Breaking: SCOTUS Orders Response to Texas Lawsuit~OTHER STATES SHOW INTEREST IN JOINING LAWSUIT

On today’s Jay Sekulow Live, we cover the breaking news that the Supreme Court has ordered Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin to respond to the State of Texas' lawsuit by 3pm tomorrow. (Dec. 10, 2020). This election lawsuit alleges violations of fundamental Constitutional protections and is clearly outcome determinative.

President Trump is Defending the People, Democrats are Attacking Them

Republicans want to count every legal vote, while Democrats want to count every illegal opinion.

BY DANIEL GREENFIELD

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/12/president-trump-defending-people-democrats-are-daniel-greenfield/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Democrats claimed that the 2016 election was stolen, Republicans say that the 2020 election is being stolen. But there is a fundamental difference in how they say the theft happened.

The Democrats and their media have spent four years claiming that the 2016 election was tampered with through “disinformation”. Disinformation has become the latest media buzzword whose meaning is both ambiguous and menacing. Every opposing point of view, on any issue, is now labeled “disinformation” and falsely described as being a “threat to democracy”.

Strip away the Orwellian buzzwords and what they are really saying is that the election was stolen because the voters had access to wrongthink and accordingly voted the wrong way.

Ignore the actual merits of the proposition and compare it to the Republican argument.

Republicans are saying that the 2020 election was stolen through systematic election fraud. They’re not saying that the election was stolen because people had the wrong views.

The proposed Republican solution to the election fraud is to verify the legitimacy of the vote while the Democrat solution to their claim of election theft was and is massive censorship.

Republicans want to empower voters while Democrats want to disempower them.

Democrats reversed the basic meanings of words and ideas. Hillary Clinton accused Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg of being “authoritarian” and “Trumpian” for saying, “our users can make up their own minds” when refusing to remove an unflattering Pelosi video.

That’s the opposite of authoritarian.

Legally, there are no such things as illegitimate ideas, but there are illegitimate votes.

Republicans are addressing an election fraud by sorting legitimate votes from illegitimate ones, while Democrats want to fight what they say is election theft by sorting legitimate from illegitimate ideas. This censorship venture actually is authoritarian and unconstitutional.

Republicans want to count every legal vote, while Democrats want to count every illegal opinion.

When President Trump calls for counting all legal votes, he’s defending the rights of the voters, but when Hillary Clinton and Democrats attack speech, they’re attacking the Bill of Rights.

Distinguishing between legitimate and illegitimate votes is fundamental to representative government. When ballot harvesters hand out gift cards, as they allegedly did in Nevada, when massive amounts of ballots appear in the dead of night and are never properly verified, when drop boxes and voting machines vulnerable to fraud are used, then the power of the voters to choose their representatives is undermined, not by other voters, but by Democrats.

That’s not an election: it’s an authoritarian system that elects its own leaders.

Verifying the integrity of the vote is a fundamental function of government because its legitimacy rests on free and honest elections. When one party or another challenges the integrity of an election, it’s not attacking the people, but holding the system that serves them accountable.

Democrats and their media have responded to President Trump’s claims of election fraud by describing it as “disinformation” and an “attack on democracy”. Media outlets have cut off speeches and statements by President Trump and his associates about the election fraud, and tech monopolies have censored claims by President Trump and other conservatives.

This is not a “defense of democracy”. It’s the response of an authoritarian system to political dissent. A free system doesn’t fear verifying the integrity of an election because it has nothing to hide. It doesn’t seek to disbar lawyers who sue over election results, and it doesn’t censor elected officials and private citizens who raise questions about it, let alone call for their arrests.

Verifying ideas is an illegitimate and unconstitutional function of government. It is so entirely unconstitutional that the First Amendment was designed as a rebuttal to that entire notion.

"It's imperative that leaders from the private sector and the public sector step up to protect our democracy and innocent lives," Hillary Clinton ranted, urging a fight against “disinformation”.

Our republic, and for that matter no democracy, is threatened by disinformation. It can be threatened by bad and evil ideas, but free societies don’t police ideas, they police crimes. The Democrats have endorsed police defunding and no longer want to police crimes, just ideas.

George Orwell’s Ministry of Truth in 1984 was based on the real Ministry of Information whose goal was to dispense propaganda and enforce censorship. The modern UK set up the National Security Communications Unit to combat disinformation in “an era of fake news and competing narratives”. Treating “competing narratives” as a national security threat is how you get 1984.

Or the Democrat claims that the 2016 election was stolen because they lost the argument.

Democrats or Republicans have every right to challenge the integrity of an election because elections are a legitimate function of government. They have no right to regulate ideas, as Senator Elizabeth Warren and Hillary Clinton have urged, because ideas are not a legitimate function of government. Governments serve the people through elections, not ideas.

There’s no room for a Ministry of Information or a Ministry of Truth in America.

In the fight for the last two presidential elections, as in all things, Republicans and Democrats have maintained their respective polar philosophical differences over the role of government. Democrats responded to losing in 2016 by trying to police the people, while Republicans are fighting in 2020 to police the government. Republicans believe that elections are undermined by the government, while Democrats believe that elections are undermined by the people.

At the heart of the question is the same debate over the relationship between the people and the government. The Democrats run for office to reaffirm the central role of the government and attribute their losses to an unruly public that needs to learn its place, while Republicans run for office to affirm the central role of the people in limiting the power of the government.

And they blame their losses on the government, whether it’s the ‘deep state’ or corrupt officials.

President Trump is right to question the role of the government in this election. And, more importantly, whether he’s right or wrong, he is within his rights to do so. As are we all. But Hillary Clinton and Democrats were never within their rights to question the role of ideas in elections.

When President Trump challenges the integrity of an election, he’s fighting for the rights of the voters to have their votes legitimately counted. But when Hillary Clinton or Elizabeth Warren call for a crackdown on ideas, they are proposing to have the government repress the people.

Those are the ultimate stakes in this election fight and in our political system.

People elect governments. Governments do not elect people. The public has the right to question, challenge, and denounce the government. But the government has no right to tell the people what to think. It is a dangerous thing for the government and its allies to tell the people that they have no right to question an election or that they have no right to their opinions.

