Advertisements
Home

Two presidential electors are trying to convince colleagues to abandon Trump

2 Comments

H/T The Blaze.

These people are mentally detached from reality and are in alternate universe.

Donald Trump may have won the electoral votes necessary to win the White House, but he he’s likely going to lose the popular vote to Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. And now two electors have launched a last-minute effort to convince their colleagues to abandon the president-elect.

“This is a long shot. It’s a hail Mary,” Bret Chiafolo, a Washington state elector who previously pledged not to vote for Clinton, told Politico Monday. “However, I do see situations where — when we’ve already had two or three [Republican] electors state publicly they didn’t want to vote for Trump. How many of them have real issues with Donald Trump in private?”

Chiafolo along with Colorado elector Micheal Baca have launched what they call a “moral electors” movement in hopes of convincing 37 of their Republican colleagues to deny Trump their votes. Should they succeed in their radical effort, the presidential decision would be thrown to the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.

And that would be fine with those so-called “moral electors,” as they aren’t trying to get a Democrat into the White House. In fact, they are encouraging electors to write in 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney or Ohio Gov. John Kasich, a one-time contender for the 2016 Republican nomination.

The Electoral College consists of 538 members who are expected to convene in their respective state capitals on Dec. 19 to formally vote for the next president. According to the latest count, Trump had earned 290 electoral votes and is narrowly ahead in Michigan, though a final announcement has not been made. Should those go to the billionaire businessman, he will have 306 electoral votes, well above the necessary 270 votes to win. That is how Chiafolo and Baca arrived at the number 37.

So far, Republican elector Art Sisneros, a libertarian activist from Texas, is the only conservative on record considering abandoning Trump. He told Politico he remains “undecided” about his vote.

Even if the effort fails, though, which is likely, Baca said he hopes the move launches a serious national discussion about abolishing the Electoral College, which would require either a constitutional amendment or legislation in several states (whose combined electoral votes total at least 270) mandating the popular vote dictate how their respective electors vote.

Advertisements

Trump Calls Democrats the ‘Party of Slavery’ and ‘Jim Crow’

Leave a comment

H/T The Blaze.

The truth hurts but sadly most Americans are ignorant of our history.

WASHINGTON (TheBlaze/AP) —

Donald Trump railed against the Democratic Party on Tuesday, calling it the “party of slavery” and “Jim Crow.”

The GOP presidential nominee said his party is the party of freedom, equality and opportunity.

Relevant portion begins around the 2:40 mark:

“Remember, and most people don’t know this, the Republican Party is the party of Abraham Lincoln,” Trump said at a rally in Washington State.

“It is the Democratic Party that is the party of slavery, the party of Jim Crow and the party of opposition,” Trump added.

Trump was continuing his efforts to appeal to minority voters at an evening rally in Everett, Washington, just north of Seattle, where he drew a largely white crowd.

He claimed that Democrats have “used” minority voters for “decades and decades” and will continue to use them.

He said he “will fight for you like no one ever has before.”

AR-15 Inventor Says HBO ‘Misrepresented’ His Views by Omitting ‘Key Parts’ of His Answers

Leave a comment

This is from The Blaze.

I am not surprised the the Anti-American,Anti-Gun HBO as a rabid member of media would lie about guns.

AR-15 inventor Jim Sullivan is seeking to clarify comments he made about guns in a recent interview on HBO’s “Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel,” saying the network “misrepresented much of what I said.”

“They were apparently trying to make the AR-15 civilian model seem too dangerous for civilian sales,” he wrote in The Federalist Tuesday. “They didn’t lie about what I said, they just omitted key parts, which changed the meaning.”

Sullivan wrote that the moments in the interview he takes issue with are in regard to discussion about the AR-15 when he says he “appears” to say the civilian model is equally as effective as  the military-grade M16. According to Sullivan, HBO omitted when he clarified, “When firing semi-auto only” and “the select fire M16 on full auto is of course more effective.”

Additionally, he objected to the discussion on military and hunting bullets, adding that, due to the Hague Convention, military-grade bullets cannot be hollow points like hunting bullets “that give up all of their energy in the target body instead of passing through with minimum wound effect.”

Sullivan wrote that Armalite, a small arms engineering company, “went the small-caliber, high-velocity route and gave the bullet the right twist of 1:14 to be stable in air but unstable in tissue,” which he said was in compliance with the Hague Convention.

