Tag Archives: rights

Lies of Progressive-Democrats

Posted on by
Reply

Here’s another example.

Colorado’s Office of Economic Development and International Trade, plans to hand out Wuhan Virus relief funds (which the State styles “COVID-19” relief funds) to businesses based on the race of the business’ owners. Stephen Collins, Resort Meeting Source owner and represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation, is suing the State over that.

Federal Judge William Martinez issued a temporary restraining order barring the OEDIT from acting on the discriminatory release of funds pending final adjudication of the matter in his court.

[H]e found that Collins was likely to prevail in the lawsuit because the Colorado law at issue “expressly requires OEDIT to prioritize minority-owned businesses in distributing grants under the Disproportionately Impacted Business Grant Program” and because “the process for qualifying as a disproportionately impacted business differs for minority-owned and non-minority-owned businesses.”

The lie(s):

OEDIT…forward[ed] two legal documents to Fox News. The office filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit on Wednesday, claiming that “race played no role in OEDIT’s funding decisions.”
OEDIT also filed a declaration from Michael Landes, director of OEDIT’s Opportunity Zone Program. Landes claimed that racial preferences will only come into account after all other criteria have been adjudicated.

[R]ace played no role—OEDIT is calling the judge a liar, or OEDIT is violating the State’s law requiring exactly that.

[R]acial preferences will only come into account after….  Landes calls himself a liar: either race played no role or it played a role after all other criteria. Landes calls himself a liar a second time: racial preferences will only come into account after—either racial preferences are being acted on, or they are not. When they’re being acted on doesn’t matter.

Inconsistent, or…?

Posted on by
Reply

Have vaccine proof, will travel.

The Biden administration plans to lift travel restrictions for international travelers…who will need to be fully vaccinated and show proof of vaccination.

No, it’s duplicitous of the Biden-Harris administration. Illegal aliens can stream across the border with or without vaccination, but honest travelers are restricted to proof of vaccination.

Why Bring in the Feds?

Posted on by
Reply

There was a (the latest, anyway) very serious…bad deed…in Georgia’s Fulton County election facility: some 300 hundred voter registration applications were shredded, just three weeks prior to the upcoming county municipal elections. Two election workers have been fired over the incident.

Yet Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger wants a Federal Department of Justice investigation.

The Department of Justice needs to take a long look at what Fulton County is doing and how their leadership disenfranchises Fulton voters through incompetence and malfeasance.

Never mind that elections, including elections for Federal office, are State-run affairs, and so the Federal government has no role, at this stage, in investigating election miscreancies, and it has less than no role in being the default investigator of States’ election miscreancies.

Why does Raffensberger have so little confidence in the Georgia Bureau of Investigation? Why does he place so much stock in the Feds’ FBI? Why does he trust the Merrick Garland-run DoJ?

Anti-Business Anti-Freedom Left Strikes Again

Posted on by
Reply

Their latest assault comes from left-of-the-west-coast Los Angeles.

The city of Los Angeles will begin requiring most people to provide proof of full COVID-19 vaccination before entering a wide variety of indoor businesses including salons, restaurants, gyms, museums, and theaters.

Alternatively, those with medical conditions that do not allow them to be vaccinated, or those with sincerely held religious beliefs that prevent them from being vaccinated, will be allowed to enter on presentment of a negative Wuhan Virus test done within the prior 72 hours (whose definition of “sincerely held?”). Never mind that the cost of such a test starts at $20 and that the median cost is $127. And you thought the costs at the theater concession counter were high. How’s that blowout or updo at the salon sound now? The testing requirement looks like it’s going to swamp that dinner out you thought you were going to enjoy with the family.

Notice, too, that many—most?—of the businesses in these categories are small businesses, mom-and-pop businesses, low margin businesses.

This isn’t only an assault on American businesses and American business owners, though: it’s also an assault on Americans qua Americans.

It’s a demand that we citizens give up our medical privacy and proclaim to the world what our medical status is, using only the Wuhan Virus situation—which is on the wane—as an initial step to expose all of our medical privacy.

It’s more than that, even. This vaccine mandate, and others like it, are a demand that we citizens give up an essential liberty—a liberty over which we’ve already fought one civil war—our control over our own bodies. It’s an essential liberty that the Left and its Progressive-Democratic Party are trying to take away from all of us this time, not just a minority which they held and hold in contempt.

“Threats of Violence”

Posted on by
Reply

Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, under [last week’s Senate hearing’s] questioning from [Senator Josh, (R, MO)] Hawley, said the memo is only about violence and threats of violence, and it’s the role of the FBI address those threats.

And

Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke said in a separate hearing that the Justice Department does not see parents as a threat and that the attorney general’s memo is only focused on threats and intimidation.

The FBI’s claimed responsibility in this context is to

help protect you, your children, your communities, and your businesses from the most dangerous threats facing our nation—from international and domestic terrorists….

To help. Help whom? State and local police forces, acting within a State’s police powers, their authority to enforce law, are fully capable of handling “threats and intimidation;” they might need help only against domestic terrorism.

To help. Emphasis on “help.” The FBI’s claimed responsibility also is to help State and local law enforcement agencies deal with violence, not to do for the State and locals, or dictate to them, or to usurp their responsibilities.

But, if we can take Clarke’s and Monaco’s claims at face value, the only ones talking about domestic terrorism or domestic terrorists are the worthies of the National School Boards Association. Specifically, neither DoJ nor the FBI are talking about domestic terrorism, either in the Garland Memo or in those Senate hearing testimonies. Thus, there is no reason, by Garland’s own memo or those testimonies, for the FBI’s presence in these matters: with no domestic terrorism involved, there’s nothing for which the FBI need assist State and local law enforcement.

AG Merrick Garland’s memo is reprehensible, and dangerous to liberty, not because it focuses on threats of violence (which is bad enough FBI interference)—stipulate, arguendo, that that insistence is accurate—but because it exists.

Garland’s memo is reprehensible and dangerous to liberty because it is a naked attempt to usurp those States’ police powers and law enforcement capacities and arrogate them to the Federal government’s national police.