But in 2016 and 2020, that was and is the Democrat position. In 2016, when the Democrats lost, they said that the people had no right to have the wrong sort of opinions. In 2020, they insist that the people have no right to question an election. And that is why it must be questioned.

Free countries remain free when people challenge the government. When they don’t, elections and opinions stop mattering. President Trump’s ongoing campaign for the integrity of the election upholds our nation’s highest principles of freedom and helps keep us all free.

 

Racial Equity Used to Prioritize Coronavirus Vaccinations

Social justice activists care about the most vulnerable, right?

BY JOSEPH KLEIN

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/12/racial-equity-used-prioritize-coronavirus-joseph-klein/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Social justice warriors are infecting decision-making regarding who should receive COVID-19 vaccination priority. Saving the lives of the most vulnerable is less important, they believe, than making up for past racial and socioeconomic inequities.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) convened an emergency meeting of its Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) late last month in which most of the members advised that “equity” considerations should take precedence. For this reason, they believe that after vaccinating front-line health care workers and long term care facility residents, the vast group of so-called non-health service “essential workers” should be vaccinated before adults with high risk medical conditions or those most vulnerable who are over the age of 65. “Racial and ethnic minority groups are disproportionally represented in many essential industries and live in communities that are disproportionally affected; offers an opportunity to really impact equity,” the ACIP said in the summary of its minutes.

There are approximately 90 million essential workers nationwide, according to the New York Times, which referenced the definition used by a division of the Department of Homeland Security. The list is very long and, in some states, can reach as high as 75 percent of their overall worker population. In too many cases, the list includes workers whose occupations do not place them face to face with the public as potential super spreaders. Yet the ACIP thinks it is less important to save the people most likely to die from the coronavirus than so-called “essential” workers who are “disproportionally” members of racial and ethnic minority groups.

Senior Trump administration officials, including Dr. Robert Redfield, who currently leads the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, believe that the people most likely to die from the coronavirus should receive priority for vaccinations. That would include adults 65 years old and older. But even if Redfield decides not to accept the ACIP’s recommendation on the order of priority, it won’t make any difference. He is on his way out, to be replaced by Joe Biden's candidate for the job, Dr. Rochelle Walensky. Biden’s choice has somehow managed to bring Black Lives Matter into her discussion of the coronavirus pandemic.

Speaking about the lessons she learned from the pandemic, Walensky declared: “If…anything good comes out of this, and there have been some silver linings, I do think it's the protection of our vulnerable populations, and I mean that sort of based on comorbidities, but really, more importantly, this intersection of Black Lives Matter, attention to the racial injustice, and this pandemic.”

Biden chose California Attorney General Xavier Becerra to serve as his administration’s Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) Secretary. The current HHS Secretary, Alex Azar, has spent his career working in senior healthcare leadership roles in both the public and private sectors. Becerra has no relevant healthcare experience. His claim to fame has been his resistance to President Trump, including signing on to more than 100 lawsuits against the Trump administration.

Becerra has a "health equity" model to use in his new position, which was devised in his home state of California. It focuses on the disparities COVID-19 is having on communities of color. “We want to make sure that our focus on COVID has a look at every community, regardless of skin color or wealth, and that we are concerned about equity," Dr. Mark Ghaly, California's health secretary, said in describing the model. We can expect Becerra to be consulting frequently with his California counterpart to ensure racial and socioeconomic equity in prioritizing the order of vaccine recipients.

Biden has also appointed members of his coronavirus advisory board who prioritize equity over age-related vulnerability to the coronavirus in determining priority for vaccination. Dr. Zeke Emanuel is probably the most well-known member of the advisory board. Emanuel, among other things, was a key architect of Obamacare. Aside from writing that he himself does not want to live beyond the age of 75 because of the infirmities of old age, Emanuel co-authored an article last September warning against “prioritization strategies, such as age-based preference, that risk widening racial and socioeconomic disparities.” The article recommended that vaccines be allocated to reduce COVID-19 disparities “commonly produced by racism.”

Dr. Marcella Nunez-Smith, co-chair of Biden’s advisory board, claimed recently that “We’ve had a collective witnessing as a country here in 2020 around the pervasive, deep-seated challenge of racial injustice and COVID-19 exploited that reality.” According to Nunez-Smith’s twisted way of thinking, “privileged” whites must atone for the coronavirus because it somehow "exploited" racial "injustice."

“We cannot get this pandemic under control if we do not address head-on the issues of inequity in our country,” Nunez-Smith declared. “There is no other way.”

The only sensible way to curb the pandemic’s most deadly effects is to use health-based criteria for vaccine prioritization to save the most lives, not social justice agendas.

Each state will be making the ultimate decisions in distributing the vaccines it receives to its residents. If Oregon is any indication, racial equity will be the determining factor rather than medical need.  Oregon’s COVID vaccination plan to allocate and distribute COVID-19 vaccine states that it “is grounded in a commitment to health equity, which requires an examination of how power and resources are distributed.”

Using the language of the radical left, which seems to rule Oregon these days, the plan declares that “One legacy of racism and longstanding oppression is that people of color, tribal communities and people living with intellectual, developmental and other disabilities, due to historical and current injustices, structural racism, the colonization of relationships and processes experience overall worse health outcomes.” The way to rectify these “historical and current injustices,” according to the Oregon plan, is to impose “equitable distribution or redistribution of resources and power.”

Harald Schmidt, an Assistant Professor at the Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy at the University of Pennsylvania and a member of UNESCO's Ethics Task Force, minced no words in explaining the inhumane philosophy behind sacrificing the lives of the most vulnerable to achieve the progressive social engineer’s notion of the greater good.  “Older populations are whiter, ” Schmidt said. “Society is structured in a way that enables them to live longer. Instead of giving additional health benefits to those who already had more of them, we can start to level the playing field a bit.”

This is the roadmap for how the progressive left intends to cast the horrible devastation wrought by a deadly pandemic that originated in China as another manifestation of so-called “structural racism” in the United States. The reparation for the alleged “victims” of such “structural racism,” no matter how old or healthy they may be, is to receive prioritization for vaccinations over more vulnerable elderly whites. Joe Biden is assembling a team that is supportive of this perverted radical agenda.