“This gave us a small cartridge that was half the size, weight, and recoil of a 7.62 NATO,” he wrote, “so the soldier could carry twice the ammo, fire controllable full auto, and be far more deadly out to 300 yards, the three characteristics that determine military rifle cartridge effect.”

He also said the 5.56 “can’t compete” with hunting bullets, which can legally be expanding hollow points that are more lethal than tumbling.

There was also a point in the interview that Sullivan said was made to look as if he was unhappy with the fact that AR-15 are popular in the civilian market.

“5.56 is only half as powerful as the 7.62 NATO (.308) hunting bullet. That doesn’t mean I’m not pleased to see AR-15s sell on the civilian market,” he wrote. “It just means I didn’t realize they would 57 years ago.”

Immigrant Youth Confronts Ted Cruz, Asks If He Would Deport Her — Camera Captures GOP Candidate’s Candid Answer

Leave a comment

This is from The Blaze. 

If you break the law you should expect to pay the consequences..

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz did not back down from his stance on immigration Wednesday night, after being confronted by a woman who asked if he would deport her, even though it was her parents who brought her to the United States illegally.

During an event in Storm Lake, Iowa, Wednesday night, Ofelia Valdez, 30, told Cruz that although she was brought to the country illegally by her parents as a teen, she was able to retain residency due to President Barack Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or “DREAM act.”

cruzdaca

Image credit: Youtube/screenshot

“As a DACA holder myself, I am worried about whoever comes next in the presidency and what’s gonna happen to people like us?” Valdez said, according to a video taken posted on YouTube by the Democratic National Committee. “I think of myself as a part of this community and, you know, first day in presidency you decide to deport, you know, people like myself — it’s just very difficult to process it.”

While Valdez’ question invoked many emotions, Cruz did not concede that immigrants should be allowed to stay in the U.S. illegally, noting that deportation is a consequence of a “broken immigration system.”

“I would note, if you’re a DACA recipient it means that you were brought here illegally, and violating the laws has consequences,” Cruz told the woman. “And one of the problems with our broken immigration system is that it is creating human tragedies and there are human tragedies when people break the law.”

The leading Iowa Republican went on to explain to the woman that, if he were to immigrate to a country illegally, he would most likely be deported — so America should be no different.

“If I illegally emigrate to England or Germany or France or China or Mexico, and they catch me, they will deport me,” he said. “That’s what every other country on Earth does, and there’s no reason that America’s laws should have less respect than the laws of every other country on Earth.”

“We should welcome people who come following the laws, but there are consequences for breaking the laws, and that is part of what makes America the nation that we are,” the Texas Republican added.

Cruz, over the last month, has been sharpening his rhetoric on immigration, in an effort to contrast himself and fellow Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio.

Democratic candidates, on the other hand, have been attempting to win over Hispanic voters by advocating for immigration reform that includes a pathway to citizenship for those illegals who are already in the U.S. Former President Bill Clinton, who is now campaigning for his wife Hillary, was even introduced by a “DREAMer” at an event on Thursday.

Watch the exchange below:

 

Liberal Guest Makes Anti-Gun Case by Admitting She Has ‘No Idea How to Shoot Anybody’ — Watch Michelle Malkin’s Response

1 Comment

This is from The Blaze.

Like all liberals, Democratic strategist Julie Roginsky want you to believe she is the smartest person in the room.

Then, like all liberals, she opens her mouth and proves to the world she knows nothing about the subject they are trying to lecture us about.

Democratic strategist Julie Roginsky argued against gun owners carrying concealed weapons to neutralize potential mass shooters by noting she has “no idea how to shoot anybody.”

After Fox News host Sean Hannity, who is licensed to carry a concealed firearm, asked her if she would want him in the room during an active shooter situation, Roginsky declined to answer and replied with a question of her own.

“Here’s my question: Do you want me in that room? Because I have the same access to guns as you would and I have no idea how to shoot anybody. That’s the difficulty.”

Conservative firebrand Michelle Malkin disagreed — emphatically.

“I’d want every grown woman in that room to also be trained and armed,” she said. “And I’m going to make sure my own daughter, who is now a teenager, understands that, of course, being armed in self-defense is the great equalizer whether you are talking about defending against a rapist or a jihadist.”

