Connect with us

Politics

Bill Clinton: It’s Harder to Vote than Purchase Assault Weapons

Published

on

When you start hearing intelligent people say stupid things, you know they’ve lost the argument. Bill Clinton is a smart man. He’s a Rhodes Scholar. He’s well read. But he can’t defend liberalism by an appeal to facts. So he does the only thing he can. He makes up stuff.
The same tactic is used by today’s racialists. Everything is about race. Criticism of an Obama policy is an attack on him and all blacks because he’s black.
People are getting tired of hearing the “it’s all about race” narrative. Even President Obama is not convinced that race is a factor of conservative opposition to his policies. Obama told PBS’ Newshour that Republican opposition to his policies isn’t about the color of his skin. “It doesn’t have to do with race in particular.”
Bill Clinton’s latest act of desperation to motivate the liberal base is to claim that voting is more difficult than purchasing an assault weapon.
During Clinton’s speech at the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech, the first black president, as Toni Morrison called him in 1998, said the following after offering support for President Obama’s expansion of the welfare state:

“We must push open those stubborn gates,” Clinton said. Clinton suggested that the Supreme Court decision striking down a portion of the Voting Rights Act was an act of continuing racism. “A great democracy does not make it harder to vote than to buy an assault weapon. We must open those stubborn gates,” Clinton stated.

Hyperbole is one thing, but outright fabrication is something else. Voting in America today is one of the easiest tasks to do. It doesn’t cost anything but time. There is no fee or product to buy. You need money to purchase a firearm. You don’t need any money to vote.
What about identification. Some states require them for purchasing a firearm and some don’t. But why should anybody be required to show identification to exercise a constitutional right? Some will counter that voting is a constitutional right. The difference is that the purchase of a firearm does not force anybody else to comply with political decision making. Voting empowers other people to make laws that affect all citizens.
One argument that’s been made is that “there’s little danger of someone killing someone with their voting card . . .  but there’s plenty of evidence that people die from guns.” People vote for politicians who use their power to steal (taxation), legalize abortion that has resulted in the deaths of around 60 million preborn babies since 1973 in the United States, start wars, like President Obama is threatening to do in Syria, and arm our enemies.
Bill Clinton knows this. He also knows his audience. His rhetoric makes good political theater. Keep the troops charged up. Hillary will be running in three years.
There’s more. President Obama wants to make it more difficult for people who want to exercise their Second Amendment rights:

“Striving to take action where Congress would not, the Obama administration announced new steps Thursday on gun control, curbing the import of military surplus weapons and proposing to close a little-known loophole that lets felons and others circumvent background checks by registering guns to corporations.”

The only people who are going to be impacted by these new unconstitutional laws are law-abiding citizens. “Felons” don’t care about laws; that’s why they’re felons. What they can’t buy (often with stolen money), they’ll steal.
It’s kind of like Democrats who work hard at stealing elections.

Don't forget to Like The Washington Sentinel on Facebook and Twitter, and visit our friends at The Republican Legion.

Become an insider!

Sign up for the free Washington Sentinel email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

VP Pence Takes A Shot Directly At Bloomberg: ‘So God Made A Farmer’

Published

on

Mini Mike Bloomberg’s 2016 comments came during a sit-down discussion at Oxford’s Said Business School.

“It’s a process,” he went on to say, referring to the agrarian economy 300 years ago, “you dig a hole, you put a seed in, you put dirt on to, add water, up comes the corn.” He then said working in the modern information economy is “fundamentally different, because it’s built around replacing people with technology and the skill sets you need to learn are how to think and analyze and that is a whole degree level different, you need to have different skill set, you have to have a lot more gray matter.”

Mike Pence tweeted out a video today praising the profession. “So God Made a Farmer.”

Paul Harvey, we miss you. Update to this story.

Daily Caller:

Vice President Mike Pence shared a video on Twitter Monday about farmers that appeared to take direct aim at 2020 Presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg, who belittled the profession in 2016.