 

“THE VIRUS”~THE LIE

BY JACK KERWICK

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/12/virus-jack-kerwick/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Perhaps, at this juncture, some nine months into the COVID Scare of 2020, the only thing that will emancipate people from the fear—the pathological, obsessive, wildly irrational fear—that has consumed them for the better part of this year is access to a vaccine.

Personally, and while I am not now nor have I ever been an “anti-vaxxer,” I will not go anywhere near any so-called COVID vaccine. The reason for this is simple enough:

Since “the Virus” has never been isolated, purified, and extracted from the bio-chemical soup in which scientists claim to have found it; since, that is, COVID-19 has never been identified with the exactness and rigor demanded by the scientific method, it’s anyone’s guess as to what would be included in an alleged vaccine.   

That COVID has never been scientifically determined is borne out by two indisputable facts:

(1)The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention itself concedes, way down on the 39th page of its 59 page report—“CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel”—that the Virus’s existence has not been proven. 

Of course, the report doesn’t say this in so many words. What it does say, within a section with the title, “Performance Characteristics,” is that “no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available [.]”

To repeat: the “experts” are here admitting to us, albeit in a document that few people are going to read and buried deeply within it to boot, that they possess zero “quantified…isolates” of the virus that they have had us believe for most of this year is the second iteration of the Bubonic Plague.

So, the Virus hasn’t been measured and it hasn’t been isolated—the two things that must happen in order to confirm the existence of any virus, to say nothing of a “novel” virus.

It is precisely because, as the CDC confesses, the Virus has never been proven that it prescribes PCR testing—instead of the blood serum testing that it should and would be employing had it determined the existence of the Virus through the scientific method according to which viruses are determined.  

And the PCR test is intended to detect RNA that “the experts” assume is embodied by the Virus that they concede they have never isolated!

(2)There are two things concerning that PCR test of which to take note:

First, Kary Mullis, the man who invented the PCR test and who in 1993 won a Nobel Prize for doing so, was interviewed by John Lauritsen three years later. He made the following revealing judgment regarding his invention:

Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron.”   

An oxymoron is a contradiction in terms. In other words, the PCR test, while it may detect the presence of material, cannot detect the amount of it.

In other words, and although the Fake “Fact-Checkers” of the leftist press deny that Mullis implied that his test was never designed for the purpose to which it’s being deployed at the present moment, Mullis did indeed imply just that.

Jon Rappoport is an investigative journalist who has been writing on epidemics and pandemics for about 35 years. In 2014, during the Ebola virus scare, Rappoport, while quoting Mullis’s own declaration regarding his invention, noted the flaws of the PCR test. He asked:

“Is the sample taken from the patient actually a virus or a piece of a virus? Or is it just an irrelevant piece of debris?”

He also noted that the “test is based on the amplification of a tiny, tiny speck of genetic material taken from a patient—blowing it up millions of times until it can be observed and analyzed.”

The significance of this can’t be overstated. It requires “millions and millions” of a virus—it requires, that is to say, quantification—to determine whether a person is sick, or will become sick. Yet, as Karry Mullis unequivocally stated, his PCR test precludes quantification.  

And, of course, not long ago, even that dastardly right-wing publication known as The New York Times revealed that the PCR test has a false-positive rate as high as 90%! This is due to the fact that it is almost always administered according to the CDC’s recommendation that it be run through an excessively large number of cycles that, as none other than the sainted Dr. Fauci himself acknowledged, is guaranteed to deliver a false-positive result (“dead nucleotides”).

The bottom line is this:

Even if, counterfactually, the Virus had been found, the PCR test would still have proved worthless in determining whether anyone was sick, and almost as worthless, given the (undoubtedly politicized) manner in which it’s been administered, in proving the rate of infection.      

The Government-Media-Industrial complex’s breathless sensationalizing of the most recent explosion of “case numbers” is surely designed to pump even more fear into the already terror-stricken hearts of the millions of Americans whose lives over which power-hungry politicians and their propagandist apologists in the Fake News industry have assumed control during the course of this past year. This extra dose of fear is guaranteed to corral them into mile-long lines for the Virus “vaccine.”

So be it. If it liberates them from their fear and restores our country to some semblance of pre-COVID normalcy, then it would be a good thing. 

However, if those who have been hiding behind their (wholly ineffective) masks for months weren’t consumed by an irrationality that has proven to be impenetrable, I’d urge them to inquire into the contents of this drug that they’ll be climbing over one another to have “experts” inject into their bodies.

Since, though, it has long been obvious that the irrationality of the True Believers in the Virus most definitely is immovable, it is only for the remotely stable that I write this article.   

 

BOMBSHELL: The link between Dominion, Sequoia, Smartmatic, and the CCP~CFIUS APPROVES SMARTMATIC IN THE U.S.

EXCERPTS FROM: https://www.followcn.com/the-link-between-dominion-sequoia-smartmatic-and-the-ccp/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) opened an investigation into Sequoia only after Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), who chairs the subcommittee overseeing CFIUS and who co‐​authored the Foreign Investment and National Security Act 2007 (FINSA), wrote a letter to then-Treasury Secretary John Snow inquiring whether the Venezuelan government could use Sequoia to manipulate U.S. elections. Maloney cited the fact that the Venezuelan state had invested in Smartmatic’s affiliates, the company’s current ownership was buried in a labyrinth of offshore trusts, and revelations that Sequoia had flown 15 Venezuelan nationals to Chicago to tabulate votes in a local election. “There clearly remained doubt surrounding this company, and as long as those doubts lingered, many people would have legitimate questions about the integrity of these voting machines,” said Maloney. “When I first raised this case with Treasury, I thought that it was ripe for a CFIUS investigation, because the integrity of our voting machines is vital to national security. At that time, Smartmatic flatly refused to undergo a CFIUS review. But now it seems the company could not overcome the cloud of doubt surrounding this doubt – had they been able to, we would not be talking about a sale of Sequoia today. As I said in May, it seems that a CFIUS review was in fact the proper course.”

The company replaced its headquarters in Boca Raton in favor of a complex structure with offices in multiple locations. The U.S. State Department said its Venezuelan owners “remain hidden behind a network of holding companies in the Netherlands and Barbados”; its organization is “a complex network of offshore companies and foreign trusts.”

Key conclusion/question #3: why did Smartmatic reorganize from a transparent structure with a head office in Florida to an opaque structure with holding companies and trusts in the Netherlands and Barbados?

