Your support needed: Stop the sale of assault weapons now. SANDY HOOK PROMISE.

 

David,

The shooter who murdered my sweet little Daniel took an assault rifle and ten 30-round gun magazines with him into Sandy Hook Elementary that day. He was able to fire 154 bullets in less than five minutes. In the blink of an eye, Daniel, 19 other children and six educators were gone forever.

But when the shooter at Sandy Hook paused to reload, 11 children were able to escape. If he had a less lethal firearm and fewer bullets in each magazine that day, maybe my son and others would have survived.

These semi-automatic rifles are military-style firearms designed to kill people quickly with little effort, and they’ve been used again and again to carry out our country’s deadliest mass shootings, like in Sandy Hook, Parkland, Uvalde, and Nashville.

That’s why I’m turning to you for help today: The U.S. Senate has the power to limit access to these military-style weapons and large-capacity magazines. There are solutions to reduce mass shootings and save lives. We’re gathering 100,000 signatures to demand lawmakers pass legislation before more lives are senselessly taken. Please, will you add your signature now?

Sign the petition now and urge the Senate to take action to stop the sale of the most lethal semi-automatic firearms and large-scale capacity magazines.

Sign the Petition

We cannot accept another moment of inaction. In 2023, there were 656 mass shootings – and every minute lawmakers fail to stop the sale of these weapons of war, more children’s lives are at risk.

Your action today will help save lives, and I’m so grateful. You’re also helping me honor Daniel’s too-short life – and every life taken by gun violence. With your support, we’ll continue to make real, meaningful change that will protect other children.

Mark Barden (Daniel's father)

Donate

BREAKING DOWN THE MUELLER REPORT...ONE STEP AT A TIME. PT 1.

 THE FOLLOWING IS MY PERSONAL REVIEW OF THE FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THE MUELLER REPORT. GIVEN ITS EXTENSIVE LENGTH, I WILL ATTEMPT TO BREAK IT DOWN SECTION BY SECTION. (IT'S OVER 400 PAGES.) THE ANALYSIS WILL ATTEMPT TO STICK TO THE MOST PERTINENT POINTS, ADDRESSING WHAT I FEEL TO BE THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES IN TERMS OF A LASTING IMPACT ON OUR LEGAL SYSTEM, AND THE DANGEROUS PRECEDENTS BEING SET BY IGNORING OR DENYING CONCLUSIONS THAT CAN BE REASONABLY DEDUCED OR INFERRED FROM THE DATA.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME 1.

In a very telling and dramatic way, this section begins with the following Statement:

"The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion..."

This is an unqualified conclusion that tells us that the RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT had an active role in attempting to influence and determine the outcome of the 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. It does not say "...could have interfered..." or "...may have interfered...", it's a direct accusation that the MUELLER REPORT MAKES, arrived at by the evidence that was uncovered.

Further on, the following is stated in the report.

"As set forth in detail in this report, the Special Counsel's investigation established that Russia interfere~ in the 2016 presidential election principally through two operations. First, a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Second, a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations against entities, employees, and volunteers working on the Clinton Campaign and then released stolen documents." 

Part of what was uncovered, and prompted the FBI to begin an investigation into possible TRUMP CAMPAIGN coordination with the RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT in its activities, is the following taken from the REPORT:

"...a foreign government contacted the FBI about a May 2016 encounter with Trump Campaign foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos. Papadopoulos had suggested to a representative of that foreign government that the Trump Campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton."

What is interesting about this revelation, because it was a major reason that the FBI began its initial 
investigation into possible ties between the RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT and the TRUMP CAMPAIGN, was the fact that it became known to the FBI from an outside source, and not from any member of the TRUMP CAMPAIGN. 

TO BE CONTINUED...

THIS PAST ARTICLE TAKES ON MORE SIGNIFICANCE: THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: LETTING THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN, AND THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT, OFF THE HOOK.

 The Special Counsel defined "coordination" as an "agreement-tacit or express-between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference."

IF THIS IS THE ONLY DEFINITION USED, THE SPECIAL COUNSELS REPORT CLEARS UP NOTHING AND OPENS
UP SOME DISTURBING POSSIBILITIES.

HOW SO?

IF WE ACCEPT THAT THE ABOVE DEFINITION IS THE 
SOLE MEASUREMENT FOR PROSECUTION, IT LEAVES US WITH  THE FOLLOWING POSSIBLE SCENARIOS:

SCENARIO #1- A RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT OPERATIVE ENLISTS A TRUMP CAMPAIGN WORKER WITH A PLAN TO AID DONALD TRUMP, BY GATHERING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION THAT IS ANECDOTAL IN NATURE, AND FULL OF INNUENDO AND UNSUBSTANTIATED INFORMATION.

SCENARIO #2- A TRUMP ELECTION OFFICIAL APPROACHES A RUSSIAN NATIONAL,WHO CONDUCTS BUSINESS IN THE U.S. THE REASON? HE ASKS THE BUSINESSMAN IF HE COULD OBTAIN "SPECIAL INFORMATION" THAT WOULD AID DONALD TRUMP IN WINNING THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.

THESE ARE EXAMPLES, NOT ACCUSATIONS. THE POINT IS THIS: IF SCENARIOS LIKE THIS, OR OTHER SIMILAR ONES DID OCCUR, NO LEGAL ACTION WOULD BE TAKEN BY THE SPECIAL COUNSEL. WHY? BECAUSE IN NEITHER CASE WAS THE DEFINITION OF PROSECUTORIAL CONDUCT MET.

REMEMBER, IN THE ABOVE DEFINITION, THE "TRUMP CAMPAIGN," AND THE "RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT" HAD TO
BOTH BE INVOLVED, NOT JUST ONE. THE EXAMPLES OF A TRUMP CAMPAIGN WORKER, OR A RUSSIAN BUSINESSMAN,
SHOW US THAT "COLLUSION," OR "ELECTION INTERFERENCE" COULD OCCUR. HOWEVER, THE CONCLUSION OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN BEING INNOCENT OF SUCH ACCUSATIONS, AS THE SUMMARY LETTER IMPLIES, WOULD BE VALID, EVEN IF CRIMINAL ACTS WERE PRESENT IN BOTH SCENARIOS.

THE CONCLUSION IS SIMPLY THIS: THE DEFINITION USED BY THE MUELLER COMMITTEE IS SO NARROW, WHEN REFERRING TO "COORDINATION" TO VIOLATE ELECTION LAW(S), THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN, THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT, AND JUST ABOUT ANYONE ELSE COULD HAVE COMMITTED ACTS OF "CONSPIRACY" OR "ELECTION INTERFERENCE", BUT WOULD NOT BE CHARGED UNLESS THERE WAS A FORMAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TWO. 

THIS DOES NOT EXCLUDE AGENTS OF ONE, OR BOTH, ACTING INDEPENDENTLY WITHOUT THE "OFFICIAL " APPROVAL OF THE LEADESHIP. IN FACT, AGENTS OF ONE OR BOTH COULD HAVE BEEN "ENCOURAGED" TO ACT IN A CERTAIN MANNER TO BENEFIT THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN, BUT WITHOUT AN ACKNOWLEDGED AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE "OFFICIAL LEADERSHIP," NO ONE COULD BE CHARGED CRIMINALLY. THIS EXTREMELY NARROW DEFINITION ESSENTIALLY MADE "CONSPIRACY", "COORDINATION", OR "ELECTION INTERFERENCE" PERFECTLY LEGAL.

BLAST FROM THE PAST: HUMILIATION TELEVISION; REALITY TV AND "JUSTICE FOR ALL."

 

 When you are watching Reality Television that is filmed in a courtroom setting, remember one thing;  In no way, shape or form is this a legitimate and true to life depiction of civil proceedings that are part of the U.S. Legal System.

To begin with, the presiding individual has no legal authority, they are playing the role of judge.

( Yes, they may have been a legitimate court official in the past, but not in this setting.)  Many times their manner, vocabulary and rulings are so outrageous, that if it had been done while sitting on the bench, it could have been grounds for censure or removal from office.  Their tough love search for truth is a sham, that often borders on the ludicrous.  Dialogue that includes name calling, ridicule and personal insults puts this make believe setting on the same intellectual level as a grade school playground. 

Oh, by the way, the Bailiffs are also fake.  No real authority, just window dressing. (Although, in the past, they may have held such a position in an official capacity.)

The cases are researched by staffers, and include suggestions sent in by viewers who may be involved in an actual civil case currently pending.

Here are a few more things that differentiate Reality Court T.V., from an actual court of law;

-  The Plaintiff and Defendant must sign an ARBITRATION AGREEMENT. This binds them both to accept the judgment, and to not litigate it further. ( Except in the rare case where it is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.)   

-  Both sides are usually paid an appearance fee.  In addition,  travel expenses are paid, and a daily stipend may be given to both sides.

-  Any judgments are paid from a fund set up by the producers, not from either party involved in the lawsuit. 

-  There have been accusations of contrived and scripted cases, that were either partially or totally made up fiction.  Care to guess what would happen if this was attempted in a true court of law, where both sides are trying to DEFRAUD THE COURT?  In the U.S. it is called a FELONY.

In the end, Reality Courtroom Television is just another example of  mind numbing and tasteless programming, from a genre that constantly looks for new ideas to pollute the airways.  All in the name of entertainment.