Malkin went on to claim that the “political culture and the media” are more comfortable demonizing law-abiding “Christian” gun owners than they are “jihadists that want to kill us by any means necessary.”

Watch the segment below:

 

 

 

 

Listen to Donald Trump’s Answer When CNN Host Asks If ‘It’s Time to Do Something Else About Guns’ After WDBJ Shooting

Leave a comment

This is from The Blaze.

I doubt if Chris Cuomo got the answer he wanted about gun control.

However The Donald told him the truth about the need to deal with mental illness. 

When asked  if more gun control is needed following Wednesday’s tragic on-air WDBJ shooting in Virginia, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump told CNN’s Chris Cuomo that the U.S. has a mental health problem, not a gun problem.

“Do you think it is time to do something else about guns?” Cuomo asked. “Would you do something different with gun policy?”

“I don’t think I would, because this is really a sick person,” Trump said of the WDBJ shooter. “This isn’t a gun problem, this is a mental problem.”

CNN

CNN

Trump cited the recent thwarted terror attack on a Paris-bound train where U.S. servicemen helped take down the gunman and argued they could’ve more easily defended themselves if they were armed.

“Frankly, you know, a case like this, he snuck up on them — whether it was with a gun or a knife or whatever it would’ve been, it would’ve been something,” Trump said of the WDBJ shooting. “You’re not going to get rid of all guns.”

He continued, “I know one thing: if you tried to do it, the bad guys would have them…and the good folks would abide by the law — they’d be hopeless, and it would just be a hopeless situation for them.”

Trump made it clear that he is very much a “Second Amendment person.”

Watch the interview via CNN below:

Judge Hands Down Big Ruling on Dad Who Openly Carried Gun Inside Daughter’s ‘Gun-Free Zone’ School

Leave a comment

This is from The Blaze.

If this ruling holds up under the appeals it will be a major win for gun owners everywhere.

Judge Hands Down Big Ruling on Dad Who Openly Carried Gun Inside Daughter’s ‘Gun-Free Zone’ School

A Michigan judge has ruled in favor of a father who wanted to open carry inside his daughter’s school, despite it being a “gun-free zone.”

According to the Detroit Free Press, Kenneth Herman sued a Clio, Michigan, school district, arguing that he was denied access to his daughter’s elementary school on multiple occasions when he tried to pick her up from the school because he was openly carrying his pistol.

 “I think schools being gun-free zones is not a wise idea,” Herman told WOOD-TV. “I think having law-abiding armed citizens in there provides some measure of protection that isn’t a glass door that can be broken out.”

Image source: WOOD-TV

State law allows people who have concealed carry permits to carry on school property, which ultimately led to Circuit Judge Archie Hayman’s decision on Monday. However, Tim Mullins, the school district’s attorney, argued that the law also allows school districts to develop policies for the “safety and protection of students,” according to the Free Press.

Mullins said he expects the school district will appeal Hayman’s decision, as does Michigan Open Carry, the nonprofit that represented Herman.

“If I’m a principal and I’m sitting in my office and I see someone walking up to my building with a gun, what am I supposed to do?” Mullins said. “What they do is declare a lockdown, they call the police. Kids are afraid. Teachers are afraid. Education stops. And then the police come.”

“The legislature needs to step up and get the focus on education, and not on some guy who wants to carry a gun in a school,” Clio Area School District Superintendent Fletcher Spears said.

Spears is a member of the National Rifle Association and has a concealed carry license himself. He also supports legislation that allows for concealed carry in schools. His issue is with open carry.

“Open carry does not have a place in the schools,” he said.

But despite the group’s speculation that the school district will appeal, Michigan Open Carry said the judge’s ruling is a victory for gun rights activists.

“This was clearly an easy decision for the Judge to make based on the speed of the ruling,” the group said in a statement. “We citizens are expected to follow the law. It’s sad a school district with a team of lawyers did everything they could to try and find a way around the law. We are very happy with this verdict and are prepared to defend it in the Court of Appeals if need be.”

Backed by NRA, Senate’s No. 2 Republican Is Introducing Gun Background Check Legislation

Leave a comment

This is from The Blaze.

Who will set the definition of mental illness and will the definitions be subject to change with the political winds?

Will the NRA, the Obama Regime or the courts set the definitions?