In November 2007 CFIUS issued a ruling ordering Smartmatic to sell all of its shares in Sequoia Voting Systems in exchange for CFIUS dropping its investigation of Smartmatic. But what followed was far from what one might expect. Following a ruling by the CFIUS, Smartmatic was ordered to sell to Sequoia’s management team- SVS Holdings Inc, (Sequoia Holdings). However, Smartmatic still retained some financial control over several aspects of Sequoia, ownership of the intellectual property rights of some of Sequoia’s election products deployed in the U.S., and the right to negotiate for overseas business.

It was only in April 2008 that these arrangements were revealed when Hart InterCivic, a competitor of Sequoia, attempted a “hostile takeover” of Sequoia Holdings. Through the discovery process made possible by the purchase offer, it became evident that Smartmatic had not fully divested itself of Sequoia Holdings. The purchase contract showed several elements of permanent control over Sequoia Holdings.

  • Smartmatic still retained some financial control of Sequoia Holdings.
  • Smartmatic also retained ownership of intellectual property rights for some of Sequoia’s currently deployed election products in the United States.
  • Sequoia Holdings reserved the right to negotiate non-compete contracts overseas.

“The secrecy regarding CFIUS investigations is legendary: CFIUS was previously not allowed to tell Congress of the results–or even existence–of security reviews.” [1]

However, these arrangements were allegedly made with the review and approval of CFIUS. Sequoia Holdings faces substantial legal liability for infringement of intellectual property rights and repeated voting system failures.

___________________________________________________________________________

SEE OUR PREVIOUS POSTS ABOUT CFIUS, GULFTAINER & THE PORT OF WILMINGTON, DE:

https://ratherexposethem.org/2018/08/30/rep-duncan-hunter-department-of-justice_30/

https://ratherexposethem.org/2018/08/16/gulftainer-has-terrorist-connectionsour/


 

 

Texas Drops BOMBSHELL Lawsuit Challenging ELECTION as Congress Rejects Biden as President-Elect!!!

★★★ A NEW CONSERVATIVE AGE IS RISING ★★★

Texas Drops a BOMBSHELL Lawsuit Challenging the ELECTION Results as a Congressional Committed Rejects Biden as President-Elect! In this video, we’re going to look at the amazing lawsuit filed by the attorney general of Texas, how it plays into Rudy Giuliani’s strategy for President Trump’s reelection, and how a congressional committee failed to pass a resolution acknowledging Sleepy Joe Biden as president-elect; you are NOT going to want to miss this!

Biden Chooses Anti-Gun, PRO-ABORTION CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL Becerra to Head Health & Human Services

BY DAVE WORKMAN

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2020/12/biden-chooses-anti-gun-becerra-to-head-health-human-services/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- Democrat Joe Biden sent another strong signal about the direction on guns his administration will take by announcing his pick to head the Department of Health and Human Services is Xavier Becerra, the anti-gun California attorney general who replaced another gun prohibitionist, Kamala Harris, when she was elected to the U.S. Senate.

Becerra is the defendant in several ongoing gun rights lawsuits filed by the Second Amendment Foundation, Firearms Policy Coalition, and others. He’s been sued at least five times by SAF.

If he is confirmed as HHS Secretary next year, he will be in a position to put the full force of the federal government behind the notion that guns are a health risk.

Various anti-Second Amendment groups have been crusading for years to declare “gun violence” a public health crisis. None of these groups ever seem to create a ripple in the news when there is a fatal stabbing or someone is bludgeoned to death. Becerra would likely get plenty of support from such organizations.

But he may have trouble being confirmed depending upon the outcome of the double Senate election in Georgia on January 5th. If Republican incumbents Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue are re-elected, it gives the GOP a thin majority. Republican Sen. Tom Cotton of Alabama already said he will vote against confirming Becerra.

Fox News is reporting “Republicans slammed President-elect Joe Biden after he announced his choice of California Attorney General Xavier Becerra for secretary of Health and Human Services on Monday, and they criticized Becerra's record on abortion and other issues.”

Conservative groups such as the Alliance Defending Freedom and the Susan B. Anthony List has labeled Becerra an “extremist,” Fox added. Religious leaders are also slamming the choice, again on the abortion issue.

In September, Becerra’s office made a big splash with the announcement that he was leading a “coalition” including the anti-gun Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence “in filing a lawsuit against the Trump Administration demanding the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) correct its interpretation of what qualifies as a firearm.”

The lawsuit is aimed at defining so-called “80 percent” frames as firearms.

It’s no small wonder why Giffords Executive Director Peter Ambler issued a ringing endorsement of Becerra when news broke Monday about Biden’s pick.

“After four years of Donald Trump, Americans desperately need strong leadership from the top to confront public health crises like the coronavirus pandemic and gun violence,” Ambler said in a prepared statement. “Xavier Becerra is a superb choice to take charge of Health & Human Services, which will have one of the most critical missions in the Biden-Harris Administration. Becerra has an impressive record of taking action to protect and improve public health, he’s been a partner in the fight against gun violence, never backing down from special interests like the gun lobby in his mission to save lives. We look forward to working with him and the rest of the cabinet to address gun violence.”

No doubt most of the resistance to Becerra will relate to the abortion issue, but Becerra would remain no friend to American gun owners as head of HHS.

Last year, when a killer opened fire at the annual Garlic Festival in Gilroy with a semi-auto rifle he brought from neighboring Nevada, Becerra lamented “We cannot enforce California laws in Nevada.”

At the time, KGO reported that despite California’s restrictive gun control laws prohibiting the sale or import of so-called “assault rifles” into the state, “the suspected gunman brought one into the state.”

Gun rights activists shook their heads because the media, and Becerra, missed the point entirely. Determined killers will ignore gun control laws and find ways to commit their heinous acts. Transporting the gun into California simply underscored the problem with such laws: They don’t really prevent crimes.

While he was in the state assembly representing California’s Legislative District 31, Democrat Becerra voted against legislation prohibiting junk lawsuits against gun manufacturers for crimes committed by third parties misusing their firearms. He voted against reducing the waiting period for firearms purchases from three days to one day. He was rated “F” by the National Rifle Association.

