During an outdoor town hall in New Hampshire on Friday, a man asked 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) how she will “diminish the mentally retarded actions” of President Trump. As the audience laughed and cheered, Harris laughed and responded “Well said. Well said. I plan to win this election, I’ll tell you that.”
Using "retarded" as a slur and an insult is never, EVER "well said", @KamalaHarris, no matter who it's against and no matter the larger point being made. It's ALWAYS a betrayal of the disability community.
— Kendally Brown (@kendallybrown) September 7, 2019
Kamala Harris was then asked about the comment on Saturday by CBS News’ Caitlin Huey-Burns, Harris replied: “It’s an incredibly offensive term, and as someone who has a long-standing relationship of advocacy for our disability community – in fact, I have a whole policy proposal on it that I have been working on for quite some time that we rolled out weeks ago – it’s offensive, and you would think that in the year 2019, people would have a much better understanding of how hurtful a term like that can be, but also the history behind it, which is a history of really ignoring the needs and the realities and the capacity of our disability community.”
Huey-Burns then asked: “You didn’t correct him though. Did you hear him?”
And Harris responded: “I heard him talk about the other stuff, and then that came later, and it was not something that I really heard or processed or, you know, in any way condone, that’s for sure.”
When my staff played the video from my town hall yesterday, it was upsetting. I didn’t hear the words the man used in that moment, but if I had I would’ve stopped and corrected him. I’m sorry. That word and others like it aren’t acceptable. Ever. https://t.co/mNmo1hyNpW
— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) September 7, 2019
Obviously lying, Harris claims she “didn’t hear the words the man used,” but somehow heard everything else. She practically endorsed the man’s use of the word “retard,” saying “well said” as the audience cheered him on and laughed.
Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke warned the opponents of his recent proposal to have government seizure of firearms from U.S. citizens, claiming that opponents warning the seizure could lead to violence is self-fulfilling.
“I just, I think that kind of language and rhetoric is not helpful,” O’Rourke told The Daily Beast. “It becomes self-fulfilling — you have people on TV, who are almost giving you permission to be violent and saying ‘you know, this is, this is going to happen.'”
While co-hosting “The View,” Meghan McCain expressed concern that a federal seizure of firearms could lead to violent responses from gun owners, who do not want to give up their right to self-defense.
“The AR-15 is by far the most popular gun in America,” McCain said on the show. “If you’re talking about going and taking people’s guns away from them, there’s going to be a lot of violence.”
O’Rourke specifically referred to McCain’s remarks while reporting to The Daily Beast.
“When someone says ‘if you do this, then this will happen,’ [it’s] almost as though that’s a natural response,” O’Rourke claimed. “Or maybe even something that should happen or deserves to happen.”
“When I think the response should be: ‘We’re doing nothing now and we’re seeing people slaughtered in their schools, at work, at a Walmart, in a synagogue, in a church, at a concert,’ he continued. “There is violence right now and it is horrifying and it is terrifying and it is terrorizing. … We should be worried about that kind of violence right now.”
You will often see Democrats claim “we’re doing nothing now,” as O’Rourke did, and, therefore, the government needs to “do something.” But, at the lowest estimates there are already 300 relevant gun laws on the federal and state level. That number jumps up to between 9,000 and 20,000 laws when local government laws are taken into account. Clearly, the government has already legislated a lot. Maybe the “something” the government should be doing is repealing gun laws to allow citizens to better and more easily defend themselves?
According to the Crime Prevention Research Center, data indicates that countries with high rates of gun ownership tend to have lower homicide rates. Additionally, homicide rates and gun homicide rates rose sharply in Great Britain in the years following strict gun control measures, while most other countries in the developed world saw a decrease in these rates. Further, homicide rates in Ireland also spiked after the country’s 1972 firearm seizure.
Former Vice President and Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden appeared to have a blood vessel burst in his left eye during CNN’s town hall on climate change.
