thousand chance a generation ago, it is now about one in a hundred chance a child will develop autism, and though is looks to be escalating, the trigger is not known. Is it as simple as one person not being able to put their feet in another person’s shoes? Surely, you would think differently, question the official narrative more closely, if your child contracted autism, and on the very day you got a shot… and in your studies, found that some statistics said that one child in every on hundred children might get autism, and another stating there was a one in a hundred chance. Throwing the dice is not the same as a solid statistic, but that is precisely what confuses truth… and without truth you are nothing but a slave with no future you can call your own.

Your child had a slight fever, some had no symptoms at all, and that is enough to show that each individual reacts differently to the shot! If there are differing reactions, who would not concede that some people may be more susceptible than others?
The nurses, practitioners of many kinds, and doctors that I know, some in my family, and some who I see professionally, overwhelmingly agree that vaccinations are a powerful force for good. Now this may be entirely true, or not… shouldn’t we consider that the primary reason for this strong supportive stance might be that they have, for their entire career, believed that vaccinations are a power for good, and that even the mere suggestion that it is not is an affront not only to their intellect, their professionalism, but a moral and ethical affront as well? Who, with so much education, making daily life and death decisions, would readily admit the remote possibility that they have been duped. Surely, a doctor three hundred years ago would look at how medicine is being practiced today as magic. And surely, without a doubt, with computer compilations having the ability to save all data, making it easily accessible to all those working on similar projects, that we are doubling our store of knowledge in most all of the sciences, every 2.2 years? Could there be, Lord forbid, something that might curb this expansion of knowledge? Perhaps a reluctance to relinquish power, control, and a black bottom line.
Those who are questioning these vaccines, are not doing it for any other reason but that they love their children, and fear for their safety. It is glaringly noticeable that only a few men are taking up this issue, from the media to the courts, and that is the rub. Both sides should be seen to have the same general motivation, a love for our children and a need to see them safe. And one might think that would be enough to work together, but it is not.
Points to consider…
There is the trust issue. Both big corporations and government, all modern governments, work together for a common cause. Some corporations in Russia feel competitive with some Western corporations, and central banks too. Do you think that Western inventions are protected by law beyond the borders of China, Russia, or India? International law? Ever wonder why our country is so opposed to being under the jurisdiction of a system of international law? No, it has nothing to do with your right to bear arms, but of arms and drug trafficking. If you really want truth, do a bit of homework using this question: “What does Afghanistan Poppy, Medicinal Marijuana, Benghazi, Iran, Saudi and Israel, Cuba and North Korea, have in common?” Want a hint? Its Profit. Corporate profit. If you vaccinate your children, and it works, then they surely must be safe from those who are not vaccinated. Unless, of course, the vaccination did not work. So what moral justification does one woman have over the other? Both are loving and caring, responsible parents, who want to do what is right. If there are no guarantees, why then is the argument so cut and dry? Read the Public Health Service Act (PHSA). And how it deals with something they term “Quarantine.” Any resistance, as they can proclaim martial law, is futile, with unconstitutional draconian enforcement backed by the military. Yes, we trust them. We trust everything that is said on the black box too. They have never lied to us! Out of manufactured fear, one woman would destroy another woman for taking a stand on this issue, for the love she holds for her kids.
Note: I know a woman in Crowley, LA, who has been raising a child who was normal the same day it was inoculated, over forty years ago. “While we were driving home, I saw the change in her. I saw her alert, with sparkling eyes who saw me and reacted to me, and I watched them turn dull and without light before we got home. She didn’t die that day, only her future did, because she is still four years old. There is no way anyone can tell me that shot had nothing to do with it. It can’t be proved, so they told me, but I live with it every day, and I know damned well the shot did it.” This year she will be 48. She still plays with the same teddy bear, has never learned to read, and is barley potty trained. She can not be trusted alone, and has to be monitored from the time she wakes up till she is bathed and put to sleep. She is diagnosed with having autism, and no one can explain how or why. Don’t we have an obligation to ask these questions? Any loving and responsible parent would.
It is said that we will be required to have the Covid Vaccine. That we will be required to have a certificate to travel by plane, to attend school, to eat in a restaurant, to go to a ball game, to get married, by penalty of law.
“ I do not agree with a word that you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it” – Voltaire
••••
Read more COVID-19 Vaccine related articles
••••
Read more great articles by Ken LaRive
••••
From the Author, Ken La Rive – We in the Liberty movement have been fighting to take back this country for more than a decade, peacefully and with the love of God and country in our hearts. Our banner has been trampled on and displaced by a multitude of distractions, further eroding our nation and the cause for Liberty. And so, as we are pulled by forces we cannot fathom, powerful entities with unlimited resources stolen from our future, unaccountable trillions printed out of thin air and put on our backs as debt, we must formulate the most pitiful of all questions any patriot might ask in the final hour: Are we going to fight for our master’s tyranny, or are we going to demand the return of our civil liberties and Constitution? Are we going to choose The Banner of Liberty, or the shackles of voluntary servitude? Will it be a war for corporate profit, or a war to regain our ability to self govern, as the blood and toil of our forefathers presented to us, their children, as a gift? I fear that decision is emanate. I fear that any decision will be a hard one, but my greatest fear of all is that the decision has already been made for us.
••••
••••
Stay tuned to …
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-08-15--Ex-FBI lawyer to plead guilty in Russia probe by John Durham

Ex-FBI lawyer charged with felony , to plead guilty to altering evidence in Russia probe Former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith was charged Friday with a felony and has agreed to plead guilty to altering a document in the Russia collusion probe , the first criminal case to be brought in the investigation of U.S. Attorney John Durham , according to officials and a court document .
Ahead of his plea , Clinesmith was charged in federal court in Washington D.C. with one count of making a false statement for altering information he had received from the CIA in June 2017 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ official Carter Page was a source for the Agency .
The alteration caused the Justice Department to make a false representation to the FISA Court that approved surveillance of Page for nearly a year , the criminal information filed by Durham states .
Clinesmith “ did willfully and knowingly make and use a false writing and document knowing the same to contain a materially false , fictitious and fraudulent statement and entry in a matter before the jurisdiction of the executive branch and judicial branch , ” the court filing said .