Biden is in the midst of picking people to fill his cabinet positions as the possibility of any reversal of the election grows increasingly remote. Over the weekend, President Trump traveled to Georgia in an effort to get out the vote for Loeffler and Perdue, while insisting he won the state and contending he won elsewhere.


About Dave Workman

Dave Workman is a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms, and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.

Dave Workman

_______________________________________________________________________________

Biden Taps Radical Planned Parenthood Lackey Xavier Becerra to Head HHS

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/tyler-o-neil/2020/12/07/biden-taps-planned-parenthood-lackey-xavier-becerra-to-head-hhs-n1195377

EXCERPTS:

"Joe Biden will nominate California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D) as secretary for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the department notorious for railroading religious freedom via the Obamacare contraception mandate. Becerra has attacked religious freedom and free speech with zeal at the beck and call of radical-Left activists in Planned Parenthood and other groups."

"Becerra has abused his power as attorney general in pursuit of silencing pro-life activists and organizations."

Becerra also vigorously defended a California law that mandated pregnancy resource centers (PRCs), most of which are pro-life, must advertise abortion on placards.

____________________________________________________________________

Biden’s Gun Control Signal in Becerra Nomination

BY JIM GRANT & LARRY KEANE

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2020/12/nssf-bidens-gun-control-signal-in-becerra-nomination/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
Biden's nomination of CA AG Becerra is a bad omen for American's gun rights. 

U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- President-elect Joe Biden is taking an early turn to the far left with his nomination of California Attorney General Xavier Becerra to take over the Department of Health and Human Services.

That nomination would put a firebrand gun control collaborator at the helm of the nation’s leading health organization delivering services and support of scientific advances in medicine, public health, and social services. This is a harbinger that the federal office that employs 80,000 and has a $1.3 trillion budget will be used to push an antigun ideology over science. Attorney General Becerra’s nomination means that the next four years will be an administration pushing firearm ownership as a public health crisis and using the cover of a national health emergency to trample on Constitutional rights.

Attorney General Becerra’s public career started in California, working as a deputy attorney general for California’s Department of Justice before he was elected to the State Assembly, then to the U.S. House of Representatives from 1993-2017. He left Congress when he was chosen by California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom to succeed U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris as California’s Attorney General.

California Gun Control Parade

When it comes to gun control, California’s jockeying to lead the parade with Attorney General Becerra as the drum major waving the giant stick. He’s embroiled in two lawsuits challenging California gun control laws that could have national impacts. The first is Duncan v Becerra, a case challenging California’s ban on standard capacity magazines, or what the state labels “large-capacity magazines” (LCMs). In 2000, the state banned the sale of new magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds, but a 2016 voter initiative called Proposition 63 made possessing those magazines purchased before the ban illegal. U.S. District Court Judge Roger Benitez blistered the law in his ruling that it’s unconstitutional. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld Judge Benitez’s ruling earlier this year.

Another high-profile challenge to California’s onerous gun control laws is Miller v Becerra, a case that challenges the state’s nearly 20-year ban on modern sporting rifles, or what they knowingly mislabel “assault rifles.” That case, too, was brought before Judge Benitez, who ruled the law was unconstitutional. Attorney General Becerra also appealed the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, where it was denied a motion to dismiss the case.

That’s Not All

Attorney General Becerra’s fights to place stumbling blocks in the way of lawful firearm ownership don’t just involve modern sporting rifles and their magazines. He’s also defending a law that requires universal background checks for ammunition purchases. California passed a law requiring background checks for ammunition sales, which was challenged by U.S. Olympic Gold Medalist Kim Rhode. The case, Rhode v Becerra, challenges the burdensome regulation that was fraught with inaccuracies and outages. Judge Benitez thrashed that law and issued a preliminary injunction to stop the state from enforcing the law. Attorney General Becerra again appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and won a stay against the preliminary injunction while the case awaits hearing there.

Attorney General Becerra also led the defense of California’s slow-motion handgun ban. In Pena v Horan, a challenge to California’s Unsafe Handgun Act that bans handguns in common use for lawful purposes. That case was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, but denied review last summer, along with nine other firearm-related cases. He also defended the law in NSSF v State of California, filed in 2014 that went to the California Supreme Court, the state’s mandate to incorporate microstamping technology for firearms that doesn’t exist. In 2007, California gun control advocates knew they couldn’t outright ban handguns, so they put a condition on their approved sale. They would be required to incorporate technically-unfeasible microstamping technology, that would make identifying marks on two places of each cartridge casing fired from the firearm. The state’s Department of Justice created a list of “approved” handguns that’s only shrunk. They haven’t added a new semiautomatic handgun since 2013 when then-Attorney General Kamala Harris triggered the law. A new law passed in California last session only speeds that shrinking roster. The new law calls for three handguns to be removed for every new one added.

Wrong Prescription

The problem with Attorney General Becerra leading the nation’s health agency is that any issue he finds politically unfavorable can be labeled a public health crisis and be used to justify unprecedented restrictions on Constitutionally-protected individual liberties. Gun control advocates have been trying to do this for years as if criminal activity could be cured with a pill.  Thinking this wouldn’t happen would be foolish. The evidence abounds that this not only could happen, it has and is happening. The COVID pandemic saw governors order firearm retailers and ranges to close, reversing course only after threats of lawsuits, or their orders were tossed out by judges. Democratic Govs. Gavin Newsom and Andrew Cuomo trampled on religious liberties by attempting to block people from attending services at churches and synagogues. They didn’t stop until the courts told them, and even then, they’re grousing that they’re the authority.

They’re neglecting that they are accountable to the people. That’s us. Don’t expect Attorney General Becerra to be any different at the Department of Health and Human Services. He’ll make you swallow the gun control pill and it will come in one color.  Blue.


The National Shooting Sports Foundation

NSSF is the trade association for the firearm industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of thousands of manufacturers, distributors, firearm retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations, and publishers nationwide. For more information, visit nssf.org

National Shooting Sports Foundation

 
 

California Sheriff Eviscerates Newsom’s ‘Dictatorial’ Rules

BY VICTORIA TAFT

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/victoria-taft/2020/12/08/california-sheriff-eviscerates-newsom-over-dictatorial-and-ridiculous-covid-lockdown-orders-n1197320;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

A California sheriff has issued a white-hot response to Governor Gavin Newsom’s latest lockdown order in which he threatens to defund counties that don’t abide by his diktats.