Bloomberg told a room full of people at a 2016 business forum that he “can teach anybody … to be a farmer.” After the comment re-surfaced on Twitter Feb. 14, Pence tweeted out a video Monday praising the profession. More

Twitter joins in:

What a great way to respond to the arrogant, elitist city slicker Mike Bloomberg. The Country can do without him but we can not do without is farmers. They are the original entrepreneurs and the most efficient workers in the country.

Continue Reading

Politics

BARR: Russia and Ukraine Conspiracy Theories to Be Examined by Network of Prosecutors

AG Barr is taking the Deep State out of the picture by casting a wide net here.

Published

on

In modern American political history, there isn’t much that compares to the bizarre judicial circumstances endured by President Donald Trump.

The New York City business mogul entered the White House already under duress.  There was a “resistance” forming beneath him, as both the liberal left and the Washington elite worried about their future.  For the Democrats’ base, there were concerns that Trump’s bombast would be the spearhead that finally plunged hard-right conservatism into the soft flesh of America.  For the DC Deep State, there were concerns that their cushy way of life was going to go bye-bye when the thrifty CEO-in-Chief waltzed into the Oval Office.

The backlash that President Trump has been bearing the brunt of has taken many forms, including two prevailing conspiracy theories that the Commander in Chief colluded with or extorted a foreign nation in order to rise to, and stay in, power.  These hyperbolic hypotheses led to a number of all-consuming investigations that brought Washington to its knees for months at a time.

Now, the Attorney General wants some answers as to why, and he’s taking the job out of The Beltway.

Attorney General Bill Barr has tapped a growing number of federal prosecutors across the country to review high-profile Russia probes involving Trump associates and consider emerging allegations tied to Ukraine, in a bold but risky move that comes as he faces mounting criticism and even resignation calls from congressional Democrats who allege he’s protecting the president.

On Friday, Fox News reported that Barr appointed Jeff Jensen, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri, to review the case of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. Justice Department officials told Fox News Jensen would be working hand-in-hand with Brandon Van Grack, the lead prosecutor in the case. It marked the latest example of Barr bringing on a federal prosecutor to examine a politically charged case.

Once again, the traditional Washington power structure is being cast aside by the Trump administration, reinforcing the drain the swamp ethos of this newly invigorated presidency.

Continue Reading

Politics

Impeachment Lawyer Claims Proof That Soros Used Obama to Spy

As this story unfolds, the world may finally get a peek behind the curtain at the ‘great and powerful’ Soros.

Published

on

When we find ourselves watching television shows like House of Cards or The West Wing, we are bombarded with wild and crazy storylines from deep within the Washington power structure that are meant for entertainment purposes only.  There are torrid affairs, backdoor deals, and any number of nefarious goings-on that keep us hooked on the drama.

But, in reality, DC likes to downplay these sorts of shenanigans, insisting that politics is more about the mundane ins-and-outs of procedural government than it is about puppeteers, oligarchies, and the illuminati.

Every now and then, however, a story does come to light that seems to push the idea of a seedy underbelly in the world’s elite circles.  This week, that tale involves liberal boogeyman George Soros and Democratic darling President Barack Obama.

Harvard Law School professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz told Breitbart News Sunday this weekend that billionaire left-wing financier George Soros told then-President Barack Obama to investigate someone.

Dershowitz would not identify who, precisely, the target of the investigation was, but said that the name would soon emerge in in a lawsuit that had yet to be filed.

The admission took the radio host by surprise.

The revelation was so startling that this host had to double-check:

Q: But let me just ask you — you said that George Soros asked Barack Obama to have his Justice Department investigate somebody?

Dershowitz: We’re — that’s going to come out in a lawsuit in the near future. Yeah

Q: Wow, well, we look forward to hearing more about that new.

