People & Groups Funding Student Protests & Massive War On Our Rights

[M]

I found this posted on Twitter by Navstadt;

Guess Who's Funding the 'Student' Gun Control Movement? https://constitution.com/guess-whos-funding-anti-gun-student-movement/ … via @ConstitutionNat Read all of the article and find out the despicable truth. So, who’s bankrolling the lefty kids from Parkland, Florida? It’s a veritable “Who’s Who” of leftwing money from Michael Bloomberg, to George Soros, to the baby killers at Planned Parenthood. Everytown, Giffords, Move On, Planned Parenthood, and the Women’s March LA =Logistics Everytown and Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America,Everytown for Gun Safety — bankrolled mostly by Michael Bloomberg.MoveOn-George Soros,A-list celebrities including Oprah, George and Amal Clooney, Steven Spielberg, and Jeffrey Katzenberg,Planned Parenthood,are organizing.

And this is just the tip of the iceberg, folks.The activist left has been bankrolling these children since the day after the shooting, when Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) arrived on the scene in Parkland and realized there were easy political points to win. THIS IS AN OUTRAGE.

 Michael Bloomberg’s groups and the Women’s March working on the upcoming March For Our Lives, MoveOn.org doing social media promotion & (potentially) march logistics, and training for student activists provided by FEDERALLY FUNDED Planned Parenthood=OUR TAX DOLLARS.

Here's the PDF of the collaborative school agreement PDF https://www.browardprevention.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Fully-...

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/02/28/obama_a...

Is the information on the School and runcie where Cruz was not listed per agreement.Despite committing a string of arrestable offenses on campus before the Florida school shooting, Nikolas Cruz was able to escape the attention of law enforcement, pass a background check and purchase the weapon he used to slaughter three staff members and 14 fellow students because of Obama administration efforts to make school discipline more lenient. “He had a clean record, so alarm bells didn’t go off when they looked him up in the system,” veteran FBI agent Michael Biasello told RCI. “He probably wouldn’t have been able to buy the murder weapon if the school had referred him to law enforcement."  The new policy resulted from an Obama administration effort begun in 2011 to keep students in school and improve racial outcomes (timeline here  https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/03/02/broward...), and came against a backdrop of other efforts to rein in perceived excesses in "zero tolerance" discipline policies, including in ( Florida. http://www.djj.state.fl.us/news/press-releases/press-release-detail...)  Broward school Superintendent Robert W. Runcie – a Chicagoan and Harvard graduate with ( close ties  http://www.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=3758419) to President Obama and his Education Department – signed an agreement with the county sheriff and other local jurisdictions to trade cops for counseling. Students charged with various misdemeanors, including assault, would now be disciplined through ( participation  https://www.browardprevention.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/SY-201... in “healing circles,” obstacle courses and other “self-esteem building” exercises.

If you read through the article & follow the successive links, you'll see a correlation between the serial shooter & the various programs and ideologies that let him slip through the cracks in the system that failed to prevent him from getting the gun."ROOT CAUSES"

More information about the massive movement by the millionaire crowd and the use of our tax dollars to fund this latest attack on the Constitution. I believe they truly don't give a damn about the students and are just using them to promote their base agendas.

AFT, as well as the growing contingent of organizations backing the student-led march, are working to cultivate and build upon the movement after the rally.After that, she says the goal is to carry that momentum until November — with some of the students already using the hashtag #VoteThemOut.

Follow through on the article and the successive articles by following all the links they contain, and you will see just how massive a movement by the organizations and their financial/political backers is being waged against our rights. I DARE YOU TO LEARN ABOUT IT!!!

It's Imperative the articles at; https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/03/paper-ben-rhodes-establishing-shadow-national-security-council/ … and https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/03/ben_rhodes_launches_a_shadow_national_security_council.html#ixzz58Xyvk2JG … be read thoroughly, and the internal links be followed to see the depth of the Anti-American "Deep State" that Obama originated on orders from his Puppet Master ( IMHO ) in the Federal Government to destroy us and eliminate Constitutional Protections guarding our Liberty.

