Vice President Kamala Harris has yet to define much of her policy agenda for voters to scrutinize. Much of that is being left to proxies. So far, she has indicated a continued march toward more unconstitutional gun control. She’s yet to actually deny that she would abandon her previous policy agenda of forced confiscation of Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs). The only “denial” that’s been made purports to come from an unnamed campaign staffer. This election, though, will be a referendum on the future of the U.S. Supreme Court.
U.S. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) is telling voters that Vice President Harris would carry out the radical plan to upend the Supreme Court to end lifetime appointments and turn it into a rubber stamp for The White House. That move could threaten Second Amendment rights and neuter the Judicial Branch in the balance of power set forth by the Founding Fathers that created three co-equal branches that are each a check on the authority of the others.
Quietly, away from the cameras and glitz of the Democratic National Convention, Sen. Whitehouse, joined by U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), spoke to a panel about his plans to upend the Supreme Court by passing a bill that would end lifetime appointments, according to The Dispatch. Sen. Whitehouse told attendees this plan is “virtually certain” if Democrats sweep elections in November to take The White House and majorities in the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate.
Electioneering the Supreme Court
This idea of reforming the Supreme Court was President Joe Biden’s swan song. He published a fact sheet in his plan to upset the balance of power between the three government branches – Legislative, Executive and Judicial – because a radical extreme voter base of his party couldn’t accept the Supreme Court actually interprets the law as it is written. Instead, he kowtowed to the loudest voices on the Left to put forth a plan that would limit Supreme Court appointments to 18 years, which would immediately put Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito off the bench. That would open up two vacancies for the next president to nominate jurors who would rubber stamp their liberal agenda.
For the firearm industry and gun owners, this elevates the plan from “wishful thinking” by a president who was shoved aside by his own party to an election-year issue. Justices Thomas and Alito have consistently decided in favor of protecting Second Amendment rights and interpreting the Constitution for what it actually says. If this plan were to pass, that would immediately change the composition of the Supreme Court from a 6-3 conservative court to a 5-4 liberal court that is hostile to the Second Amendment.
That’s significant because there are several challenges to state bans on MSR and standard-capacity magazine where petitions to the Supreme Court have or soon will be filed. NSSF is challenging Illinois’ ban on the most popular rifles being sold in the U.S. and commonly owned standard-sized magazines. We are also challenging Oregon’s magazine ban. That case is on appeal to the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. In our Illinois case, we obtained a preliminary injunction against the Illinois law, but the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals reversed the order. Our petition to the U.S. Supreme Court was denied because a final decision had yet to be issued by the Seventh Circuit. Justice Alito voted to hear our case while Justice Thomas wrote, “This Court is rightly wary of taking cases in an interlocutory posture. But I hope we will consider the important issue presented by these petitions after the cases reach final judgment.”
Justice Thomas concluded Illinois’ bans are “highly suspect,” finding it “difficult to see how the Seventh Circuit could have concluded that the most widely owned semiautomatic rifles are not ‘Arms’ protected by the Second Amendment.” He added, “But, if the Seventh Circuit ultimately allows Illinois to ban America’s most common civilian rifle, we can—and should—review that decision once the cases reach a final judgment. The Court must not permit ‘the Seventh Circuit [to] relegat[e] the Second Amendment to a second-class right.’” NSSF’s case goes to trial next month. We are confident we will prevail. But the losing party will certainly appeal and, ultimately, a petition to the Supreme Court is all but assured.
Plan to Upend SCOTUS
Vice President Harris hasn’t made many policy announcements and surely has yet to distance herself from the Biden-Harris plan to upend the Supreme Court’s composition. She’s got allies in both Sen. Whitehouse and Rep. Raskin who both have supported gun control efforts when they’ve come for a vote. Sen. Whitehouse sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is tasked with vetting and confirming Supreme Court nominations before those nominations are voted on by all senators. He’s also Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action and Federal Rights. And he has a history of threatening Supreme Court justices with amicus briefs that even the Washington Post called “incendiary.”