I do not want any of this crowd deciding who is and is not mentally ill.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Backed by the National Rifle Association, the Senate’s No. 2 Republican leader is introducing legislation that would reward states for sending more information about residents with serious mental problems to the federal background check system for firearms purchasers.

The bill promoted Wednesday by Sen. John Cornyn, who has an A-plus rating from the NRA for his gun rights record, is far more modest than a Senate measure expanding background check requirements that the organization and Republicans helped defeat two years ago. Cornyn’s proposal also is narrower than a measure a top Senate Democrat announced this week.

 Still, the legislation represents a rare effort by a leading Republican to curb some firearms purchases. The NRA, a leading force for decades against gun restrictions, has backed some bills before limiting the ability of mentally troubled people to buy firearms.

Recent shootings have drawn attention to weaknesses in the background check system. The gunman in last month’s killings in a Louisiana movie theater had mental problems that went unreported to the federal database.

“Gaps in existing law or inadequate resources prevent our communities from taking proactive steps to prevent them from becoming violent,” Cornyn, R-Texas, said in a written statement.

Jennifer Baker, spokeswoman for NRA legislative affairs, said the bill took “meaningful steps toward fixing the system and making our communities safer.”

By law, federally licensed gun dealers must conduct background checks on firearms purchasers.

Among those barred from buying guns are people legally determined to be “mentally defective” and those who have been committed to mental institutions. But states are not required to send those records to the background check system, which is run by the FBI, and its database is spotty.

Cornyn’s bill would increase grants under the government’s main law enforcement program by up to 5 percent for states that send the federal system at least 90 percent of their records on people with serious mental problems. States providing less data could see their grants from a broad range of justice programs penalized by the same amounts, at the attorney general’s discretion.

The provisions were described by aides to Cornyn who spoke on condition of anonymity because the legislation had not been broadly distributed.

The bill would give state and local governments more flexibility to use federal funds to screen for mental problems in prisoners and improve training for law enforcement officers and others on handling emergencies involving the mentally ill.

Less than two weeks ago, John Russell Houser fired a handgun into a crowd of movie watchers in Lafayette, Louisiana, killing two and wounding nine. Houser’s family said they knew he had mental problems and had sought court protection, but he was not involuntarily committed to a hospital.

When he purchased the weapon at a gun shop in Alabama, the background check let the sale occur. Police said Houser killed himself after they confronted him.

Dylann Roof, charged in June’s massacre of nine people at a historically black church in Charleston, South Carolina, bought his gun after an FBI background check examiner did not discover that Roof had been arrested for possessing illegal drugs, authorities said. That should have blocked his purchase.

On Monday, a Democratic leader, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., introduced legislation that would provide extra federal money to states that send a broad range of data on the mentally ill to the federal system, including information about the mentally ill, violent criminals and domestic abusers.

In 2013, the Senate shelved bipartisan legislation that would have expanded required background checks to firearms bought at gun shows and all Internet sales. All but four of the chamber’s 45 Republicans opposed the measure.

He Was Walking by Group When Suddenly One Guy Pointed and Yelled for Somebody to ‘Sock’ Him. Video Captures Shocking ‘Mob Mentality’ That Followed.

Leave a comment

This is from The Blaze. 

A white man attacked by a pack of feral  black thugs.

Here is a quote from the police, Police said they’re not characterizing the incident as a hate crime.

If it was a pack of feral white thugs the police would be calling it a hate crime.

Police said arrests are imminent after a gang of people were caught on video knocking down and stomping on a man in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

“It almost appears like a game,” Captain Matt Ostapowicz told WOOD-TV of the clip that began with a man pointing at the victim. “The one guy for whatever reason says, ‘Somebody hit him,’ and they did and everybody went crazy.”

mob-attack-e1438782439820

mage source: Live Leak

The attack, which took place about 10:15 p.m. July 28 near Rosa Parks Circle, has been viewed over half a million times.

Here’s the clip. (Content warning: The video contains violence, racial slurs and profanity. Viewer discretion is advised.)

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d9f_1438711327

Police have identified several individuals in the clip based on tips.

The victim, an 18-year-old shirtless white man, told police he didn’t know his attackers — all of whom are black — and had no previous contact with him. He suffered a concussion as well as bruising, cuts and scrapes.