Riverside Sheriff Chad Bianco says he won’t be cracking heads for breaking Newsom’s “flat-out ridiculous,” “hypocritical,” and “disastrous” lockdown orders.

Bianco released a video on Friday (see it below) in which he took apart the governor’s threatened three-week lockdown, which will go into effect in one of California’s five regions if that region’s hospitals fall below 15% ICU capacity.

He calls the standards that the governor plans to use in order to shut down California “unbelievably faulty.”

The metrics used for closures are unbelievably faulty and are not representative of true numbers and are disastrous for Riverside County.

If the lockdown goes into effect, “non-essential” travel will be temporarily banned. KTLA reports Newsom “is establishing a framework where non-essential travel would be temporarily restricted statewide.”

Also set to be closed are:

  • Eating at restaurants
  • Camping sites
  • Playgrounds
  • Salons and barbershops
  • Museums, zoos, aquariums
  • Theaters
  • Places where alcohol is served
  • Betting places such as card rooms and satellite wagering

Churches, hotels, malls, and businesses can be open but with fewer to no people. Sports events can go on without fans.

Bianco said he’s not changing what he’s already been doing in Riverside County.

As has been our position from the beginning of this pandemic, the Sheriff’s Department is asking and expecting Riverside County residents to act responsibly and do what they can to protect themselves and their family from contracting the virus.
Gavin ‘French Laundry’ Newsom Imposes Draconian Lockdown … Just in Time for Christmas

And he’s tired of Newsom’s “dictatorial attitude” and hypocrisy.

The dictatorial attitude toward California residents while dining in luxury, traveling, keeping his business open and sending his kids to in-person private schools is very telling about his attitude toward California residents, his feelings about the virus, and it is extremely hypocritical.

But it’s the sheriff’s comments about Newsom’s threat to defund the counties that may leave a shiv mark in the governor’s back. Bianco calmly laid out how Newsom’s actions are just like those of the man he claims to abhor: President Trump.

We were also told that there was a potential to withhold federal and state funding from counties that did not enforce the order. Ironically, it wasn’t that long ago our same governor publicly argued how wrong it was for the president of the United States to withhold federal funding from states not complying with federal laws.

[…] It appears part of the goal is to shift focus and attention away from his and others’ personal behavior with a “do as I say, not as I do” attitude by turning public opinion against California sheriffs. He is expecting us to arrest anyone violating these orders, cite them and take their money, close their businesses, make them stay in their home, and take away their civil liberties or he will punish all of us. I believe that all jobs are essential to someone. Leaders do not threaten, attempt to intimidate, or cause fear; bullies do. As has been our position from the start.

California’s sheriffs, who are elected, have largely abandoned enforcement of anything but the most egregious and flagrant violations of the governor’s COVID-19 rules, such as this huge party in LA County.

The Orange County and LA County sheriffs have both said they won’t go out of their way to bust the chops of coronavirus scofflaws, either, saying they’ll rely on “educating” people instead.

The governor seems to think he’s smart enough to safely navigate life in the pandemic, such as eating at a restaurant with no masks and social distancing, but considers everyone else too stupid to do what’s in their best interest.

Governor Newsom might have to do a gut-check on how his rules are being perceived and followed. For starters, he might want to look behind him to see who’s following. If you’re the leader and no one is following, are you a leader anymore?

Victoria Taft is the host of “The Adult in the Room Podcast With Victoria Taft” where you can hear her series on “Antifa Versus Mike Strickland.” Find it  here.  Follow her on Facebook,  TwitterParlerMeWeMinds @VictoriaTaft 

Gavin Newsom’s Latest COVID-19 Order Doesn’t Even Make Sense
Newsom Wanted Snitches to Turn in Thanksgiving ‘Scofflaws’ But Several California Sheriffs Say They Will Not Comply
INFURIATING: Owner of Shut Down LA Outdoor Bar Gets ‘Slapped in the Face’ by California’s COVID Double Standards
California DAs Blast Gov. Gavin Newsom’s Apathetic Response to $1 Billion Prisoner COVID Benefit Scam
 

Tucker Carlson Exposes China’s Influence Inside the U.S.

Video Shows Chinese Professor Talking About American “Elite” Traitors Who Work for Beijing

SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/video-shows-chinese-professor-talking-about-american-elite-traitors-who-work-for-beijing/

BY STACEY LENNOX

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/stacey-lennox/2020/12/08/tucker-carlsons-monologue-on-a-chinese-professors-recent-speech-should-terrify-you-n1197202;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
In case you missed it, Tucker Carlson opened his show last night with a shocking video showing a Chinese professor of economics giving a speech about the country’s decades-old activities in the United States. He followed up with commentary from China expert Gordon Chang and current Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe.

The complete segment on Tucker Carlson tonight is about eight minutes long, but it is well worth a watch. The comments are damning, and it is easy to see why they were removed from Chinese media and social media:

The economics professor appeared on Chinese television on November 28, discussing Wall Street and international trade. He also commented on President Donald Trump and the recent election. He started by noting the trade war with the United States and musing about why the Chinese couldn’t “fix” the Trump administration:

Why, between 1992 and 2016, did China and the U.S. used to be able to settle all kinds of issues, no matter what kind of crises we encountered, be it the Yinhe incident or the bombing of the embassy or the crashing of the plane?

Things were solved in no time like (a couple) do with their quarrels starting at the bed head but ending at the bed end. We fixed everything in two months. What is the reason?

The answer to that question is chilling and should concern every American interested in preserving our sovereignty, the republic, and the future of our children:

I am going to throw out something maybe a little explosive here. It’s just because we have people at the top. At the top of America’s core inner circle of power and influence. We have our old friends.

Who is this professor referring to, specifically? In the remainder of the presentation, the professor gives some insight. According to Carlson, the talk included references to a Chinese agent working as a vice president in a top Wall Street firm that was not named for fear of creating political trouble. The professor also went on at length about an American who now has dual citizenship in China. The professor asserts this agent helped the CCP with a propaganda operation in Washington, D.C., in 2015.

Gordon Chang: China Engaged in ‘an Act of War’ by Enflaming Antifa Riots in the U.S.