You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Trump , who long has argued he and his campaign were the victim of FBI misconduct , immediately weighed in .
He called Clinesmith “ a corrupt FBI lawyer ” and predicted more shoes will drop in Durham ’ s probe .
“ That ’ s just the beginning , I would imagine , ” Trump told a White House briefing Friday afternoon .
“ …You ’ ll be hearing more.
” Clinesmith ( pictured below ) was expected to plead guilty to the charge as early as Friday afternoon , officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a statement to The Washington Post apologizing for his conduct .
“ Kevin deeply regrets having altered the email .
It was never his intent to mislead the court or his colleagues as he believed the information he relayed was accurate .
But Kevin understands what he did was wrong and accepts responsibility , ” the lawyer told the Post .
Clinesmith ’ s misconduct was first revealed last December in a Justice Department inspector general report that widely criticized the FBI ’ s conduct in the Russia collusion probe against President Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the FBI general counsel ’ s office and altered an email to hide the fact that former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page was a source for the CIA .
The FBI never revealed to the FISA court that authorized surveillance of Page assisted the agency .
In bringing first Russiagate charge , Durham hints at other crimes ( TLB ) published this article with permission of John Solomon at Just the News Some emphasis and pictorial content added by ( TLB ) Click Here to read about the staff at Just the News @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at a near exponential rate , and for this we are grateful and excited !
But we must also be practical .
For 7 years we have not asked for any donations , and have built this project with our own funds as we grew .
We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent .
So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them .
Nothing is too small .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your considerations … ( TLB ) Comment Policy : As a privately owned web site , we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam , advertising , vulgarity , threats of violence , racism , or personal/abusive attacks on other users .
This also applies to trolling , the use of more than one alias , or just intentional mischief .
Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators .
Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning .
Disclaimer : TLB websites contain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner .
We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “ fair use ” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political , health , economic and social issues .
The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes .
If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “ fair use ” you must request permission from the copyright @ @

Ex-FBI lawyer charged with felony, to plead guilty to altering evidence in Russia probe
Kevin Clinesmith will admit he altered a document involving Carter Page’s ties to the CIA.
By John Solomon
Former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith was charged Friday with a felony and has agreed to plead guilty to altering a document in the Russia collusion probe, the first criminal case to be brought in the investigation of U.S. Attorney John Durham, according to officials and a court document.
Ahead of his plea, Clinesmith was charged in federal court in Washington D.C. with one count of making a false statement for altering information he had received from the CIA in June 2017 to hide the fact that Trump campaign official Carter Page was a source for the Agency.
U.S. Attorney John Durham
The alteration caused the Justice Department to make a false representation to the FISA Court that approved surveillance of Page for nearly a year, the criminal information filed by Durham states.
Clinesmith “did willfully and knowingly make and use a false writing and document knowing the same to contain a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statement and entry in a matter before the jurisdiction of the executive branch and judicial branch,” the court filing said.
You can read the charging document here:
President Trump, who long has argued he and his campaign were the victim of FBI misconduct, immediately weighed in. He called Clinesmith “a corrupt FBI lawyer” and predicted more shoes will drop in Durham’s probe.
“That’s just the beginning, I would imagine,” Trump told a White House briefing Friday afternoon. “…You’ll be hearing more.”
Clinesmith (pictured below) was expected to plead guilty to the charge as early as Friday afternoon, officials said.
Clinesmith’s lawyer issued a statement to The Washington Post apologizing for his conduct.
“Kevin deeply regrets having altered the email. It was never his intent to mislead the court or his colleagues as he believed the information he relayed was accurate. But Kevin understands what he did was wrong and accepts responsibility,” the lawyer told the Post.
Clinesmith’s misconduct was first revealed last December in a Justice Department inspector general report that widely criticized the FBI’s conduct in the Russia collusion probe against President Trump. The report said he worked in the FBI general counsel’s office and altered an email to hide the fact that former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page was a source for the CIA.
The FBI never revealed to the FISA court that authorized surveillance of Page assisted the agency.
_________
RELATED ARTICLE
*********
(TLB) published this article with permission of John Solomon at Just the News
Some emphasis and pictorial content added by (TLB)
Click Here to read about the staff at Just the News
••••
••••
Stay tuned to …
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-08-15--Joe Biden on Gun Control: Understanding His 2020 Platform & the 2nd Amendment

Joe Biden on Gun Control : Understanding Biden ’ s 2020 Platform and the Second Amendment The one-two punch of the Wuhan Coronavirus explosion , and the civil unrest of early 2020 , led to an unprecedented growth in firearms ownership in America .
All told , there were about two million firearms sold in the month of March 2020 alone .
Between March and July , an additional three million were sold , with about half of those happening in the month of June .
Ammunition sales have similarly spiked , with record sales occurring on this website .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ need a report to know that there has been a massive surge in demand for ammunition .
They need only go down to their local gun store and see that all of the most common rounds are in short supply , sold out or being rationed at the point of sale .
But it ’ s not just guns and ammo .
There has also been a significant increase in the number of Americans obtaining their concealed carry weapons permit and packing on a daily basis .
Forbes magazine estimates that 20 million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their everyday life .
The flipside of this is that Joe Biden ’ s 2020 campaign has been perhaps the most radically anti-Second Amendment campaign on record .
Former Vice President Biden is very proud of his role in spiriting the 1994 gun ban into passage .
If he ’ s elected , we will see an expansion of the power of the federal government and attacks on the rights of Americans that will not be restricted to the ownership of firearms .
As president , Biden would resume the Obama-era attacks on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ give citizenship ( and voting rights ) to nearly 30 million illegal aliens and use the Federal Reserve to address a “ racial wealth gap.
” However , Biden ’ s desire to erode the Second Amendment deserves special attention .
It is a radical agenda that will gut the right to bear arms in this country .
Does that sound like bluster and hyperbole ?
It ’ s not .
Joe Biden ’ s Record : What He Says vs. What He ’ s Done There are two ways to determine how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with regard to the Second Amendment : What he says and what he has done .
As Joe Biden has been out of government since 2017 , we will start with his history as a legislator and as Vice President of the United States .