Sen. Whitehouse introduced a bill last year, S. 3096 – the Supreme Court Biennial Appointments and Term Limits Act, that mirrors the Biden-Harris plan to upset the courts. It would limit Supreme Court terms to 18 years. The legislation calls for presidents to nominate a new justice to the Supreme Court every two years and appoint one of those nominated jurors with the advice and consent of the Senate. Only the nine most-recently appointed justices would sit for appellate cases.
That sounds like a tremendous change to convince the Senate – much less the House of Representatives – to accept. But Sen. Whitehouse told the DNC panel that he’s got a plan for that too. He would attach the proposal to “an omnibus package that would include a bill creating a national right to abortion and other top Democratic priorities,” The Dispatch reported.
“To get around the filibuster, we’re going to have to have a process that allows very substantial debate from the Senate minority,” Sen. Whitehouse said, according to The Dispatch. “We are not going to want to give the Republicans multiple stalls, multiple filibusters on this, so the bill that gets around the filibuster will be virtually certain to include permanent reproductive rights, permanent restored voting rights, getting rid of corrupting billionaire dark money, and Supreme Court reform. If you’ve got a bill like that moving, that’s going to have spectacular tailwinds behind it.”
There’s one obstacle that Sen. Whitehouse cannot ignore. That’s the voters. That’s why it is imperative to #GUNVOTE. Don’t Risk Your Rights! Voters can send a message on November 5 that upending the Supreme Court and threatening Second Amendment rights is not up for debate.
So far the fascist left has used the doj to grind its enemies. Just like roland freisler in social-list Germany. It has tried to kill Trump. Now they are salivating at the chance to corrupt the highest court in the land.
But just like their social-lists forbears in Germany from the 30’s and the 40’s they forgot a vital fact.
Win the war before you commit all the crimes. We are way past due Nuremberg 2.0.
The worst thing about that rat bastard Freisler is USAAF’s bomb went astray
“We are way past due Nuremberg 2.0“
Don’t you worry your pretty little head, Nuremberg 2.0 is already in progress:
“DOJ charges former 2016 Trump campaign adviser over his work for sanctioned Russian TV
By — Eric Tucker, Associated Press
By — David Klepper, Associated Press
Politics Sep 5, 2024 7:40 PM EDT
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department has charged a Russian-born U.S. citizen and former adviser to Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign with working for a sanctioned Russian state television network and laundering the proceeds.
Indictments announced Thursday allege that Dimitri Simes and his wife received over $1 million dollars and a personal car and driver in exchange for work they did for Russia’s Channel One since June 2022. The network was sanctioned by the U.S. in 2022 over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Simes, 76, and his wife, Anastasia Simes, have a home in Virginia and are believed to be in Russia“
It seems the Russian-born former adviser to Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign has already fled to Mither Russia.
Nope, Trump’s got no connection with Russia, nobody here but us chickens…
The commies will eventually get the conditions they want. They are nothing if not relentless.
The only question is — will Republican led states have the ba11s to tell a newly packed SCOTUS to go pound sand? I have serious doubts.
What will packing SCOTUS mean?!? A civil war & dissolution of America. Yes DIMS are that evil🙄
They make plans that take years, decades, even generations to process. Their plans even survived the fall of the USSR. They play the very long game. Chess players versus poker players.
Of course they’ll get it. They managed to bring in 10 million illegal newcomers by doing the opposite of what government is mandated to do by law. And half of the country will continue to support this lawlessness because “racism” and Orange Man feelz. If they’re this brazen now, how bad do you think it will be in the next term? Why would it ever stop?
Kinda diminishes the whole “fighting for democracy” thing when you go out of your way to bend, warp and manipulate the system to get the results you want.
Some South American despot type shit. We’re sitting around 20% of the public actually trusting the government so why not beat that number down to 10% or less? When it gets that low the pollsters can replace trust with fear. Works just as well for government.
“Kinda diminishes the whole “fighting for democracy” thing when you go out of your way to bend, warp and manipulate the system to get the results you want.”
Pretty sure they don’t give a fuck.