He suggested the Obama administration was easy to manipulate, and the Chinese had many friends among its members. China’s problem came when Donald Trump was elected because after that, everything changed:

For the past 30 years, 40 years, we have been utilizing the core power of the United States. As I said before, since the 1970s, Wall Street had a very strong influence on the domestic and foreign policy of the United States. So, we had a channel to rely on.

But the problem is that after 2008, the status of Wall Street declined and, more importantly, after 2016, Wall Street can’t fix Trump. Why? It’s very awkward. Trump had a previous soft default issue with Wall Street, so there was a conflict between them.

So, during the U.S.-China trade war, they (Wall Street) tried to help, and I know that. My friends on the U.S. side told me they tried to help but they couldn’t do much.

So, President Trump was impervious to Wall Street’s influence, an influence operation the Chinese have spent decades building. Of course, after the 2008 financial crisis, they expanded their other influence operations. Their activities at U.S. universities have been well documented through the Confucius Institutes and the 1,000 Talents program. The Chinese have also disclosed $19 million in ad buys and printing fees in major newspapers, and they influenced corporate media parent companies by granting access to the Chinese market.

According to Carlson, the professor went on to say that as a result of Trump’s aggressive stance on China, the “elites” got to work electing a new president:

But now we’re seeing Biden elected, the traditional elite, the political elite, the establishment, they’re very close to Wall Street, so you see that, right? Trump has been saying that Biden’s son has some sort of global foundation. Have you noticed that?

Who helped him (Biden’s son) build the foundations? Got it?

Carlson notes:

Now you know why you weren’t allowed to talk about Hunter Biden’s laptop. Why big business aligned as one, the tech companies and the rest, to suppress that story. Because they were implicated in it.

Then Carlson reflected on his interview with former Biden business partner Tony Bobulinski, and what he disclosed about the Biden family’s dealings with China:

Bobulinksi: And in a document you guys have, and I think has been provided to the world, the Chinese reference that because of their trust in the Biden family, that Chairman Yi and Director Zhang are excited about moving forward in this. And in that document, they reference loaning $5 million to the BD family. The BD family is the Biden family.

Carlson: What are the implications of this going forward? If Joe Biden is elected president, which could very well happen, how does this constrain his ability to deal with China?

Bobulinski: Are you asking for my opinion?

Carlson: Yes, I am. As someone who’s worked with the Chinese.

Bobulinski: So, I think Joe Biden and the Biden family are compromised.

Treading Water: Biden Campaign Dodges on Key Corruption Question as More Evidence Emerges

Next, Carlson brought on Gatestone Institute Senior Fellow Gordon Chang. Chang noted that under President Trump, the Chinese were not nearly this arrogant because they were afraid of him. He claimed the regime’s open commentary now indicates that the Communist Party feels emboldened by a prospective President Joe Biden. He also confirmed the existence of China’s relationship with a core base of power in the United States. Chang proposed ways that President Trump can break some of those ties in a short period of time using existing executive powers.

DNI John Ratcliffe also appeared to comment on a Wall Street Journal editorial he wrote on December 3 regarding China and the threat of intellectual property theft. The editorial is entitled “China Is National Security Threat #1,” and it is well worth reading. It details China’s impact on American jobs and the security of our nation. A notable quote from the article:

“There are no ethical boundaries to Beijing’s pursuit of power.”

When Carlson questioned why more leaders aren’t speaking out against the threats China poses, Ratcliffe responded:

Well, I think you did a good job of encapsulating why, Tucker. There are a lot of people who, for economic reasons, don’t want China to be our greatest threat. There are a lot of people who, for political reasons, don’t want China to be our greatest threat in America. But the intelligence doesn’t lie. China is our greatest threat and it’s not even close.

So how will that threat be dealt with over the next four years? Americans have good reason to be concerned. Joe Biden’s record on China is dismal in terms of controlling the aspirations of the Chinese Communist Party. There is more direct evidence with corroboration to indicate that he is in a weaker position now than when he was responsible for the U.S.- China relationship as vice president.

Biden has also appointed John Kerry as “Climate Czar,” and will reportedly sit on the National Security Council. This appointment will not require Senate approval. In a recent appearance at the World Economic Forum discussing the Great Reset, Kerry disclosed that he has already been speaking to the Chinese regarding climate goals and said he believes a Biden administration will be more open to China. Biden has also appointed many Obama-era staff members that the professor indicated were friendly with China.

Carlson said that China’s influence over our political and business elites will be a topic he and his team will focus on deeply over the coming weeks. Every American interested in the country that future generations will inherit should be tuned in.

Ex-Hunter Biden Associate: ‘I Have Firsthand Knowledge’ Joe Biden Was Involved in China Deals
5 Ways Hunter Biden’s Business Deals Empowered China at America’s Expense
Report: Big Tech, Media ‘Stole the Election’ by Burying Biden-China Scandal
Biden Says ‘My Son Has Not Made Money in… China.’ PANTS ON FIRE

Ilhan Omar Advises Christians to “Turn the Other Cheek”

When Muslims pretend to be Christian theologians.

One of the least known tactics used by Muslims to disarm Christians has been to insist that Christianity is against warfare and violence in general.

BY RAYMOND IBRAHIM

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/12/ilhan-omar-advises-christians-turn-other-cheek-raymond-ibrahim/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

Past and present, one of the least known—and, until the modern era, largely futile—tactics used by Muslims to disarm Christians has been to insist that Christianity is against warfare, violence in general.

In this regard, the most recent Muslim to take on the mantle of Christian theologian is none other than Somalia-born Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn.  Around November 18, after Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla criticized Georgia Senate candidate Raphael Warnock for claiming that Christians could not serve both God and the military, Omar, the Muslim, turned to quoting—that is, misquoting—the Bible.  In a tweet with an embarrassed face emoji, as if to suggest what Rubio was saying was so embarrassing—in fact, the emoji was appropriate, but more because of her spelling errors—she posted:

Mathews [sic] 6:24

No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and dmoney.’ [sic] The lies and smears of the GOP have no boundaries, but this is a disgrace and shameful.