According to WebMD, a broken blood vessel in the eye, also known as a subconjunctival hemorrhage, can be caused by multiple things, including high blood pressure and excessive straining.
The Washington Examiner explains how “Biden, 76, has long been plagued by health issues. In 1988, he suffered an aneurysm that burst and required him to undergo emergency surgery. The then-senator was so close to death that a Catholic priest began preparing to administer the sacrament of last rites.
Months later, surgeons clipped a second aneurysm before it burst. Biden then took a seven-month leave from the Senate following the surgery.”
An aneurysm bursting is a blood vessel bursting, a blood vessel bursting is what caused the blood to fill his eye. Biden is likely dealing with severe health issues that he needs to get taken care of. Brain aneurysms and subconjunctival hemorrhages very often have the same cause. But, as sad as it is, it doesn’t really matter if Biden is alive or dead, the DNC establishment would most likely push him forward in the polls.
Jussie Smollett, former actor in the TV series “Empire,” is making another attempt to get the city lawsuit against him thrown out of federal court before trial. Michael Sneed of the Chicago Sun-Times learned exclusively on Tuesday night that Smollett’s attorneys filed a motion in response to the city’s claim that Smollett should pay the city more than $130,000 to cover police overtime and other costs.
According to Sneed, “The city claims the costs were incurred in connection with an investigation into a report he filed claiming he was the victim of a racist and homophobic attack in River North. Police later charged Smollett with staging the attack.”
Sneed outlines the argument of Smollett’s attorneys: ““My client from the beginning has maintained his innocence and disputed the city’s allegations,” said William J. Quinlan, of The Quinlan Law Firm, who filed the motion…
But the latest court filing contends even if Smollett did make a false report, there is no way the city can assert he would have known the city would investigate — and investigate it to the extent cops did.
“We contend the city is wrong,” Quinlan said of the city’s assertion that Smollett should have known the city would spend nearly 2,000 hours investigating. “ … The mere fact somebody filed a police report doesn’t presume the investigation will be done and certainly not to the extent of what the city is claiming.””
To summarize, if Smollett falsely reported a hate crime and staged an attack, he does not believe he is responsible for the costs of the investigation. Obviously, this does not make any sense. Assuming Smollett falsely reported a hate crime and staged the attack, he should be solely and fully responsible for the costs of the investigation, since the investigation would not have happened without his dishonest fabrication of events.
Two members of “The Squad,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), have defended terrorists from antifa and offered to help bail them out of jail after their assaults on police officers at this past weekend’s straight pride parade in Boston.
As The Daily Wire described, “On Saturday, about 200 people participated in a much-publicized and much-maligned “straight pride” parade in Boston put on by a group calling itself “Super Happy Fun America.” There to greet them were about five times as many “anti-fascist” counter-protesters ready to “protect” the city from the “homophobic” paraders. By the end of the day, the Boston police arrested 36 people, including “activists” who came armed with dangerous weapons and who proved they were prepared to get rough, even with police. In response, two members of the “Squad” of far-left freshmen Democratic congresswomen urged their supporters to donate to help bail out the “allies & accomplices” who “put themselves on the line protecting the Boston community.””
The Boston Herald reported a list of 36 arrests from the event, including 9 suspects with assault and battery of a police officer, 5 charged with assault by means of a dangerous weapon or carrying a dangerous weapon, and many more arrested for either disorderly conduct and/or resisting arrest. It is believed the assault and battery of a police officer charges are on antifa terrorists. The two squad members responded on Twitter:
“Join me right now in making a contribution,” tweeted Rep. Ayanna Pressley, linking to a fundraising page. “TY to the allies & accomplices who stood in the gap & laid their bodies on the line today in affront #LGBT hate march. To everyone feeling unseen & vulnerable today…we got you. Equitable outrage. Our destinies & freedoms are tied.”
“One way to support the local LGBTQ community impacted by Boston’s white supremacist parade?” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez tweeted. “Contribute to the Bail Fund for the activists who put themselves on the line protecting the Boston”