“manipulate the system to get the results you want” Another way to say the “Ends Justify The Means”
Sure, but it’s always the fault of republicans, even when dems are in control. Just ask the media or any drone like Miner.
“Kinda diminishes the whole “fighting for democracy” thing when you go out of your way to bend, warp and manipulate the system to get the results you want.”
Not really.
First, operationally define “democracy”. If you do it the way that they do, it makes perfect sense.
They don’t see democracy as a “consensus of the public”. They see it as “a consensus of the public institutions [which we just so happen to control 5.9/6 of]”.
It’s that 0.1 (SCOTUS) that they want now because it has effective veto (or rubber stamp) power over the rest in key instances.
They’ve played a long game for a very long time and they’ve done extremely well at it. Their victory is close if they are not decisively turned back. They even have a name for what they’ve done.
“They’ve played a long game for a very long time and they’ve done extremely well at it. Their victory is close if they are not decisively turned back.”
That very thing is about to happen…
One *tiny* problem with that plan, the brown people they have been importing in vast numbers aren’t doing what they have been told to do, vote democrat.
Look at the data from the last 3 major election cycles. The new Americans are rejecting the hard left. The poorer and more Catholic you are, the more staunchly supportive of conservative values you are. They are right the tipping point of losing *everything* to those ungrateful Latinos that are the fastest growing demographic.
Personally, I think that’s the main driver of Kamala now supporting finishing the border wall. They finally dug into the polling data and are horrified as to the implications to their political doom.
There’s literally nothing they can do now, no spiffy re-messaging will save them. They blew it bigtime with betting everything on the Latino base replacing the ‘Old Fat White Guys’… 😉
The Europeans have cut their own throats by importing hundreds of millions of followers of Islam. If they thought bog-standard Skinheads were bad, the Islamists are openly fascist with what they want.
They are about to get it, good and hard… 🙂
Geoff PR,
I have multiple relatives who are (or at least were) practicing Catholics and they are 1000% Democrat cheerleaders and voters. I have no idea why.
And as much as I wish newly minted Latino voters would vote conservative, I will have to see it to believe it. I mean, what is their incentive to vote conservative when the Far Left is promising (and in many cases giving) all of the “entitlement” freebies?
As for Kamala claiming that she will now resume building the border wall (which I have not heard by the way), I think that is just pandering to the electorate since many polls show that economy is number 1 priority and border security is number 2 priority. You know darn well that Kamala will say anything to get votes and will most assuredly NOT reinforce the border. (If Democrats were/are worried about Latinos, they would immediately start enforcing the border–turning back anyone who tries to cross and deporting anyone who makes it across. But they are not doing that.)
Kamala isn’t the issue.
“Election fortification” is the issue. R’s think that just means cheating, IRL, it means a combination of mechanistic factors involving ground game using pre-existing and new structures set up to advantage Democrats.
While I’m sure they’ll layer cheating on top of that if needed, there’s a margin for cheating within machine politics that is difficult to expand past a certain point in the 5-7% range. It can be overwhelmed in many cases with a quality opposing ground game.
But a quality opposing ground game is the R’s Achilles’ Heel.
The Right prefers personalities while the Left builds and maintains institutions and machines. This greatly advantages the Left over time.
The reality is this: Overconfidence on the R side can hand this election to Kamala without cheating on the D side. A huge percentage of people are not going to vote for her, but against the “Orange Not-Z” who’s going to “wreck Democracy”.
Because propaganda works on people who aren’t really paying attention and most Independents don’t pay much attention. That’s a big secret that pollsters and poly sci people don’t say often. “Independents” are not “independent thinkers”. They’re just fucking lazy and, quite frankly, don’t care much. They’re easy to manipulate.
“Independents” are not “independent thinkers”. They’re just fucking lazy and, quite frankly, don’t care much. They’re easy to manipulate”
I know I am a majority of one, but I declared “independent” as a means of ending calls and emails from political campaigns; it’s been effective for the last ten years.
As I point out all the time:
There’s a tendency amongst Right-leaning people to think that their anecdote is equal to the data. It’s not. (Yes, I get that you have stated this is not the case for you, but for the benefit of others…)
Propaganda is everywhere because it uses the exact same methods as advertising. That’s because advertising and “Marketing” come straight from WWI propaganda techniques.