Omar is hardly the first Muslim to try to manipulate Christian theology to Christians’ own detriment and disadvantage.  Nearly a millennium ago, prior to the Crusader siege of Antioch in 1098, Muslim emissaries were sent to parley.  They told the Europeans how their masters were “amazed that you should seek the Sepulchre of your lord as armed men, exterminating their people [Muslims] from long-held lands—indeed, butchering them at sword point, something pilgrims should not do.”

Of course, these diplomats said nothing about what “their people” had been doing to Christian subjects and pilgrims—that is, extorting, torturing, raping, and killing them—which is what occasioned the Crusades in the first place.

Similarly, Omar, who hails from a radically Islamic nation, Somalia— deemed the third worst persecutor of Christians in the world—would much rather “shame” Christians into disarming than have them resist violence, especially at the hands of Muslims.

In other words, she, like so many others, is an advocate of Doormat Christianity—a passive, nonjudgmental form of Christianity that deems lying down before an enemy virtuous.  Muslims and other elements are persecuting innocents around the world? Show love and tolerance, turn the other cheek, say a prayer, and feel guilty for your own crimes—or even your ancestors’ crimes—is one of the dominant strains of this brand.

Doormat Christianity was regularly on display during Barack Hussein Obama’s presidency: “On Easter, I do reflect on the fact that as a Christian, I am supposed to love,” he said in 2015 — three days after an Islamic terror attack targeting Christians killed 147 people in Kenya, provoking a few American Christian groups to express anger. “And I have to say that sometimes when I listen to less than loving expressions by Christians, I get concerned.”

Similarly, during the National Prayer Breakfast on February 5, 2015, Obama directly invoked Doormat Christian tenets to shame Christians from being too critical of Islamic State atrocities: “Lest we get on our high horse and think this [Islamic beheadings, sex-slavery, crucifixion, roasting and burying humans alive] is unique to some other place,” the American president admonished, “remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.”

Speaking of the Crusaders, how did they respond when Muslim diplomats expressed shock that they, Christian pilgrims, had come with the sword?  With more knowledge of Christian Just War theory than Omar, Obama, and their ilk would have us accept.  According to the account of Robert the Monk, the Crusaders, with “one accord,” replied:

No one with any sense should be surprised at us coming to the Sepulchre of Our Lord as armed men and removing your people from these territories.  Any of our people who came here with staff and scrip [i.e., as unarmed pilgrims] were insulted with abominable behavior, suffered the ignominy of poor treatment and in extreme cases were killed.

This was an understatement.  As just one of countless examples, a pilgrim wrote of what Muslims did to a “noble abbess of graceful body and of a religious outlook” who had joined a German pilgrimage to Jerusalem thirty years earlier: “The pagans captured her, and in the sight of all, these shameless men raped her until she breathed her last, to the dishonor of all Christians. Christ’s enemies performed such abuses and others like them on the Christians.”

Before the walls of Antioch, where the word “Christian” was first coined, the Crusaders continued their response by noting that the land “belonged to our people [Christians] originally and your people [Muslims] attacked and maliciously took it away from them, which means it cannot be yours no matter how long you have had it.”  Accordingly, “payback will be exercised by Frankish swords on your necks!”

The modern reader may find such an approach extreme, certainly “medieval.”  But for the proponents of Doormat Christianity, nothing less than total capitulation will ever do. Thus, former nun turned advocate for Islam, Karen Armstrong, chides: “During the 12th Century, Christians were fighting brutal holy wars against Muslims, even though Jesus had told his followers to love their enemies, not to exterminate them.”  No word that it was Muslims who had initiated these “brutal holy wars” and who first began to “exterminate” Christians.

In short, Christianity makes ample room for Just War—even as those who seek to subvert justice argue otherwise.

_______________________________________________________________________

SEE ALSO:

https://sovereignnations.com/2018/11/15/doormat-christianity-islamic-invasion/

https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/muslims-quote-scripture-to-encourage-doormat-christianity-submission-to-islam

 

 

 

Rand Paul: No Scientific Evidence ‘Tyrannical’ Lockdowns Work

"You can take advice and you can give advice. But once you mandate it, it doesn't become advice. It becomes a form of tyranny."

BY STEVE WATSON

SEE: https://www.infowars.com/posts/rand-paul-no-scientific-evidence-tyranical-lockdowns-work/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Senator Rand Paul spoke out Monday against the policy of lockdowns and restrictions, declaring that there is no evidence they are having any impact on the spread of coronavirus, and that those who say they do are not paying attention.

“We ought to at least still use logic to try to figure out how we stop this …,” Paul said in an appearance on Fox News, adding “I don’t see any evidence that crowd control, hand washing, standing six feet apart, all of these things they tell you to do — closing down the restaurants, closing down the schools — there’s no real evidence that they are changing the trajectory of the disease.”

“If you look at the incidence of COVID, it’s going up … exponentially despite all the mandates. So those who say there is science [behind the restrictions] just aren’t paying attention to it,” Paul continued.

Paul, who last week slammed lockdown zealot Dr. Anthony Fauci for doing a complete 180 on schools being closed, urged that “keeping all our kids home isn’t changing the course of this disease.”

“They’ve studied this in four different country-wide studies. They’ve studied the incidence of the disease, they’ve studied the transference of the disease, and they’ve found that closing schools don’t work. Even the socialist [New York City Mayor Bill] de Blasio is now opening schools,” the Senator emphasized.

Paul has been calling for schools to be open since the Summer, consistently pointing out that there is no science behind the closures.

Owen reacts to The governor of New York announcing another lockdown.

Paul explained that he isn’t recommending at risk people just ignore the virus, adding “But I’m also telling you that the government shouldn’t tell you you can’t go to church and the government shouldn’t tell you can’t send your kids to a religious school.”

“There’s good advice and you can take advice and you can give advice. But once you mandate it, it doesn’t become advice. It becomes a form of tyranny,” the Senator asserted.

“So I think the government should not be in the form of mandating these things, because sometimes the science isn’t clear and sometimes they change their mind on the science month to month and week to week,” Paul added.

Senator Paul has vowed to do everything in his power to resist Joe Biden’s “forever lockdowns”.

“He’s going to ruin the country. Lockdowns don’t work. And in fact, all of the evidence on mandatory masks show that they don’t work either,” the Senator urged in an interview last month.

John Catsimatidis · Senator Rand Paul 11-15-20