Some combining and Grammar corrected by me W/Apologies

M

[T Amnesia]

Regarding your statement : 

You may think the 2nd only allowed flintlocks like I have heard many politicians say, and that's untrue it meant the state of the art military weapons available to the troops.

You are the very first conservative that I have ever, EVER, witnessed that actually stated that and you are absolutely correct,  in my mind anyway. 

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Sentence structure is important, and especially so when writing a document that will guide a new nation from its inception.  Most people involved in the debate completely ignore the first 13 words of the Second Amendment, and furthermore, insist it has nothing to do the meaning of the Amendment.  I would insist that "A well regulated militia" is the first thought of the sentence and the most important, with all that follows being secondary. 

The reason I think you are right, Marvin, is that back in the day, the "state" did not supply the arms.  Rather, the men brought what they had.  Therefore, to have and assemble a well regulated militia, the citizens were required to bear arms.  If they showed up without being armed, they loaded canons, carried the flag, or played the drum.

Every discussion leading up to and after the writing of this Amendment, without fail, involved state regulated militias and the standing army of the federal government, but never as an individual need or right.  Even as recently as  1939  In United States v. Miller , the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment did not protect weapon types not having a "reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia".  (emphasis added)  Do you see how I actually give you the case and didn't make you look for it?

Fast forward to today - any individual, regardless of the number and type of weapons they possess, is totally impotent against the might of the US Armed Forces and appear retarded when they state their "right" to defend themselves against the tyranny of government.  My interpretation is that the Second Amendment was written so STATES could defend themselves against the tyranny of a federal government, not individual people.  Now, don't get all up in arms (pun intended!) because I said that's why it was originally  written.  Today it is interpreted completely different and I get it.

I also understand that you believe that the lack of organized Christian prayer to the Lord Jesus Christ in public schools, along with anti-censorship laws during the 70' directly caused the downfall of our nation.  The ten commandments are not illegal and neither is personal prayer in ANY location.   I think it's the republicans' chronic inability to formulate sensible responses to social changes and an uncanny inability to govern that has destroyed the people's trust in government. Maybe I'm wrong.

 

[M]

T.

 On a different subject,here is a link to a California Political News Review you might be interested in.

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/

Here is a link to todays Ca. News Review;

https://us2.campaign-archive.com/?e=e37000a617&u=99a396202eef94...

[T Amnesia]

The California Political Review: A web site that grabs published (and copyrighted) material from other sources and posts them when they feel it fits within the scope of their agenda.  Now, you of all people, M, should know that you have to actually read and contemplate what is being presented. 

  If one just scrolled down, one would find the following text:

[T]he FBI considered any person with an outstanding arrest warrant to be a fugitive. On the other hand, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives defined a fugitive as someone who has an outstanding arrest warrant and has crossed state lines.

That disagreement was settled at the end of Obama’s second term, when the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel sided with the ATF’s interpretation. Under President Donald Trump, the DOJ defined a fugitive as a person who went to another state to dodge criminal prosecution or evade giving testimony in criminal court, and implemented the Office of Legal Counsel’s decision. The decision meant that around half a million fugitives were removed from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.  (emphasis added)

At first glance, they would have us believe that "fugitives" are more or less, felons on the run, reckless killers in search of weapons and victims.  But the vast bulk of them are merely people who have been accused of any number of traffic violations, licensing issues, and petty misdemeanors that have failed to appear in court.

Secondly, I'm quite sure that the FBI would have a way to differentiate a convicted felons not showing up for the meeting with their Parole Officer from someone who simply had a job transfer to Alabama and forgot to pay their speeding ticket before purging them from the data base.  One would hope, anyway!

Then this joke:   "Attorney General Jeff Sessions recently announced the Justice Department will “aggressively” pursue any person who lies on their background check."   

Either way - NOT INTERESTING.

No offense - it's nothing you actually wrote, Marvin.

[M]

T.

I thought you would be amused by the California Political Review since it's mostly conservative, and a counterpoint to Salon.

Fugitives are prevented from owning guns in all 50 States. At the very least Fugitive is a misdemeanor and at worst is a felony depending like you said. That is why they can't be sold firearms while a listed Fugitive.