Joe Biden has a very long record of being anti-Second Amendment .
He voted for the 1986 Firearms Owners Protection Act , which was primarily a series of gimmes to gun grabbers in exchange for getting the ATF to leave law-abiding gun owners alone .
If you ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but can ’ t afford one because of the high price of the related tax stamp , you can thank Joe Biden for that .
Biden was also instrumental in the passage of the Brady Bill .
This law , until the creation of the NICS background check system , provided for a five-day waiting period to purchase a firearm .
He brags about his role in passing this bill into law on his campaign website , saying “ In 1994 , Biden – along with Senator Dianne Feinstein – secured the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and high-capacity magazines .
As president , Joe Biden will defeat the NRA again.
” Far more concerning , however , is that , as a Senator , Joe Biden literally wrote the bill that banned so-called “ assault weapons ” in the United States for 20 years .
This assault weapons ban defined “ assault weapons ” in an extremely broad sense .
Under the law , the definitions of an assault weapon were as follows : • None Flash suppressors or barrels threaded for them • None An unloaded weight of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a number of specific firearms that were widely popular with American gun owners .
This included the Colt AR-15 , the INTRATEC TEC-9 ( which were popular with the Roof Koreans who defended Koreatown during the LA riots of 1994 ) and the Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil .
Not only were most of these restrictions unconstitutional , they were also largely useless .
Many gun companies continued manufacturing virtually identical versions of firearms that had been banned by the law , removing only minor cosmetic features to get themselves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there was virtually no impact on violent crime throughout the United States .
If we are being generous , this can be seen as a misguided attempt to curb urban violent crime .
If we are being more cynical , it was little more than a power grab .
The law expired on September 13 , 2004 .
There have been several attempts to reintroduce the law , all of which have been unsuccessful .
For most of his political career , Joe Biden has operated as a sensible centrist within the Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his positions are outside of conservatism , they have certainly not historically been outside the mainstream of American political thought .
However , Joe Biden ’ s 2020 presidential campaign is a whole different animal .
Joe Biden is running for president on a highly radical platform .
There are a number of reasons why the former personal envoy of the credit card industry , the man who made it impossible to discharge student loans in bankruptcy , has pivoted toward appealing to the woke crowd .
The reasons are unimportant , however @ @ @ @ @ @ @ speculation as to motive , that Joe Biden ’ s 2020 campaign is perhaps the most radical political campaign in modern American history .
Nowhere is this more clear than on the subject of firearms .
The official website for Joe Biden ’ s 2020 campaign defines gun violence as a “ public health epidemic.
” This might sound like boilerplate , but in fact it is language designed to lay the groundwork for moving firearms restrictions under the purview of the FDA .
This alphabet organization has broad leeway to ban , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to public health .
He also cites a commonly used weasel statistic to advocate for such : that 40,000 Americans die from firearms-related injuries every year .
This includes every firearms-related death – suicides , accidental discharges , shootouts between gangland figures where no innocent bystander is killed , self-defense actions .
And while any death is certainly tragic , this is simply not what anyone means when they talk about “ gun violence.
” All told , there were 14,542 gun homicides in 2017 , less than half of the statistic that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doesn ’ t even crack the top 10 of causes of death in the United States , according to the CDC .
More Americans died of septicemia in 2017 than gun homicides , yet there is no public health crusade against this .
In a related campaign promise , Biden says that he will “ hold gun manufacturers accountable ” for the use of their products .
This means that the families of shooting victims will be able to file civil suits against gun manufacturers to obtain damages related to the misuse of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an attempt at corporate gun control through the backdoor .
When facing such liability , gun manufacturers will be inundated with frivolous lawsuits that will cause them to either go out of business or discontinue their civilian lines entirely .
Biden has previously voted to repeal these protections , which is another point he brags about on his website : Even if a President Joe Biden can not get a new “ assault weapons ” ban to be passed , he plans to use an executive order to ban the importation of such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign website boasts that he will accomplish this “ while working to pass this legislation… using his executive authority.
” This would end the market for a number of lower-cost imports into the United States , restricting the Second Amendment rights of many low-income Americans who can not afford high-priced domestic options .
He also states that any new gun ban would be informed by the last one , meaning that it would be far more sweeping and ban a far greater number of weapons features than the 1994 bill .
But what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden plans to use the National Firearms Act to regulate possession of these firearms .
His language on his website is vague and this is probably intentional .
“ Regulate ” can mean just about anything , allowing him to either do something minor and claim victory or to enact sweeping changes without the hurdle of legislative approval .
When it comes to buybacks , his language becomes more clear : Those who now own “ assault weapons ” – whatever that means , either under newly passed legislation or executive fiat – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the government or register them with the ATF under the National Firearms Act : Registration , of course , will be a prelude to confiscating these arms , either under the Biden Administration or future administrations even more hostile toward the Second Amendment .
He would also seek to limit the number of firearms a person can purchase in a single month to one and close the so-called “ gun show loophole.
” This should all be alarming to you .
But unfortunately , it gets much worse .
A Biden Administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ firearms on the basis of “ mental health ” reasons .
While this might sound reasonable ( who wants a paranoid schizophrenic with a cache of AR-15s ? )
, it is , in fact , a very troubling development .
There are millions of Americans seeking treatment for anything from depression to anxiety .
Oftentimes this isn ’ t representative of any underlying medical condition .
People are simply having a hard time and reaching out for a little help – precisely what they are supposed to do .
This initially will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the Social Security Administration as being unfit to manage their own affairs .
But it is extremely unlikely that this will not be quickly expanded .
Biden also seeks to close a number of “ loopholes ” in the law that aren ’ t actually loopholes at all , such as : • None The “ Hate Crime ” Loophole : This would deprive the right to bear arms from anyone who has received a politically motivated “ hate crimes ” enhancement to a misdemeanor – potentially making petty crimes like vandalism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Constitutional rights anytime an overzealous left-wing prosecutor decided to pursue a “ hate crimes ” enhancement .
Please note that flags such as the Betsy Ross flag and the Gadsden flag have become labeled as “ white supremacist ” images in recent years , so don ’ t think you need to be wearing a swastika armband to receive such an enhancement .