“It turns into that mob mentality,” Ostapowicz told WOOD. “He [the victim] gets sucker punched, knocked down and, as you can see, several people start stomping on all different parts of his body. We’re very fortunate he didn’t get hurt worse than he was.”

Police said they’re not characterizing the incident as a hate crime but will leave that decision to the prosecutor’s office.

College Professor Accuses State Trooper of Racial Profiling — Then Investigators Listened to the Dashcam Audio

Leave a comment

This is from The Blaze.

This professor should be fired, but she will be promoted because white privilege and racism altered the Dashcam audio to make it seem she was lying. Snark.

After looking at her picture Minati Roychoudhuri looks like she has a chip on her shoulder.  

Roychoudhuri

Minati Roychoudhuri was charged making a false statement after she accused a state trooper of racial profiling. (Image source: WVIT-TV)

 

Minati Roychoudhuri was pulled over on Route 15 in Connecticut a few months ago and cited for an unsafe lane change. Roychoudhuri fought this infraction, saying that she was unfairly and racially profiled by the state trooper as evidenced by him asking her if she spoke English.

Last week though, an internal investigation revealed this woman’s accusations were false, leading to a warrant for her arrest under a false statement charge. Roychoudhuri turned herself in on July 28.

 After the traffic stop in May, Roychoudhuri, a professor at Capital Community College, wrote a letter to the commissioner of the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, accusing the trooper of pulling her over based on her race. The Connecticut State Police Union identified the trooper involved as John Such with Troop H.

“An unmarked police car with flashing light stopped me on the ramp after I had taken the exit. The policeman asked me if I could speak English and if I knew why he had stopped me,” Roychoudhuri wrote in her letter,according to WTIC-TV. “I said, ‘yes’ to speaking English and ‘no’ to why he had stopped me. He then asked me for my driver’s license and registration. He returned with an envelope and said that I could simply mail in the infraction.

“The officer did not give me any reason as to why had stopped me. His asking if I could speak English shows that he had racially profiled me and was not able to give me a concrete reason for stopping me,” she continued in her letter. “Further, the officer had checked ‘Hispanic’ in the race category in the infraction ticket. I am a Professor in English at Capital Community College, I teach about diversity and the negative impact of racial profiling, I have now become a target of the same insidious behavior! It is easy to connect the dots with the nationwide racial profiling which has led to serious consequences.”

Roychoudhuri said that she wanted the infraction dropped and the officer to be reprimanded in some way. She also sent her letter to a senator and state legislator. WTIC noted that she signed a statement with investigators regarding her allegations.

The Connecticut State Police Internal Affairs office concluded Roychoudhuri’s allegations were false and the trooper was exonerated on all charges, a news release stated. Some of that investigation included the recorded exchange between Roychoudhuri and the trooper.

Transcript of the audio posted by WTIC not only revealed that the trooper stated within seconds why Roychoudhuri was pulled over but also revealed that he in no way asked if she spoke English.

Here’s that transcript, in part:

Officer: Hi ma’am, do you know why I’m stopping you today?
Roychoudhuri: No
O: OK. There’s that big gore area with white lines painted across it and you cut in front of it, in front of me, thinking it’s a lane or something. You have to wait until it’s a dotted white line. License and registration.

[…]

O: Ma’am. So I wrote you the infraction for that improper lane change that you did.
R: Please, you know, I probably crossed over there, and that’s why I did it.
O: OK.
R: Obviously I did that.
O: [Inaudible]
R: My [inaudible] is absolutely clean.
O: Ok. So I wrote you an infraction for that improper lane change that you did.
R: OK.

Hartford Superior Court granted the state police department’s request for an arrest warrant last week and Roychoudhuri turned herself in and was released on a $1,000 non-surety bond.

The Connecticut State Police Union called for a public apology from Roychoudhuri.

“As Connecticut State Troopers, we take great pride in our duties and are willing to sacrifice our lives to protect the rights and lives of others,” the union’s president, Andrew Matthews, said in a statement. “We understand we are vulnerable to physical and verbal attacks from the criminal element and others in our society whose sole purpose is to disrupt law enforcement. However, we do not tolerate actions of a professor, from a well-respected college, whose motivation is to tarnish the reputation and career of a State Trooper by making false accusations of racial discrimination.”

Matthews sent a letter to the president of the community college where Roychoudhuri works asking that she be “held accountable for her illegal and malicious actions.”

 

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: