Category Archives: Government

FBI: Virginia Gunman Emailed With Two Democrat Senators Before Attacking Republican Lawmakers [video]

https://i0.wp.com/cdns.yournewswire.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/shooter-contacted-democrats-678x381.jpeg

James Hodgkinson, the baseball field shooter who had a list of Republican congressmen he planed to kill, exchanged emails with two Democratic senators from Illinois prior to the shooting, according to new information released by the FBI.

Mainstream media went into damage control mode after the shooting and attempted to portray Hodgkinson, 66, as a lone wolf. However the new information from the FBI opens the door to a wider investigation, amid claims Hodkingson was acting as a political operative.

While the FBI did not name the Senators, Illinois has two Democrats currently serving in the United States Senate – Richard Durbin and Tammy Duckworth. Durbin has already attempted to distance himself from the shooter, despite admitting he has an eight year email history with Hodgkinson.

Here’s a man for eight years who expresses himself to me in private emails and never once crosses a line where I would say, ‘Wait a minute, I want to take look at this man, I want to turn this over to somebody,’” Illinois’ senior senator told The 21st.

Hannity reports: After he was shot and killed by local police, law enforcement found a note in Hodgkinson’s pocket with the names of six members of congress written on it.

The suspect spent three months before the attack living in a van just outside the Washington metro area, running out of money, and visiting tourist attractions in and around the nation’s capital.

Prior to the mass shooting, Hodgkinson visited the senate office of democrat Bernie Sanders, whose failed presidential campaign the gunman had volunteered for.  The FBI also said the shooter had been in contact with the offices of democratic senators Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth.

In the immediate aftermath of the “assault,” Sanders issued a public statement denouncing his volunteer.

“I have just been informed that the alleged shooter at the Republican baseball practice is someone who apparently volunteered on my presidential campaign,” Sanders said in the statement. “I am sickened by this despicable act. Let me be as clear as I can be. Violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society and I condemn this action in the strongest possible terms.

By Baxter Dmitry | Your News Wire

 

Update: Terms Of Surrender In California

“Any person who from January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2016 inclusive, lawfully possessed an assault weapon that does not have a fixed magazine as defined in Penal Code … including those weapons with an ammunition feeding device that can be readily removed from the firearm with the use of a tool (commonly referred to as a bullet-button weapon) must register the firearm before January 1, 2018,” the State of California mandated in a May regulation notice.

It’s grand of them to finally share that with us, particularly after an earlier notice advised “The draft regulations are not open for public comment due to the exemption set forth in [the] Penal Code … Per the stated exemption, the Department is not required to provide further clarification.”

It would not have been surprising had they added “So there.”

Still, as the antis often ask us about guns, how many so-called “assault weapon” bans does “the Golden State” need?

They already had a 1989 ban on specific firearm models. A follow-up ban 10 years later on cosmetic characteristics inspired The New York Times to proclaim, “California enacts the toughest ban on assault guns.”

“This is a prototype for reasonable gun-control legislation,” the measure’s sponsor, State Senator Don Perata (holder of an elite “may issue” concealed carry permit), said at the time. “And if it can be done in California, I would argue that it can be done in the United States as a whole.”

That, of course, is one of the goals, along with promoting rabid gun-grabbers as the arbiters of what is “reasonable.”

As for the new edict, assuming a firearm was ‘legally acquired on or before December 31, 2016” and other qualifiers are met, there are all kinds of other hoops gun owners will be required to jump through. That includes typical and expected registration stuff, like name and identifying information for both the owner and the gun. They have to know who you are, what you’ve got and where they can find it (and you). “Common sense gun safety” and all.

Not content with just that, the gun-haters in Sacramento are also requiring “joint registration,” and I’m not talking about for legalized weed (see “A Mess of Pottage,” October 2016 issue). This decree applies if you want to be able to share enjoyment of your property with qualifying family members, and requires a “primary registrant” along with “acceptable forms” of “proof of address for each joint registrant.”

As an aside, compare that to “progressives” objecting to Voter ID laws because they claim proving you are eligible to vote “disenfranchises minorities.” You’ll note they never pull that argument when it comes to gun ownership requirements.

Imagine the cow they’d have if those voters were also required to have Internet access, because that’s also a mandate.

“Assault weapon registrations must be filed electronically using the Department’s California Firearms Application Reporting System (CFARS)” the order specifies.

That shows nothing if not bureaucratic zeal, and the motivation appears to be gloating, in-your-face harassment. Because half-a-year in, California gun owners are still unable to comply with the new “law’s” requirements. The utility to register isn’t working yet. At this writing, this language still appears on the California Department of Justice website in bold red letters:

“UPDATE AS OF Thu Jun 01 2017 15:10:35 GMT-0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) : The ability to register an Assault Weapon … is not yet available… Assault Weapon registration regulations must be effective before any registrations can take place. At this time, the regulations are still pending, however they should be effective in the very near future. Please continue to check the Bureau of Firearms website for updates.”
But wait, there’s more!

Because now imagine those “disenfranchised voters” also being required to own a digital camera. Gun owners are required to provide “Clear digital photos of firearms listed on the application.

“One photo shall depict the bullet button-style magazine release installed on the firearm,” the regulations order. “One photo shall depict the firearm from the end of the barrel to the end of the stock if it is a long gun or the point furthest from the end of the barrel if it is a pistol. The other two photos shall show the left side of the receiver/frame and right side of the receiver/frame.

“These locations are typically where firearms are marked when manufacturing is complete,” the instructions elaborate. “At the discretion of the Department the last two photos shall be substituted for photos of identification markings at some other locations on the firearm.”

“Discretion”? How? When? It’s like they’re trying to create compliance violations based on applicants not knowing what the … uh … heck they want.

For a “Firearm Manufactured By Unlicensed Subject (FMBUS),” there’s a department-issued serial number that needs to be taken in to a “Federal Firearms Licensed Manufacturer (type 07),” who is “under no obligation to perform this work.” Alternatively, “Persons who have manufactured their own firearm may also use non-licensed parties to apply the serial number and other required markings, however, the owner of the weapon must not leave the firearm unattended with an unlicensed party in violation of firearms transfer and/or lending laws.”

Then there are the fees, “$15.00 per person per transaction.” If you want “a copy of the original registration disposition letter,” that’ll be another 5 bucks. And they’ll only accept payment via credit or debit card.

Again, think of those “disenfranchised” voters.

Then think of something else. Think of the Second Amendment. Think of “shall not be infringed.” Think of the Founders who envisioned an armed citizenry capable of meeting “enemies foreign and domestic” with equivalent weaponry.

Here’s what it boils down to: Those of us who believe government exists to serve the people believe we have a right to keep and bear arms. Those who believe people exist to serve the government believe we do not.

The California Rifle and Pistol Association, with the backing of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, filed a lawsuit in April challenging the new ban. It will go through the courts for years. When it reaches the “liberal” Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, expect them to cite precedent and side with the state. When that’s appealed to the Supreme Court, all they need do for the law to stand is… nothing. If they decline hearing the case, the law will stand. And even if they hear it, there are no outcome guarantees.

In the mean time, gun owners have been dictated the terms of their unconditional surrender. Obey or be declared a criminal, and suffer all the penalties the state can bring down on your head to make an example of you to everyone else. Or flee to another state; one of those Don Perata envisioned exporting his “reasonable” disarmament to.

Let’s work toward reclaiming our right to keep and bear arms, heeding Patrick Henry’s warning to “guard with jealous attention the public liberty.” And let’s hope the Supreme Court ends up doing the right thing.

If they don’t, you’re going to have to ask yourself “What would Captain John Parker do?” If you don’t know who he was, you probably ought to make it a point to find out.

by David Codrea | Gun Magazine

Do Not Invest In Cryptos: Here’s why

Cryptocurrency has arrived like an armada of cockroaches that the bankers cannot control. The bankers can not touch them; they can not take them away from the rest of us. Why do you think Fedcoin is going to be a possible alternative? Because they can’t remove cryptos so they are going to join in and try to contaminate the good ones like Bitcoin. But that is not going to work. As soon as you get a gold backed cryptocurrency, start the countdown, it’s game over.