Dershowitz: That’s not unusual. That is not unusual. People whisper to presidents all the time. Presidents whisper to [the] Justice Department all the time. It’s very common. It’s wrong, whoever does it, but it’s common, and we shouldn’t think that it’s unique to any particular president. I have in my possession the actual 302 form [an FBI record of an interview], which documents this issue, and it will, at the right time, come out. But I’m not free to disclose it now because it’s a case that’s not yet been filed.

This news will certainly unsettle the conspiracy-minded among us, who have long considered Soros to be a globalist puppeteer of the highest order.

Continue Reading

Politics

The ‘Terminator’ Thanks Star of ‘The Apprentice’ for Cleaning Up Cali’s Homeless Problem

Can you imagine trying to convince someone from the 1990’s that this would be the political reality of 2020?

Published

on

There are plenty of wacky beliefs out there in cyberspace, especially if you’re familiar with the hive mind of Reddit and other fringe internet communities.

There are conspiracies available for perusal on any subject you’d like, from Tupac Shakur’s death to the very nature of existence itself.  There are doomsday prediction threads, and those who believe that we’ve already lived through a silent cataclysm that altered our very reality.

Heck, there are even folks who believe that the large Hadron collider’s work could have changed the total weight of the universe, thus sending us ever so slightly into a parallel dimension where The Bearenstain Bears were actually The Berenstein Bears.

Of course, there’s no proof of this anywhere to be found here in the real world.  No, down here on planet earth, a bodybuilder-turned-movie star is thanking a President with a Hollywood Walk of Fame star for tackling California’s homeless problem.

Actor and former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger thanked President Donald Trump and Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Ben Carson for taking part in a homelessness summit and helping the state with the chronic problem of homelessness in the state.

“Everyone knows @realDonaldTrump & I have our disagreements,” Schwarzenegger said on Thursday. “But I want to thank you for sending @SecretaryCarson to our homelessness summit. We’ll only solve this if everyone works together. This issue is bigger than all of us. Now it’s time for action.”

This is the sort of headline that would be unimaginable to Americans in the 1990’s, or even the early 2000’s.

Of course, there are also conspiracy theories about this, saying that the 2012 “doomsday” was actually the shift into this strange new reality…

Continue Reading

Opinion

Porn Star’s Lawyer Faces 42 Years in Jail After Conviction in Nike Extortion Scheme

This is far from the end of his legal trouble, however.

Published

on

Given the sheer amount of scandal that the Democrats have attempted to pin on President Trump, it can be easy to lost track of the host of characters involved in these shenanigans.

For instance, in what was one of the first real controversies of the President’s first term, aging adult film actress Stormy Daniels attempted to ride Trump’s coattails into the mainstream by dredging up a story about “hush money” payments made to her by Michael Cohen, Trump’s lawyer.

At the head of Daniels’ legal team was Michael Avenatti – the sort of television lawyer that you envision when someone says the words “television lawyer”.  Avenatti was also along for the ride, and turned himself into a bit of a star during the scandal.  This must have gotten to his head because, the next thing you know, Mikey Avenatti is arrested on charges of attempting to extort sneaker giant Nike for millions of dollars.

This week, the one-time regular on the nightly news shows has been found guilty, and faces decades behind bars.

Michael Avenatti, a lawyer who gained fame by representing a porn star in lawsuits against President Donald Trump, was convicted Friday of trying to extort sportswear giant Nike.

The verdict was returned Friday by a Manhattan federal jury after it deliberated charges of attempted extortion and honest services fraud in what prosecutors say was an attempt by Avenatti to extort up to $25 million from Nike with threats to otherwise harm it. The charges carry a combined potential penalty of 42 years in prison.

Avenatti will be back in the courtroom come April as well, as he is being charged with defrauding the aforementioned Daniels out of book proceeds after the porn star penned a tawdry tome about her life and experiences around Donald Trump.

Continue Reading

Politics

AG Barr Jumps into General Flynn Case, Reportedly Assigning Special Prosecutor

Prosecutors in the case appear to be attempting to sweep the case under the rug, but the DOJ is telling them “not so fast”.