The corporate world doesn’t spend hundreds of billions of dollars on this kind of manipulation (that’s what it is) per year, year in and year out, decade after decade because it doesn’t work.
They pay that money because it does work. In fact, it works so well that you can pay hundreds of billions and get a healthy ROI. That’s even after you invest on improvements.
You’re up against weaponized psychology and neurobiology with a massive warchest, better than a century of practice and an impressive track record of success.
Statistically speaking, the vast majority of self-identified “Independents” simply pay very little attention. They are more likely to be be able to tell you the starting QB for randomly selected NFL teams than they are the Speaker of the House or the Leader of the Senate (yeah, it’s been tested).
They are disconnected from politics, which is why polls shape the way they do 60 days out from an election as some of them start to pay a bit more attention to politics than to sportsball.
That’s the target audience. If you’re not hustling to grab them, you’re hustling to lose.
If you’re paying attention the way most TTAG readers are, you’re several sigma from the statistical norm. Yet, statistically, such people do not recognize their own distance from the mu because people tend to assume that everyone else sees the same world they do.
“And as much as I wish newly minted Latino voters would vote conservative, I will have to see it to believe it.”
It’s very real, saw it on one of the major networks in their 2020 election night coverage.
Lemme see if I can dig up the video tomorrow…
One *tiny* problem with that plan, the brown people they have been importing in vast numbers aren’t doing what they have been told to do, vote democrat.
Those people are not being imported to vote, at least not at this time. They’re being imported to boost population in heavy blue states. Remove known illegals and California instantly loses five EC votes, and their attendant House seats, for example.
The other benefit that no one seems to grasp on the Right is that this allows Progressives to export their activists to other states without losing anything in the home state.
For all the nonsense going on in National level polling due to oversampling, which is totally screwing up things like the RCP average, there is pretty good state level polling that most R’s want to ignore.
Let’s examine Texas, for example. If we dive into the five most recent polls in Texas we find one that has internals that qualify the poll to be removed for shenanigans. The four remaining polls are not bad.
All of them are within the MoE. That’s somewhat alarming if we can find more data to suggest it’s not an incorrect conclusion.
So, it’s tempting to think that perhaps they’ve used other “black magic” of weighting the polls, which I’ve discussed in detail before, or that they’ve simply made methodological errors that are not corrected for. But here’s the problem: Let’s look at overall vote returns in Texas for the past 20 years. What do we find?
In 2004, 61.1% of state-level votes came back R. That number has dropped over time, in 2020, it was 52.1%.
Does that line up with the margin of error on the polls in question? Yes, it does. That’s not up for debate. Fuck.
Now, you can go two ways with that. Either it reflects a “blueing” of the state over time OR it reflects an increase in voter fraud which the State of Texas has done exactly nothing to address.
Mix that with the HAVV data I’ve discussed before and 50/50 the R’s keep Texas this time around. Ken Paxton’s response, regardless of your opinion on the guy, is… how do I put this delicately… um, “disconcerting to say the least”.
Further, you find a similar pattern in Florida, where 2020 is actually AN ANOMALY with patterns eerily similar to 2004, which by the by, led to two straight D victories in 2008 and 2012.
The two major “red states” Texas, with 40 EC votes and Florida with 30 are both moving towards being in play for D’s on a regular basis. Considering the immigration to those states since 2024 and the fact that voters are known to revert to the mean, you’ve got a fight on your hands in both.
Combine that with the fact that the Left has been quite open about their intent to “blue” both states. Oof.
If you want to win in these two states you need a ground game, which R’s suck at, and clean elections. Florida seems more keen on keeping clean elections than Texas which seems like it wants to sit around with its thumb up its rear.
But, hey, fuck me for talking facts and data. It’s been getting me into trouble pretty much non-stop since I was in high school, I’m used to it.
Now, you wanna know how they think they’re going to get a huge chunk of Boomers to vote for them?