Bitcoin in particular is serving something as a proxy for currency in a very constructive manner. Once one of these turn into a gold backed crypto, the entire game changes. If Russia and China backed their currencies with gold, do you think that would have an effect on the USD? Hell yea. So when a gold backed crypto is launched or eight of them, one from every continent, do you think that is going to have an effect on the shabby cryptos? Yea, but it will be worse than that. This would have an effect on all paper and FOREX currencies because we are not in the infancy stage of cryptocurrency anymore. We’re in the adolescent stage and it becomes adult hour when gold backing is introduced. That’s when it will be game over for the criminal banksters.

Times have become very dangerous right now for the US dollar’s primary role among the currencies because all the wars have terminally compromised it’s integrity. The dollar isn’t supported by international oil and gas trade so much anymore as it is supported by aggressive military action with war crimes on a global scale and the people are sick of it. This is a very tenuous  situation for a global reserve currency.

Know Your Rights [refresher]

https://i1.wp.com/lightonconspiracies.com/newsite/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/know-your-rights_2-571x600.png1. Know Your Rights

In any encounter with the police, a Judge will be looking after the fact at whether the police had a right to stop you in the first place. This is because the 4th Amendment of the Constitution says that you have a right as a citizen to freely go about your business unless the police can show they had a belief you were engaged in criminal activity.

What the police have to show to a Judge later depends completely on whether the Judge finds that you were being “arrested”, ‘detained’ or were ‘free to leave’.

If the police arrest you, they have to show they had ‘Probable Cause’ to believe you were committing a crime. On the other hand, the police will probably argue that they weren’t arresting you but just ‘detaining’ you. A ‘detention’ is a situation where the police stop you briefly while they investigate a crime but haven’t arrested you yet.

In a detention, the police have a much lower burden of proof. They only have to show a “reasonable suspicion” as to why they were detaining you. Or the police may argue that their entire contact with you was just a “consensual encounter” where you were free to go at anytime. In a consensual encounter, they don’t really need to justify why they stopped you because they were just talking to you and you were “free to leave”.

2. Remember the Key Phrases

The first question out of your mouth should be, ‘Am I being detained?’ Then, ‘Why? What am being stopped for? Am I free to go, or am I under arrest?’ Memorize this. Repeat it out loud: ‘Am I being detained? Why? Am I free to go, or am I under arrest?’

Your job in this situation is to keep calm and cool. Be respectful but clear and firm in what you are saying. It is completely reasonable (and legal) to ask why you are being stopped and whether you are free to go. By asking from the start if you are under arrest or free to leave you are forcing the officer to tell you exactly what is happening and whether you are a suspect.

3. Miranda Rights Myths vs. Reality

One of the most common urban myths out there is that the police have to read you your Miranda rights or the arrest gets thrown out of court.Not true. The police don’t have to read you these rights. In fact, the police have the right to completely lie to you in any interview. The only time they have to read Miranda rights is if:A) You are under arrest
B) They want to use a statement you made after being arrested in court against you.The Right against Self Incrimination is in the Bill of Rights for a reason. USE IT. You should NEVER give a statement to the police without a lawyer. Period. No exceptions.In the above scenario, questions like “whose backpack is this?” should be answered with a firm, “Officer, I am choosing to remain silent. I want a lawyer.”

4. Do not give the authorities consent to search you

One other major Constitutional right you have is the right to be free from an unlawful search of your person and property.

So let’s say you are in a Festival when the police approach you. They won’t let you leave and ask for permission to search your backpack. (Obviously, security has a right to search you as you enter a festival and go through their initial security screening.)

Cops always make it seem like you’re some kind of a criminal if you express the slightest hesitation about having your property searched without a warrant. You can expect to hear an ‘If you have nothing to hide, why can’t we search your stuff?’ type of verbal approach from the cops.

Know this: If the police is asking you permission to search you or your property, it usually means they know they are making an illegal search. Let that sink in for a second. When the police ask you ‘Can I search this bag?’, they KNOW they are asking you to let them make a search they are not legally entitled to make.