Published

on

Attorney General Bill Barr has had a fairly exciting week, but perhaps he wishes that he hadn’t.

Barr’s Department of Justice piqued the rage of the Democratic Party this week, after reevaluating the sentencing guidelines for Roger Stone, longtime pal of President Trump.  The move came in the hours after a tweet by the Commander in Chief in which Trump chided the judge in the case for considering a maximum sentence of nine years in jail for Stone, who was convicted of lying to Congress during the RussiaGate conspiracy theory investigation.

Just a few days later, Barr stated in an interview that it would behoove him to have the President only privately share such concerns in the future – something that Trump did not respond too kindly to.

New reports out of DC now indicate that the DOJ is going to involve themselves in yet another of the RussiaGate cases, this time in order to set the record straight in the case of General Michael Flynn, who is accused of lying to the FBI during the same RussiaGate probe.

The New York Times is reporting that attorney general Barr has assigned an outside prosecutor to “scrutinize the criminal case” against Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser.

“The review is highly unusual and could trigger more accusations of political interference by top Justice Department officials into the work of career prosecutors.

“Mr. Barr has also installed a handful of outside prosecutors to broadly review the handling of other politically sensitive national-security cases in the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington, the people said. The team includes at least one prosecutor from the office of the United States attorney in St. Louis, Jeff Jensen, who is handling the Flynn matter, as well as prosecutors from the office of the deputy attorney general, Jeffrey A. Rosen.”

This comes less than an hour after news broke that the DOJ would not pursue criminal charges against McCabe.

Flynn has consistently maintained that his interview with the FBI was not conducted properly, and is currently attempting to withdraw his earlier guilty plea.  Prosecutors in the case are attempting to block the defendant’s maneuver, in an effort that some believe could be an attempt to sweep the case under the rug.

Continue Reading

Politics

Flynn Prosecutor Van Grack Seeks to Dismiss Decorated General’s Plea Change

This maneuver certainly has the appearance of crooked cops telling each other to ‘shovel faster’.

Published

on

The case against General Michael Flynn has always been a flimsy one, at best, and a gross miscarriage of justice at worst.

Flynn was forcefully entangled into the wide-ranging net of “RussiaGate” months ago, thanks to a peculiar series of events surrounding a conversation he had with the FBI.  The case against General Flynn was built around the idea that Flynn had lied to the Bureau, but Flynn’s team has consistently sought to prove that his conversations with investigators were not held in accordance with the law.

In other words:  There is a very real concern that Flynn was devilishly caught by crooked cops.

Now, as Flynn seeks to withdraw his guilty plea, the prosecutors responsible for this mess are attempting to save face by attacking the decorated veteran.

Prosecutors wrote in a new court filing on Wednesday that federal Judge Emmet Sullivan should deny Flynn’s request to change his 2017 guilty plea to not guilty.
Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his conversations with the then-Russian ambassador in the early days of the Trump administration. He now says he’s innocent, is attempting to avoid being sentenced and claims investigators acted inappropriately to force him into a plea deal.
Prosecutors from the DC US Attorney’s Office and an alum of special counsel Robert Mueller’s team who now oversees federal prosecutions of foreign lobbying cases make clear in the latest Flynn filing that they are not softening their position toward him. They also defend their work in cutting his deal, which Flynn has tried to claim as misconduct.
The prosecutors issued a limp statement on the matter as well.
“The defendant does not identify government misconduct in this case, and certainly not conduct that is ‘outrageous’ or ‘grossly shocking,’ ” prosecutors Brandon Van Grack and Jocelyn Ballantine wrote in the filing Wednesday, which is also signed by recently appointed DC US Attorney Tim Shea.
Michael Flynn’s sentencing has been indefinitely postponed in order for lawyers on both sides to iron out evidentiary disagreements before proceeding.
Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Become an insider


Best of the Month

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!

Send this to a friend