Who is this Marvin you are referring to?

[T Amnesia]

They do collect some funny articles and give them a sinister twist!    In this day and age it's interesting to consider what people are willing to do to earn a few cents per click, isn't it?

But now, TRUMP has redefined fugitives, and one is only a FUGITIVE if there is a warrant issued for an arrest and the subject of the warrant "flees to a different state to avoid prosecution".  If the subject remains in the state where the warrant was issued, he is not a fugitive and therefore, was purged from the data base.

So, maybe the bottom line is that FUGITIVES were not purged, but rather, a half - million people are no longer defined as fugitives, and they have been purged by Trump (not Obama).

And Sessions is going to pursue Liars.

I guessed the M was for Marvin.  Maybe it's Michael.

[M]

T. 

It was Obama who ordered the purges and that shows the problem with the background checks system. If Law enforcement would actually use it as it is supposed to be used it would work much better. Along with fugitives criminals are forbidden in all 50 states unless they have been what is called rejuvenated with their rights officially through government actions.

Strangely enough I don't approve of Constitutional carry unless the people have been through training in laws and proficiency with firearms. I also believe the principles of gun safety and moral obligation with deadly force should be taught in every school from Kindergarten to whatever level of education the individual goes to.  

Those things used to be taught from Father to son and daughter and backed up by meaningful community standards. That is sorely lacking today. 

It could be Maxwell or Moe or Marvin or Melvin or Mac, too. 

[T Amnesia]

No, M, you are mistaken.

This was a disagreement that was first questioned under the GW Bush administration. The question was finally settled by the DOJ in November of 2016, the end of the Presidency of Barack Obama.  There was a memo issued from the FBI on February 15, 2017 that made the decision official and implemented the details of the decision, which is CLEARLY during the early days of the TRUMP administration.

That memo read, in part:

The Department of Justice recently reviewed the “fugitive from justice” prohibitor and the application of the prohibitor in NICS background checks. The Department determined that the Brady Act does not authorize the denial of firearm transfers under the “fugitive from justice” prohibition based on the mere existence of an outstanding arrest warrant. To comply with the Department’s determination, the FBI will implement a new policy for applying the “fugitive from justice” prohibitor. This policy will require NICS to establish that the prospective purchaser: 1) has fled the state; 2) has done so to avoid prosecution for a crime or to avoid giving testimony in a criminal proceeding; and 3) is subject to a current or imminent criminal prosecution or testimonial obligation.

It was at that time, under the Trump administration, that approximately 70,000 entries were purged, NOT 500,000, because the other 430,000 were reclassified under other prohibitors.

President Obama didn't "order" any such purge.  The DOJ made the decision and the FBI implemented it while Trump was in the White House.  Those are the indisputable facts yet I have no doubt that this web site and thousands more of the "conservative" cause will continue to repeat these false accusations.  It's tiresome. And disgusting.

[kevin kiernan]

I bet the Dems will have a registration drive at the rally this  weekend.....

[M]

What we really need is a registration drive for people on both sides that fully believe in and want to see the best for the United States instead of this partisan crap that was exacerbated by the ratification of the 17th amendment, which allowed the Senators to be free agents no longer under the control of their State Legislatures as the Founders intended, for proper and EQUAL representation of the various States in Congress. Now all the Senators on both sides represent are the agendas of their parties. Even the RINO's and DINO's only represent the agendas not the States like they should.

That petition I was speaking of is a petition to State Legislatures asking them to petition Congress for an Article V Amendment Proposal Convention. Congress is forbidden to mess up or over rule the States proposals for amendments. They are even prevented from proposing amendments of their own. Bear in mind it still takes 38 States to ratify any amendment and the main body of the Constitution can not be opened by the Article V convention.

[kevin kiernan]

M..Check this out...go to 8;45 of video...

[M]

This is how far the Cultural Marxism we know as Political Correctness has twisted the American mindset as it was designed to do. All these movements utilize the guilt factor incorporated deliberately into Political Correctness so it impacts our innate sense of supposedly fair play and integrity, when it fact it uses a propaganda technique that switches good for bad and uses twisted emotional logic instead of actual logic.