• None The Charleston Loophole : This alleged “ loophole ” allows people to purchase a firearm if they have not received authorization to do so under the NICS system @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to extend this to ten business days – effectively making Americans wait up to two weeks to purchase firearms .
• None The “ Fugitive From Justice ” Loophole : Biden wants to remove the right to keep and bear arms from 500,000 Americans who were declared by the Trump Administration to not actually be “ fugitives from justice.
” As we can see , none of the above are actually “ loopholes.
” They are simply laws that Biden and his constituents do not care for .
We should all be troubled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legislative channels to roll back the rights of our fellow citizens .
However , Biden isn ’ t even promising to do that : He plans to erode and cripple American Second Amendment rights through executive fiat .
Get your ammunition and firearms online ?
Not under a Biden Administration .
Beyond ammo and guns , Biden seeks to ban the online purchase of gun “ kits , ” such as 85 percent lowers or even parts for your weapons : Those who have exotic or antiquated weapons will have an extremely difficult @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keep their weapons operational .
So-called “ ghost guns ” will likewise be banned under a potential President Biden .
The Biden platform includes creating a gun confiscation framework overseen by the ATF and the FBI .
Ostensibly , this is to remove weapons from the hands of people who are no longer legally allowed to own them , such as felons and those awaiting charges .
However , it is important to note that even if this is restricted to removing guns from the hands of felons and those awaiting charges now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in tandem with the new gun registration apparatus , to confiscate firearms from law-abiding Americans .
Biden does not seek a federal “ red flag ” law , but he does seek to “ incentivize the adoption of these laws by giving states funds to implement them.
” He would also seek to “ incentivize ” licensure requirements for Americans to own firearms .
Using Big Tech to Spy on Americans A Biden Administration would spend government time and resources digging up threats on the taxpayer ’ s dime .
He would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Harassment and Abuse ” to identify the “ connection between mass shootings , online harassment , extremism , and violence against women.
” This amounts to little more than a politically motivated creation of a committee to partner with Big Tech to snoop on Americans with the aim of depriving them of their Second Amendment rights .
Expanding the ATF and Other Gun Control Tactics The Biden platform would move to require all gun manufacturers to eventually manufacture only so-called “ smart guns.
” He would pass a law that would require all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a gun safe , dramatically increasing the cost of ownership of firearms .
The Biden DOJ would prioritize the prosecution of “ straw purchasers ” – a stark departure of Obama-era policy where the DOJ worked closely with them , eventually allowing narco-terrorists and Islamic terrorists access to heavy firepower .
Local and state law enforcement would be informed whenever someone failed a background check .
The State Department would take measures to block code from the Internet that might be used to 3D print a gun in someone ’ s home .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ than already exists .
Finally , he would prohibit state and local governments from training teachers in how to defend their students with firearms .
The bottom line to all of this is that the Biden Administration would work to further erode American Second Amendment protections than any other before it .
It is just one component of a radical agenda that has taken over the Biden campaign .
Whether or not Biden actually believes any of this and whether or not he has simply had his campaign hijacked by more radical forces @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the Biden Administration would actively pursue police-state measures against law-abiding gun owners in the United States .
If you have a friend who is a new gun owner , who is unaware of the stakes in this election , we urge you to share this material with them .

Joe Biden on Gun Control: Understanding Biden’s 2020 Platform and the Second Amendment
By: Sam Jacobs
The one-two punch of the Wuhan Coronavirus explosion, and the civil unrest of early 2020, led to an unprecedented growth in firearms ownership in America. All told, there were about two million firearms sold in the month of March 2020 alone. Between March and July, an additional three million were sold, with about half of those happening in the month of June.
Ammunition sales have similarly spiked, with record sales occurring on this website. However, gun owners don’t need a report to know that there has been a massive surge in demand for ammunition. They need only go down to their local gun store and see that all of the most common rounds are in short supply, sold out or being rationed at the point of sale.
But it’s not just guns and ammo. There has also been a significant increase in the number of Americans obtaining their concealed carry weapons permit and packing on a daily basis. Forbes magazine estimates that 20 million Americans are now carrying as part of their everyday life.
The flipside of this is that Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign has been perhaps the most radically anti-Second Amendment campaign on record. Former Vice President Biden is very proud of his role in spiriting the 1994 gun ban into passage. If he’s elected, we will see an expansion of the power of the federal government and attacks on the rights of Americans that will not be restricted to the ownership of firearms. As president, Biden would resume the Obama-era attacks on the suburbs ended by President Trump, give citizenship (and voting rights) to nearly 30 million illegal aliens and use the Federal Reserve to address a “racial wealth gap.”
However, Biden’s desire to erode the Second Amendment deserves special attention. It is a radical agenda that will gut the right to bear arms in this country. Does that sound like bluster and hyperbole? It’s not.
Joe Biden’s Record: What He Says vs. What He’s Done
There are two ways to determine how a potential President Joe Biden would govern with regard to the Second Amendment: What he says and what he has done. As Joe Biden has been out of government since 2017, we will start with his history as a legislator and as Vice President of the United States.
Joe Biden has a very long record of being anti-Second Amendment. He voted for the 1986 Firearms Owners Protection Act, which was primarily a series of gimmes to gun grabbers in exchange for getting the ATF to leave law-abiding gun owners alone. If you’ve ever wanted to own an M-16, but can’t afford one because of the high price of the related tax stamp, you can thank Joe Biden for that.
Biden was also instrumental in the passage of the Brady Bill. This law, until the creation of the NICS background check system, provided for a five-day waiting period to purchase a firearm. He brags about his role in passing this bill into law on his campaign website, saying “In 1994, Biden – along with Senator Dianne Feinstein – secured the passage of 10-year bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. As president, Joe Biden will defeat the NRA again.”