Considering the immigration to those states since 2024 and the fact that…
Should read as “Considering the immigration to those states since 2020 and the fact that…”
My bad.
“Further, you find a similar pattern in Florida, where 2020 is actually AN ANOMALY with patterns eerily similar to 2004, which by the by, led to two straight D victories in 2008 and 2012.”
We’ll see in a few months. I’m confident may take will win out. 2020 in Florida was solidly red, and even the left was concerned about that. Miami turned from purple to red…
Kamala Harris, if by some cosmic joke she does become President and does try to pack SCOTUS … she might just be the first female make-believe-convienance black/white/latino/jamacain/asain/southern/northern/mid-western/hispanic-immigrant/abortionist president to die in a civil war she started.
.40 cal Booger,
“… if by some cosmic joke she does become President …”
I regret to inform you that she will win the election.
First off, her campaign staff are absolute geniuses. Their messaging is solid gold.
Second, her party has the “proper” position and track record on the ultra emotional hot-button controversy of killing babies in the womb (also known by its sanitized term abortion). Something like 75% of the nation ardently wants legal ab**tion. Even a super-majority of so-called Christians want it to be legal. (That is a real head scratcher.)
Third, her party will produce just enough fraudulent votes in a couple precincts in Pennsylvania and Michigan plus probably one other state (perhaps Georgia or North Carolina) to push Kamala over the finish line.
Until we get to a voting system where fraud/corruption (beyond a few hundred votes in a state) is extremely difficult, Democrats will win–win the Oval Office at least.
Would AOC be any better?
“Would AOC be any better?”
Oh look, you made a joke.
😂
“Would AOC be any better?”
At dying in a Civil War?
Hopefully we don’t need to find out.
That is the hope and the last time I had anything to do with “domestic extremist” threat assessment it was a damn bleak picture. Now we have cheap programmable drones and an unknown number of foreign national militants.
Hey! She was a GREAT bartender! And something something toiletwater…
“… if by some cosmic joke she does become President …”
I regret to inform you that she will win the election.
First off, her campaign staff are absolute geniuses. Their messaging is solid gold.
Second, her party has the “proper” position and track record on the ultra emotional hot-button controversy of killing babies before birth (also known by its sanitized term ab##tion). Something like 75% of the nation ardently wants legal ab##tion. Even a super-majority of so-called Chr#stians want it to be legal. (That is a real head scratcher.)
Third, her party will produce just enough fraudulent votes in a couple precincts in Pennsylvania and Michigan plus probably one other state (perhaps Georgia or North Carolina) to push Kamala over the finish line.
Until we get to a voting system where fraud/corruption (beyond a few hundred votes in a state) is extremely difficult, Democrats will win–win the Oval Office at least.
“I regret to inform you that she will win the election.
First off, her campaign staff are absolute geniuses.”
It won’t matter in the near future, see my response to Strych9 above.
In the short term, it’s gonna suck. After the Latinos realize their political power, it’s permanent light out for Leftism… 🙂
Your better alliance is with the percentage of Blacks who are Baptists. They’re far less likely to fall for side-issue bait.
See Nicholas Vaca’s work on the subject.
In the current configuration they only need win once. You need win every single throw of the political dice.
The only way that’s fixed is the D’s as a party are destroyed or they are beaten so badly that they are forced to go soul searching in the wilderness.
Their behavior after 2016 and their newfound willingness to openly weaponize government agencies while creating new ones expressly meant to be weaponized from the jump suggests that the latter will require an electoral thrashing that, quite frankly, the Right is not prepared to deliver. This isn’t terribly shocking when one examines the Obama years and what that did to the DNC and DCCC, but that’s too into the weeds for 99% of people.
These people play a long game. You think they haven’t seen losses between the 1920’s and now? They have, many times. Yet they’ve just kept coming and advancing.
The real problem for 2A people is that they don’t seem to realize that they’re being encircled. They just focus on a court case here or an election there without much notice to the larger goings-on around them.
These people think in multiple layers over time. Righties don’t. In fact, they mostly deny that such is even possible.