My advice? Respectfully tell the police officer, “I’m not giving you consent to search my property.” If they ask what you have to hide, don’t argue with them. Simply say again, ‘Officer, I’m sorry I’m not giving you consent to search my person or my property. If I’m free to leave I’d like to leave. If not, I’d like a lawyer please…’

At this point, they can still search you if they have probable cause, but what you’ve done with your statements is make them declare their reason for doing so and force them to show they are legally entitled to search you.

5. Document the Encounter

The best thing to happen to Civil Liberties was the invention of the cell phone camera and YouTube. Just bear in mind, cops will do just about anything to avoid having you upload your video of them on YouTube or on Social Media. This is an area where your own comfort level has to dictate how far you push it. Legally, since you are in a public place you are completely entitled to film and record what is happening. But cops will sometimes argue that you are “interfering with an investigation” and threaten to arrest you. Or if you have had anything to drink they will suddenly decide that you are “publicly intoxicated” and try to arrest you. As a Festival Buddy you have to decide if you can safely film what is happening. That’s because your other job as FB is to stay out of custody and post bail and let your buddy’s family know he just got arrested.

I suggest that you say the following if cops order you to turn off your camera:
“Officer, I’m not interfering with you in any way. I am just documenting this arrest. This is a public place and I’m entitled to record this”.

While making this statement, I would make a show of backing up and getting out of the way to prove that you are not interfering but just observing.

If things get crazier, be sure to get footage of the cop screaming “turn that camera off” before you turn it off. Everyone (You Tube, Media, Juries, Internal Affairs) loves footage of cops screaming “turn off that camera” to a calm person who is doing nothing but saying “I’m not interfering, just watching to make sure you are following the law.”

What Happens If You Don’t Cooperate At Border Check Points?

David Loy, the legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union in San Diego and Imperial Counties, talks to KPBS about whether you have to answer border patrol agents when they ask you questions at the border.

By Ole Dammegard | Light On Conspiracies

 

Senator Who Signed ‘Bathroom Bill’ Arrested For Child Rape

An Oklahoma State Senator has been charged with child rape after being caught by police in a hotel room with a young boy. 

https://i1.wp.com/cdns.yournewswire.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/senator-child-abuse-charges-678x381.jpg?zoom=2

Three felony charges were filed against Ralph Shortey by the Cleveland District Attorney, including one for engaging in child prostitution.

According to the Moore Police Department, police went to “check on a juvenile at the Super 8 Motel in Moore last Thursday.” When they found Shortey and the juvenile, who is 17, there was allegedly a “strong smell of marijuana” and an open box condoms in the juvenile’s bag. Shortey claimed he had simply gone to the hotel to “hang out with a friend.”

Police say the juvenile’s parents said he has a history of soliciting himself online. KFOR reports that communication records show the teen told Shortey that he needed money for spring break, to which Shortey allegedly responded, “would you be interested in ‘sexual’ stuff?”

In the wake of his arrest, the Oklahoma Senate voted to bar Shortey from all his work as a Senator. He is married with three children and was also the manager for Donald Trump’s campaign during the primaries.

Source: New World Order

 

Report: Obama Era NSA Admits To Years Of Illegal Searches On Americans

A bombshell report claims that the NSA, under then President Obama, conducted years of illegal searches of American’s private data. The report appears in the online publication Circa and details how once-classified documents show how the spy agency failed to disclose the abuses.

According to a previously classified report reviewed by Circa, one in 20 electronic communications by Americans were scooped up and kept by the NSA. The NSA admitted that the actions of the so-called 702 database potentially violated the fourth amendment protections of millions of Americans. This even after the spy agency’s own supervisors agreed in 2011 to follow certain safeguards. The publication goes on to say the Obama administration self-disclosed the violations late last year just before President Donald Trump was elected. The admittance of wrongdoing was made before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. The agency received a strong rebuke from the court according to Circa.

In early January, shortly before President Trump’s inauguration, Obama administration officials changed the rules regarding the handling of sensitive information of Americans scooped up in NSA data collection. The rule change did away with the previous safeguards and allowed wide dispersion of information on individuals to be spread across several agencies.

The American Civil Liberties Union expressed shock to Circa that the abuses were admitted by government officials. Over the last several months, various operatives with the government have tried to tamp down claims of intentional wiretapping by the former administration.

Source: Valley News Live