Far more concerning, however, is that, as a Senator, Joe Biden literally wrote the bill that banned so-called “assault weapons” in the United States for 20 years. This assault weapons ban defined “assault weapons” in an extremely broad sense. Under the law, the definitions of an assault weapon were as follows:
Rifles:
Flash suppressors or barrels threaded for them
Pistol grips
Folding and telepathic stocks
Bayonet mounts
Grenade launchers
Pistols:
Semi-automatic versions of any automatic firearm
An unloaded weight of over 50 ounces
Threaded barrels designed to accommodate flash suppressors, barrel extenders, suppressors and handgrips
Barrel shrouds
Shotguns:
Pistol grips
Detachable magazines
Folding and telescopic stocks
The law likewise targeted a number of specific firearms that were widely popular with American gun owners. This included the Colt AR-15, the INTRATEC TEC-9 (which were popular with the Roof Koreans who defended Koreatown during the LA riots of 1994) and the Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil.
Not only were most of these restrictions unconstitutional, they were also largely useless. Many gun companies continued manufacturing virtually identical versions of firearms that had been banned by the law, removing only minor cosmetic features to get themselves into compliance. Numerous studies found that there was virtually no impact on violent crime throughout the United States.
If we are being generous, this can be seen as a misguided attempt to curb urban violent crime. If we are being more cynical, it was little more than a power grab.
The law expired on September 13, 2004. There have been several attempts to reintroduce the law, all of which have been unsuccessful.
Joe Biden’s 2020 Platform
For most of his political career, Joe Biden has operated as a sensible centrist within the Democratic Party. While one can argue that his positions are outside of conservatism, they have certainly not historically been outside the mainstream of American political thought. However, Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential campaign is a whole different animal.
Joe Biden is running for president on a highly radical platform. There are a number of reasons why the former personal envoy of the credit card industry, the man who made it impossible to discharge student loans in bankruptcy, has pivoted toward appealing to the woke crowd. The reasons are unimportant, however. We can definitively say, without speculation as to motive, that Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign is perhaps the most radical political campaign in modern American history. Nowhere is this more clear than on the subject of firearms.
Why Language Matters
The official website for Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign defines gun violence as a “public health epidemic.” This might sound like boilerplate, but in fact it is language designed to lay the groundwork for moving firearms restrictions under the purview of the FDA. This alphabet organization has broad leeway to ban, tax and regulate anything deemed a danger to public health.
He also cites a commonly used weasel statistic to advocate for such: that 40,000 Americans die from firearms-related injuries every year. This includes every firearms-related death – suicides, accidental discharges, shootouts between gangland figures where no innocent bystander is killed, self-defense actions. And while any death is certainly tragic, this is simply not what anyone means when they talk about “gun violence.”
All told, there were 14,542 gun homicides in 2017, less than half of the statistic that Biden cites in his platform. This doesn’t even crack the top 10 of causes of death in the United States, according to the CDC. More Americans died of septicemia in 2017 than gun homicides, yet there is no public health crusade against this.
Removing Protections for Gun Manufacturers
In a related campaign promise, Biden says that he will “hold gun manufacturers accountable” for the use of their products. This means that the families of shooting victims will be able to file civil suits against gun manufacturers to obtain damages related to the misuse of their products in crimes. This is an attempt at corporate gun control through the backdoor. When facing such liability, gun manufacturers will be inundated with frivolous lawsuits that will cause them to either go out of business or discontinue their civilian lines entirely. Biden has previously voted to repeal these protections, which is another point he brags about on his website:
“In 2005, then-Senator Biden voted against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, but gun manufacturers successfully lobbied Congress to secure its passage. This law protects these manufacturers from being held civilly liable for their products – a protection granted to no other industry. Biden will prioritize repealing this protection.”
Banning “Assault Weapons” by Executive Order
Even if a President Joe Biden cannot get a new “assault weapons” ban to be passed, he plans to use an executive order to ban the importation of such weapons into the United States. His campaign website boasts that he will accomplish this “while working to pass this legislation… using his executive authority.” This would end the market for a number of lower-cost imports into the United States, restricting the Second Amendment rights of many low-income Americans who cannot afford high-priced domestic options. He also states that any new gun ban would be informed by the last one, meaning that it would be far more sweeping and ban a far greater number of weapons features than the 1994 bill.
Regulating Existing “Assault Weapons”
But what about the AR-15 you already purchased? Biden plans to use the National Firearms Act to regulate possession of these firearms. His language on his website is vague and this is probably intentional. “Regulate” can mean just about anything, allowing him to either do something minor and claim victory or to enact sweeping changes without the hurdle of legislative approval.
When it comes to buybacks, his language becomes more clear: Those who now own “assault weapons” – whatever that means, either under newly passed legislation or executive fiat – will have to either sell them back to the government or register them with the ATF under the National Firearms Act:
“As president, Biden will pursue legislation to regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act.“
Registration, of course, will be a prelude to confiscating these arms, either under the Biden Administration or future administrations even more hostile toward the Second Amendment. He would also seek to limit the number of firearms a person can purchase in a single month to one and close the so-called “gun show loophole.”
Using Mental Health to Ban Firearms Ownership
This should all be alarming to you. But unfortunately, it gets much worse. A Biden Administration would attempt to prevent Americans from owning firearms on the basis of “mental health” reasons. While this might sound reasonable (who wants a paranoid schizophrenic with a cache of AR-15s?), it is, in fact, a very troubling development. There are millions of Americans seeking treatment for anything from depression to anxiety. Oftentimes this isn’t representative of any underlying medical condition. People are simply having a hard time and reaching out for a little help – precisely what they are supposed to do.
This initially will only exclude people that have been adjudicated by the Social Security Administration as being unfit to manage their own affairs. But it is extremely unlikely that this will not be quickly expanded.
Closing the “Loopholes”
Biden also seeks to close a number of “loopholes” in the law that aren’t actually loopholes at all, such as:
The “Hate Crime” Loophole: This would deprive the right to bear arms from anyone who has received a politically motivated “hate crimes” enhancement to a misdemeanor – potentially making petty crimes like vandalism a pretext for depriving Americans of their Constitutional rights anytime an overzealous left-wing prosecutor decided to pursue a “hate crimes” enhancement. Please note that flags such as the Betsy Ross flag and the Gadsden flag have become labeled as “white supremacist” images in recent years, so don’t think you need to be wearing a swastika armband to receive such an enhancement.
The Charleston Loophole: This alleged “loophole” allows people to purchase a firearm if they have not received authorization to do so under the NICS system in three business days. Biden seeks to extend this to ten business days – effectively making Americans wait up to two weeks to purchase firearms.
The “Fugitive From Justice” Loophole: Biden wants to remove the right to keep and bear arms from 500,000 Americans who were declared by the Trump Administration to not actually be “fugitives from justice.”
As we can see, none of the above are actually “loopholes.” They are simply laws that Biden and his constituents do not care for. We should all be troubled by the Biden Administration working within legitimate legislative channels to roll back the rights of our fellow citizens. However, Biden isn’t even promising to do that: He plans to erode and cripple American Second Amendment rights through executive fiat.
Banning Online Sales
Get your ammunition and firearms online? Not under a Biden Administration. Beyond ammo and guns, Biden seeks to ban the online purchase of gun “kits,” such as 85 percent lowers or even parts for your weapons:
“Biden will enact legislation to prohibit all online sales of firearms, ammunition, kits, and gun parts.”
Those who have exotic or antiquated weapons will have an extremely difficult time finding the parts they need to keep their weapons operational. So-called “ghost guns” will likewise be banned under a potential President Biden.
Gun Confiscation and Licensure Requirements
The Biden platform includes creating a gun confiscation framework overseen by the ATF and the FBI. Ostensibly, this is to remove weapons from the hands of people who are no longer legally allowed to own them, such as felons and those awaiting charges. However, it is important to note that even if this is restricted to removing guns from the hands of felons and those awaiting charges now, that it can easily be used, in tandem with the new gun registration apparatus, to confiscate firearms from law-abiding Americans.
“As president, Biden will direct the FBI and ATF to outline a model relinquishment process, enact any necessary legislation to ensure relinquishment when individuals newly fall under one of the federal prohibitions, and then provide technical and financial assistance to state and local governments to establish effective relinquishment processes on their own.”
Biden does not seek a federal “red flag” law, but he does seek to “incentivize the adoption of these laws by giving states funds to implement them.” He would also seek to “incentivize” licensure requirements for Americans to own firearms.
Using Big Tech to Spy on Americans
A Biden Administration would spend government time and resources digging up threats on the taxpayer’s dime. He would create a “Task Force on Online Harassment and Abuse” to identify the “connection between mass shootings, online harassment, extremism, and violence against women.” This amounts to little more than a politically motivated creation of a committee to partner with Big Tech to snoop on Americans with the aim of depriving them of their Second Amendment rights.
Expanding the ATF and Other Gun Control Tactics
The Biden platform would move to require all gun manufacturers to eventually manufacture only so-called “smart guns.” He would pass a law that would require all gun owners to keep their firearms in a gun safe, dramatically increasing the cost of ownership of firearms. The Biden DOJ would prioritize the prosecution of “straw purchasers” – a stark departure of Obama-era policy where the DOJ worked closely with them, eventually allowing narco-terrorists and Islamic terrorists access to heavy firepower. Local and state law enforcement would be informed whenever someone failed a background check. The State Department would take measures to block code from the Internet that might be used to 3D print a gun in someone’s home. He seeks a far more robust ATF than already exists. Finally, he would prohibit state and local governments from training teachers in how to defend their students with firearms.
The bottom line to all of this is that the Biden Administration would work to further erode American Second Amendment protections than any other before it. It is just one component of a radical agenda that has taken over the Biden campaign. Whether or not Biden actually believes any of this and whether or not he has simply had his campaign hijacked by more radical forces is besides the point – which is that the Biden Administration would actively pursue police-state measures against law-abiding gun owners in the United States.
If you have a friend who is a new gun owner, who is unaware of the stakes in this election, we urge you to share this material with them.
••••
Read more articles by Sam Jacobs
••••
Read more articles by AMMO.com
••••
About the Author: Sam Jacobs grew up in Southern New England, probably the part of the country with the weakest gun culture. However, from a young age he believed firmly in the right of self defense and the right to keep and bear arms. This, coupled with 12 years of education in public schools and an argumentative nature, meant that he was frequently getting into debates with his teachers about the virtue of the Second Amendment. A precocious student of history and the Constitution, Jacobs became interested in both the practice of armed self defense throughout history as well as the philosophical underpinnings of the Second Amendment. Jacobs has an affinity for the individual and the common man against centralized forms of power and elites, whether they be in the government or the private sector. In particular, he is interested in the ways in which private companies work to subvert the legislative process and to undermine American freedoms outside of normal legal channels. He considers the resolution of how corporate power can hem in Constitutional freedoms to be the most pressing political question of our age. The private sector and the public sector are increasingly indistinguishable from one another, both because of behind-the-scenes corporate chicanery that undermines the legislative process and because private companies are rapidly becoming far more powerful than the federal government. Thus, it is more important than ever to both fight the incursion of private companies into our government and to become independent and self-reliant enough to make it difficult for private companies to hem in your rights. So Sam believes. Jacobs is the lead writer and chief historian with Ammo.com, and is the driving intellectual force behind the content in the Resistance Library. He is proud to see his work name-checked in places like Bloomberg, USA Today and National Review, but he is far more proud to see his work republished on websites like ZeroHedge, Lew Rockwell and Sons of Liberty Media. How many firearms does Sam own and what’s his everyday carry? That’s between him and the NSA.
••••
••••
••••
Stay tuned to …
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-08-15--Kamala Has Already Struck Out

Kamala Has Already Struck Out

Kamala Has Already Struck Out Even before the Democrat presidential candidate , Joe Biden , named his choice for vice president , a group of Democrat Party activists released an unprecedented document outlining their “ rules ” for how the media could address issues surrounding the woman Biden ultimately chose .
These guidelines made it abundantly clear that the media were “ required ” to handle Biden ’ s choice with kid gloves .
Questions were not to be probing ; instead , this veep candidate , unlike the vicious coverage Sarah Palin endured years ago , was to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Democrats actually warned the media that they would “ monitor coverage ” of the female veep candidate and that anything even slightly critical would be condemned as “ racist and sexist.
” Hollywood celebrities and the usual line-up of leftist women ’ s groups ( NARAL , Planned Parenthood , etc . )
have promised Kamala , “ We ’ ve got your back.
” Bottom line : Biden is in hiding ; Kamala is untouchable .
This mafia-style intimidation can not be allowed to stand .
The public needs to know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in baseball , has already struck out .
She has three strikes against her that are a death knell for her prospects .
There is no way , after these strikes , she should be anywhere near a heartbeat or a brain flare away from the presidency of America .
1 .
Opportunistic Career Path — We are not supposed to have noticed ( or it ’ s not supposed to make a difference or matter ) , but Kamala Harris came into politics as a mistress under the patronage of the notoriously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Willie Brown .
Numerous public servants in government in California at the time noted that Kamala was a pretty twenty-something young woman that Brown , a married man in his 60s , regularly showed off as his mistress at political events .
She received prestigious , powerful , and profitable political appointments in state government and moved on from there .
Anyone who brings up this opportunism is against her “ ambition ” and is trying to keep her “ in her place.
” In short , anyone raising these well documented @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kamala is known as being “ pragmatic , rather than principled.
” Some Democrat strategists claim to be happy with Kamala as a “ messenger ” ( meaning she is good TV ) but cringe at her inconsistent and problematic “ messages ” ( meaning she is all over the map on any given issue ) .
Harris has flip-flopped on issue after issue , depending on what ’ s politically expedient .
She excuses this inconsistency by saying being a prosecutor is , by its very nature , “ controversial.
” As @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but she ran for office on an “ anti–death penalty ” platform .
Her truancy policies were a problem ; also her drug programs .
She opposed police body cameras , claiming they disadvantaged blacks and minorities .
She was criticized for siding with police too often ; now she is vocal about police “ brutality.
” She is now very pro-LGBT and transgender issues and blames her previous inconsistency on staffers who disregarded her personal views .
She was against decriminalization of “ sex work ” before she suddenly advocated for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was against it before flippantly claiming that marijuana brings joy and “ we need more joy in the world.
” She ’ s taken both sides on whether a convicted terrorist should be able to vote from prison !
2 .
Radical Woke Ideologies and Policies — Many analysts believe that Kamala Harris will be America ’ s most radical left political candidate ever .
She ’ s consistently among the top two “ most progressive ” members of the Senate .
She has been called one of the most radical-left politicians today @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Kamala will be farthest left !
These policy positions are not only constitutionally problematic ; they are also prohibitively expensive , with a price tag in the multiple billions of dollars !
Guns ?
Kamala supports extremist laws to restrict our 2nd Amendment rights .
She advocates a wide array of increased gun control measures , including executive orders to implement problematic regulations .
Health care ?
Kamala co-sponsored Bernie Sanders ’ s “ Medicare for All ” health insurance proposal .
She wants to abolish all private health insurance , saying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of that !
” She strongly supports a single-payer system .
Observers note that both her position and Biden ’ s on the issue have solidified during the COVID-19 pandemic .
Education ?
Kamala attended all-white schools until she chose to attend Howard University .
She passed the bar in 1990 and progressed as a prosecutor to become district attorney of San Francisco thanks to political muscle from her benefactor , Willie Brown .
She advocates for free college and university education for all — especially for free tuition at historically black colleges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the daughter of ( legal ) immigrants from India and Jamaica , Kamala has repeatedly shown that she makes no distinction between the rights and privileges of a citizen and an illegal alien .
Benefits , she claims , belong to citizens and non-citizens alike .
Environment ?
She joined forces with the socialist Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York to require additional regulations on environmental policies .
3 .
Kavanaugh Hearings Debacle — The final strike is the most disgraceful .
The way Kamala Harris treated Brett Kavanaugh at the 2018 confirmation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the senators .
She stood out at the hearings for her deceitful questioning and the revolting tone of her accusations .
She accepted the flimsiest of evidence in attacking Kavanaugh – for instance , the implausible and unsubstantiated accusation of gang rape — and praised an obviously “ deceptively edited video ” claiming that Kavanaugh opposed birth control , claiming that it was all about “ punishing women.
” Her extreme positions were so bad that she was actually called out by the left .
Her attacks — called fear-invoking lies and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were acknowledged as false and criticized by left-wing PolitiFact and her liberal hometown newspapers , The San Francisco Chronicle and the Los Angeles Times .
As President Trump said , she was , indeed , “ extraordinarily nasty ” to Brett Kavanaugh .
Guy Benson , Townhall political editor , described her Kavanaugh performance as “ particularly demagogic , cynical and abysmal.
” In their excellent book , Justice on Trial : The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court , Mollie Hemingway and Carrie Severino detailed all the egregious procedural @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get Kavanaugh to commit perjury , as well as the fawning media coverage .
In a normal election , the veep choice would be relatively irrelevant , but Joe Biden is not a normal presidential candidate .
At 77 , “ Gaffe-Prone Joe ” Biden has said he ’ d be a “ transitional ” president , and it is generally acknowledged that he is more likely than other previous candidates to become ( sooner rather than later ) incapacitated or unable to serve more than one term .
Thus , Kamala must @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
She fails on every measure — significantly !
Leadership ?
She is obviously , much like Hillary , a ruthless opportunist willing to do or say whatever it takes to get ahead .
Ideas/Policies ?
She can be swayed however the political winds are blowing at the time .
Even her friends explain that she is “ not ideological , ” meaning she doesn ’ t take principled stances on important issues .
Experience ?
She has dramatically failed upward !
The media have frequently acknowledged her “ history of flip flopping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the veepstakes is a promise to promote a grab bag of assorted radical goals of every oddball progressive from Bernie to AOC to Obama and be an advocate for special constituencies — pro-abortion voters , instigators of the BLM movement ’ s racism , gun control activists , and illegal aliens .
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate , and for this we are grateful and excited !
But we must also be practical .
For 7 years we have not asked for any donations , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ own funds as we grew .
We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent .
So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them .
Nothing is too small .
We thank you for all your support and your considerations … ( TLB )

Kamala Has Already Struck Out
By: Janice Shaw Crouse
Even before the Democrat presidential candidate, Joe Biden, named his choice for vice president, a group of Democrat Party activists released an unprecedented document outlining their “rules” for how the media could address issues surrounding the woman Biden ultimately chose. These guidelines made it abundantly clear that the media were “required” to handle Biden’s choice with kid gloves. Questions were not to be probing; instead, this veep candidate, unlike the vicious coverage Sarah Palin endured years ago, was to be above questioning. With astounding hubris, the Democrats actually warned the media that they would “monitor coverage” of the female veep candidate and that anything even slightly critical would be condemned as “racist and sexist.” Hollywood celebrities and the usual line-up of leftist women’s groups (NARAL, Planned Parenthood, etc.) have promised Kamala, “We’ve got your back.”
Bottom line: Biden is in hiding; Kamala is untouchable.
This mafia-style intimidation cannot be allowed to stand. The public needs to know that Kamala’s quest, as in baseball, has already struck out. She has three strikes against her that are a death knell for her prospects. There is no way, after these strikes, she should be anywhere near a heartbeat or a brain flare away from the presidency of America.
••••
1. Opportunistic Career Path — We are not supposed to have noticed (or it’s not supposed to make a difference or matter), but Kamala Harris came into politics as a mistress under the patronage of the notoriously unethical speaker of the House in California, Willie Brown. Numerous public servants in government in California at the time noted that Kamala was a pretty twenty-something young woman that Brown, a married man in his 60s, regularly showed off as his mistress at political events. She received prestigious, powerful, and profitable political appointments in state government and moved on from there. Anyone who brings up this opportunism is against her “ambition” and is trying to keep her “in her place.” In short, anyone raising these well documented facts is both misogynistic and racist. Kamala is known as being “pragmatic, rather than principled.” Some Democrat strategists claim to be happy with Kamala as a “messenger” (meaning she is good TV) but cringe at her inconsistent and problematic “messages” (meaning she is all over the map on any given issue). Harris has flip-flopped on issue after issue, depending on what’s politically expedient. She excuses this inconsistency by saying being a prosecutor is, by its very nature, “controversial.” As a prosecutor, she defended capital punishment, but she ran for office on an “anti–death penalty” platform. Her truancy policies were a problem; also her drug programs. She opposed police body cameras, claiming they disadvantaged blacks and minorities. She was criticized for siding with police too often; now she is vocal about police “brutality.” She is now very pro-LGBT and transgender issues and blames her previous inconsistency on staffers who disregarded her personal views. She was against decriminalization of “sex work” before she suddenly advocated for criminalization. Same with marijuana; she was against it before flippantly claiming that marijuana brings joy and “we need more joy in the world.” She’s taken both sides on whether a convicted terrorist should be able to vote from prison!
••••
2. Radical Woke Ideologies and Policies — Many analysts believe that Kamala Harris will be America’s most radical left political candidate ever. She’s consistently among the top two “most progressive” members of the Senate. She has been called one of the most radical-left politicians today; pick any pet woke cause, and Kamala will be farthest left! These policy positions are not only constitutionally problematic; they are also prohibitively expensive, with a price tag in the multiple billions of dollars! Guns? Kamala supports extremist laws to restrict our 2nd Amendment rights. She advocates a wide array of increased gun control measures, including executive orders to implement problematic regulations. Health care? Kamala co-sponsored Bernie Sanders’s “Medicare for All” health insurance proposal. She wants to abolish all private health insurance, saying, “Let’s eliminate all of that!” She strongly supports a single-payer system. Observers note that both her position and Biden’s on the issue have solidified during the COVID-19 pandemic. Education? Kamala attended all-white schools until she chose to attend Howard University. She passed the bar in 1990 and progressed as a prosecutor to become district attorney of San Francisco thanks to political muscle from her benefactor, Willie Brown. She advocates for free college and university education for all — especially for free tuition at historically black colleges and universities. Immigration? Even as the daughter of (legal) immigrants from India and Jamaica, Kamala has repeatedly shown that she makes no distinction between the rights and privileges of a citizen and an illegal alien. Benefits, she claims, belong to citizens and non-citizens alike. Environment? She joined forces with the socialist Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York to require additional regulations on environmental policies.
••••
3. Kavanaugh Hearings Debacle — The final strike is the most disgraceful. The way Kamala Harris treated Brett Kavanaugh at the 2018 confirmation hearings was the most disrespectful and vicious of the senators. She stood out at the hearings for her deceitful questioning and the revolting tone of her accusations. She accepted the flimsiest of evidence in attacking Kavanaugh – for instance, the implausible and unsubstantiated accusation of gang rape — and praised an obviously “deceptively edited video” claiming that Kavanaugh opposed birth control, claiming that it was all about “punishing women.” Her extreme positions were so bad that she was actually called out by the left. Her attacks — called fear-invoking lies and possibly attempts at a presidential audition — were acknowledged as false and criticized by left-wing PolitiFact and her liberal hometown newspapers, The San Francisco Chronicle and the Los Angeles Times. As President Trump said, she was, indeed, “extraordinarily nasty” to Brett Kavanaugh. Guy Benson, Townhall political editor, described her Kavanaugh performance as “particularly demagogic, cynical and abysmal.” In their excellent book, Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court, Mollie Hemingway and Carrie Severino detailed all the egregious procedural maneuvers Harris tried in her efforts to get Kavanaugh to commit perjury, as well as the fawning media coverage.
••••
In a normal election, the veep choice would be relatively irrelevant, but Joe Biden is not a normal presidential candidate. At 77, “Gaffe-Prone Joe” Biden has said he’d be a “transitional” president, and it is generally acknowledged that he is more likely than other previous candidates to become (sooner rather than later) incapacitated or unable to serve more than one term. Thus, Kamala must be viewed as a possible presidential contender. She fails on every measure — significantly! Leadership? She is obviously, much like Hillary, a ruthless opportunist willing to do or say whatever it takes to get ahead. Ideas/Policies? She can be swayed however the political winds are blowing at the time. Even her friends explain that she is “not ideological,” meaning she doesn’t take principled stances on important issues. Experience? She has dramatically failed upward! The media have frequently acknowledged her “history of flip flopping and deceit.”
What Kamala Harris offers in the veepstakes is a promise to promote a grab bag of assorted radical goals of every oddball progressive from Bernie to AOC to Obama and be an advocate for special constituencies — pro-abortion voters, instigators of the BLM movement’s racism, gun control activists, and illegal aliens.
••••
••••
••••
Stay tuned to …
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.