In a battlefield analogy: The Left looks at a map of a continent and has a long term plan to take the whole thing. The Right wins a skirmish and thinks they’ve won the war.
We’ll see in a few months…
“Vice President Kamala Harris has yet to define much of her policy agenda for voters to scrutinize.”
Kamala can quite literally report any policy position that she thinks will garner votes. Of course absolutely nothing stops her from claiming policy positions which wins her the election and then changing those positions 180 degrees to the opposite direction.
We should not trust anything that any politician says. We should trust their track record. And Kamala’s track record is disastrous.
Vote for Kamala if you want our nation to become a proverbial train wreck. Do NOT vote for Kamala if you want everyone to have good opportunities for prosperity.
The most left wing senator from only 4-5 years ago is no longer Kamala because they erased that. The 2019 presidential candidate, Kamala, no longer exists. The current VP, and half of the so-called Biden-Harris Administration, who, according to the Puppet and Kamala herself, was always the last person in the room with the president making the important decisions, no longer exists. Kamala, the current candidate, is a brand new person that can only be defined by the present, as in right this very second (not even last week). As best I can tell, Kamala is currently a strong borders, tough on crime, low tax moderate.
Dude,
I recently heard an acronym which describes Democrats just prior to elections, “ALAR,” which is an acronym for “Act Like A Republican”.
SCOTUS could refuse to seat additional justices, and simply say thanks for the spares, we will use one of them in the case of a vacancy.
The office for the additional justices can be the broom closet between the toilets.
“SCOTUS could refuse to seat additional justices,…”
It’s a bit more nuanced than that. Congress can decree the Court is larger, it takes control of the Senate to confirm those seats.
And even if they overturn Heller like they want to do, doing that will so enrage our side, we will turn out and vote.
We are getting very close to firm political control, thanks to staunchly Catholic recent imports who have had recent experience with hard Leftism, and want *zero* part of it in their new home… 🙂
I don’t think that a term limit would apply to any sitting justice, as they are appointed for life (as are all other judges of the federal court) just as the amendment to limit the president to two terms did not apply to Truman (although he decided not to take advantage of that extension). Further, I think a statute would not be sufficient either, but instead a constitutional amendment would be required. On the other hand, the number of associate justices on the bench is set by Congress.
Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barret, and Thomas would all be Impeached.
I believe that’s right. To change the terms of the justices, the Constitution would have to be amended. No mention of that by the Dimocraps, which is no surprise, but also no mention by the author of the article. Kinda ignorant in that regard.
They’re using terminology that their lowest intelligence level people can grasp and also throwing out red meat for the base who would like to see someone like Thomas thrown off the court for his transgressions. (This is viewed by the hard partisans and devout cultists as a Good/Bad issue and bad people, like Thomas, must be punished.)
IRL, you’re correct. They’ll do what Jackson did in 1837 and expand the court to give themselves a supermajority. Biden actually discussed this a while back. This has been talked about quite a lot in Lefty circles for years. Usually it’s dressed up as the Federal Appeals jurisdictions being too big and unwieldy.
It’s also a large part of why they keep a constant state-to-SCOTUS pipeline of “hot button” cases going at all times. So that their agenda can be put into operation as fast as possible once they capture the final portion of the last Gramscian pillar.
Doesn’t a constitutional amendment require three fifths (or three-fourths) of the states to ratify it?
No way in hell can they meet that metric, thanks to flyover country…
They don’t require an Amendment to expand the court.
See the Judiciary Act (1807), Eighth and Ninth Circuits Act (1837), Tenth Circuit Act (1863) and the Judicial Circuits Act (1866).
All of them changed the number of justices on SCOTUS via simple legislation.
Also, this:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-3/section-1/congressional-power-to-establish-the-supreme-court
Since my reply has been in moderation for many hours…
This doesn’t require an amendment, merely legislation. Whenever that comment gets released, it comes with a short list of previous times this has happened and a link to a longer legal explanation from Cornell Law.
If they flip the SC can’t we just ignore their decisions just like the Dims do right now? Vote hard! Vote often!
#resist
Seems like fair play. Might even dye my hair old crone blue.
Ultimately it’s going to be up the We the People, what will we except a “buy back”? confiscation? etc. or will we fight?
Packing SCOTUS = 21st Century Fort Sumpter
“Packing SCOTUS = 21st Century Fort Sumpter“
The traitors of the confederacy, who were violating their oath to uphold the United States Constitution, fired the first shots at Fort Sumter, wounding and killing American citizens serving their country in the United States Army.
This began the war of southern aggression.
No fan of F.D.R. who had a plan to stack the S.C. in 1937.
The thing is, his plan worked. The mere threat of a court packed with left wing democrats was enough to “persuade” the court of the “error of its ways” in holding his economic recovery plans to be unconstitutional. The old ideology of “laissez faire” economics (a doctrine predicated on the fiction that employers and workers have equal bargaining power) which the court had long supported was with little fan fair defenestrated.
Don’t forget that the reason they did that was because of Pearl.
Evntually they will get their gun ban.
Implementing will be their problem.
“Implementing will be their problem.”
No, it won’t.
There are ‘bans’ then there are ‘bans’.
For example: The so called ‘assault weapon ban’ of 1994 wasn’t really a ban, nor was it a separate law banning guns as Joe and Kamala likes to imply or say. It was a smaller part of a larger omnibus bill that was an anti-crime bill. It did name some firearms, but mostly it focused on certain features (e.g. a bayonet lug). Overall though, every gun they named and every gun with the ‘features’ could still be legally sold and owned and manufactured if it was already in existence or planned for manufacture when the bill was enacted so they were not actually banned. Heck, I even bought some of them. And the reason they put that in the omnibus anti-crime bill was because a lot of democrats and republicans wanted the anti-crime bill, so while a lot of them did not like the anti-gun provisions (surprisingly, there were democrats who didn’t like it either), they were still willing to enact the bill because it was anti-crime. Joe touted this as bi-partisan support for a gun ban, it really wasn’t as it was bi-partisan support for an anti-crime bill not for a gun ban. But the overall reason they put it in the anti-crime bill, and the reason it was written the way it was, is because the constitution does not give government the power to ‘ban’ that which is constitutionally protected (‘arms’ in this case).
This is why the anti-gun are trying so hard to re-define ‘arms’ in terms of their desired outcome, and why they put forth the ‘militia/well-regulated’ failed/false arguments for so long to separate ‘the people’ from the ‘military’ in the 2A and why they frame certain guns as ‘assault weapons/weapons of war’ even though they are not (e.g. MSR/AR-15). And why they continue to dupe the public with those terms/concepts that were invented by Josh Sugarman who even said in his own words they were intended to deceive the people into thinking they were military only ‘machine guns’ (or ‘machine gun’ like) (thus not arms for ‘the people’ but rather arms for the ‘military’).
Knowing the constitution does not give government the power to ban that which is constitutionally protected (again, ‘arms’ in this case) the democrats tried their 1994 trick again, but in a different form this time in the guise of the ‘Bi-Partisan Safer Communities Act’ and misrepresented it to get republicans to vote for it so they could claim it was ‘bi-partisan’. But this time instead of saying it right out the democrats used it to weaponize government agencies against the American people by use of misleading and vague wording concepts such as ‘in the business’ so these agencies and Joe could create defacto law to bypass congress law making authority.
If government can get on that slippery slope its only a small step for them to say, for example, “ya gotta have a permit to buy a phone or computer’ or ‘ya can’t have a computer or phone’ because the first amendment says this:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
bot notice it doesn’t say anything about a ‘method’ of ‘exercising’ that ‘speech’ – and that’s the same basic argument anti-gun likes to bring up in court cases, that the second amendment doesn’t specifically say ‘something’ thus (what ever the ‘arms’) its not protected. And its been the same basic argument in their cases trying to infringe, or do away with requirements of, the 1st, 4th, 5th, 10th, and 14th amendments, that the right didn’t say a specific thing they are trying to infringe or do away with for their agenda.
So if government gets frisky and wants to try to actually ‘ban’ or ‘confiscate’, there is gonna be a whole lot of blood shed in the ensuing civil war because its not about guns, but rather the constitution and rights and our country free of tyranny for all Americans even if they are anti-gun.
I’ve been pointing this out for how long, now?
Realistically, a SCOTUS backed gun grab would be the least of your worries if this happened.
There are greater worries than a gun ban. The bigfer issue is once the law abiding turn in guns lime Oz and the UK they are left with the DGAF crowd.
Taking on the lone holdout with a team only goes so far.
Not to be offensive or anything but this is immaterial Right wing cope.
They get this kind of power, with the current crop of Progressives running the show, they will mostly not use “guns” as the weapon. “Teams” will be used very sparingly, actually.
They’ll mostly use pinch points to control food and go after family members via specialized-ish police to gain compliance.
“A country boy can survive” forgets that country boys are what Kulaks were and they didn’t survive.
You people really, truly, honestly do not know, and do not want to know how bad this can get. You can’t imagine it.
The citizens of the Soviet Union didn’t fear the “teams” or “the Army”. They feared the “Blue Caps”, and for damn good reason.
Just a small reminder of the world Kamala wants: one where crazy people who imagine they are a different gender are fed pills by ‘pseudo science doctors’ to keep them believing that imagination and one their left wing media conspirators wants to memory hole while also remaining silent while more than ~1,100 victims daily nationwide are violently attacked and injured by such people or their allies because they think they have a right to force others to validate their imagination while they plan and threaten on social media platforms for a genocide allied with ANTIFA to murder biological women and anyone not trans or not trans allied including left wingers and liberals and gay people and kidnap children to convertg them to an opposite gender by slice-n-dice …. yes the world of crazy that Kamala wants … so just a small reminder…
BREAKING: Nashville manifesto released, but there’s far more to go!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-66QFmCSoTI
University Takes Over Hotels (and a museum) declaring them, ‘temporary student housing’ so city and University can create illegal Gun Free Zone – stopped by a local attorney and GOA causing city and university to back down and remove their illegally established zone and signs but then city (mayor) declares the buildings them selves are gun free zones and puts up signs on the buildings (note: not in video but wants police to enforce it as though its a legal school gun free zone) even though they don’t own the property and (probably not) actually legally can’t because they are not the property owners.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNRH99HdrVE
Another small reminder of the world created by the left-wing politicians and anti-gun, then emboldened by Joe and Kamala when they came into office four years ago, by making sure these events are ‘glorified infamously’ in the media and the left-wing politicians and anti-gun continually talking about it instead of doing something like, ya know, actually using that money they spend on trying to take away a constitutional right from law biding people and devote it to securing schools and doing something about mental illness, and actually having armed force in all schools to counter such mentally ill killers when they show up. Instead, these left-wing politicians and anti-gun end up emboldening mentally ill to see and study these events to validate their mental illness want and desire for such infamy, while police arrive after the fact and failed to save, once again, ensuing their 100% failure rate for all such incidents, those who were injured/killed before they arrived, all while left-wing politicians and anti-gun intentionally create and enforce murder zones by calling it a ‘gun free zone’ that specifically attracts these mentally ill killers because they know its less likely anyone there will be armed to stop them, while basically claiming a gun did it all on its own so ban guns and constitutional rights for law abiding and magically mentally ill people will suddenly not be mentally ill any longer and never ever again want to hurt anyone with other weapons. Yes, the world of crazy Kamala wants and keeps creating.
Details Emerging Of Ga High School Tragedy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYpyoUXISuc
All the more reason to prepare for Civil War Two. If the Liberals steal this election then we must begin to rake out the treasonous rubbage
The U.S. Constitution is adequately clear regarding the law abiding citizens right to keep and bear arms. Given this situation, and the fact that judicial nominees are sworn to uphold the constitution, correct me should I be in error here, any potential or actual nominees whose speech, writings or actions indicate that they would rule otherwise should be excluded from consideration.
Court? did anyone notice that Hunter Biden changed his plea and will be sentenced in December? Gee! that gives daddy 36 days to pardon the smartest man he knows.
Comments are closed.