Tag Archives: Harry Reid

Feinstein’s Assault Weapons Ban goes down in defeat

ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN WON’T BE IN DEMS‘ GUN BILL

I Love it when a plan comes together.    ~ Steve~ —————-

————————————————————————————————–

feinstein

ugly_dogs_01

BY ALAN FRAM
ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP)Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has decided that a proposed assault weapons ban won’t be part of a gun control bill the Senate plans to debate next month, the sponsor of the ban said Tuesday, a decision that means the ban stands little chance of survival.

Instead, Sen. Dianne Feinstein said she will be able to offer her ban on the military-style firearms as an amendment. Feinstein is all but certain to need 60 votes from the 100-member Senate to prevail, but she faces solid Republican opposition and likely defections from some moderate Democrats.
“I very much regret it,” Feinstein, D-Calif., told reporters of Reid’s decision. “I tried my best.”

Asked about the decision, Reid, D-Nev., said he wanted to bring a gun bill to the full Senate that would have enough support to overcome any GOP attempts to prevent debate from even starting.

He said that “using the most optimistic numbers,” there were less than 40 votes for Feinstein’s ban. That is far less than the 60 votes needed to begin considering legislation, and an indication that Reid feared that including the assault weapons ban in the main guns bill would risk getting the votes needed to begin debate.

“I’m not going to try to put something on the floor that won’t succeed. I want something that will succeed. I think the worst of all worlds would be to bring to something to the floor and it dies there,” Reid said.

Feinstein, an author of the 1994 assault weapons ban that expired after a decade, said that Reid told her of the decision on Monday.

There are 53 Democrats in the Senate, plus two independents who usually vote with them.

An assault-type weapon was used in the December massacre at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., that revived gun control as a top issue in Washington. Banning those firearms was among the proposals President Barack Obama made in January in response to those slayings.

The assault weapons ban was the most controversial of the major proposals to restrict guns that have been advanced by Obama and Senate Democrats. Because of that, it had been expected that the assault weapons measure would be left out of the initial package the Senate considers, with Democrats hoping the Senate could therefore amass the strongest possible vote for the overall legislation.

Having a separate vote on assault weapons might free moderate Democratic senators facing re-election next year in Republican-leaning states to vote against the assault weapons measure, but then support the remaining overall package of gun curbs.

Gun control supporters consider a strong Senate vote important because the Republican-run House has shown little enthusiasm for most of Obama’s proposals.

Feinstein said Reid told her there will be two votes.

One would be on her assault weapons ban, which also includes a ban on ammunition magazines that carry more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The second would just be on prohibiting the high-capacity magazine clips.

Many Democrats think the ban on large-capacity magazines has a better chance of getting 60 votes than the assault weapons ban.

The Senate Judiciary Committee has approved four gun control measures this month, including Feinstein’s barring assault weapons and high capacity magazines. The others would expand required federal background checks for firearms buyers, increase federal penalties for illegal gun trafficking and boost school safety money.

© 2013 THE ASSOCIATED PRESS.

 H/T Drudge

 

Fiscal Cliff averted! And What’s wrong with this story?

The White House and congressional leaders have reached a deal to avert the fiscal cliff, a Democratic source familiar with the negotiations confirmed. The agreement includes a two-month delay of the sequester, which had been scheduled to begin on Jan. 2. President Barack Obama spoke with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi about the agreement and both leaders have signed off on it, according to the source.

Does Any one happen to see John Boehner’s name anywhere in this drivel?
~Steve~
For more information… http://www.politico.com

Why the GOP won’t challenge vote fraud

Friends and Patriots,

It’s major duct tape time ’cause you’ll need it to keep your head from exploding.

Are you ready for this?

Here we go….

There is now compelling and undeniable evidence that MAJOR vote fraud had been perpetrated in the November 2012 Election. See FOTM’s posts chronicling the extensive pervasive fraud by going to our “2012 Election” page below our FOTM masthead, and click on those post links colored dark green.

But our screaming and hollering are to no avail. No one is listening to us. Not even the Republican Party.

Here’s why….

The Republican Party made an agreement 30 years ago with the Democrat Party NOT to ensure voting integrity and NOT to pursue suspected vote fraud.

Yes. You read it correctly.

In fact, legally the GOP cannot ensure voting integrity, nor can it prevent vote fraud.

Here’s the astounding reason, which is kept from the American people.

PolitiJim writes for Gulag Bound, November 13, 2012, that during the weekly True the Vote webcast, Catherine Engelbrecht (see her photo below) related a meeting she had with Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC), asking what the GOP would do about voter integrity.  The answer?

Nothing.  They aren’t legally able to.

True the Vote’s Catherine Engelbrecht (read more about her, here)

This all goes back to a lawsuit 31 years ago, in 1981. The following is compiled from an account on The Judicial View, a legal website specializing in court decision research and alerts, and from “Democratic National Committee v Republican National Committee,” Case No. 09-4615.

In 1981, during the gubernatorial election in New Jersey (NJ), a lawsuit was brought against the RNC, the NJ Republican State Committee (RSC), and three individuals (John A. Kelly, Ronald Kaufman, and Alex Hurtado), accusing them of violating the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 1971, 1973, and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.

The lawsuit was brought by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the NJ Democratic State Committee (DSC), and two individuals (Virginia L. Peggins and Lynette Monroe).

The lawsuit alleged that:

  • The RNC and RSC targeted minority voters in New Jersey in an effort to intimidate them.
  • The RNC created a voter challenge list by mailing sample ballots to individuals in precincts with a high percentage of racial or ethnic minority registered voters. Then the RNC put the names of individuals whose postcards were returned as undeliverable on a list of voters to challenge at the polls.
  • The RNC enlisted the help of off-duty sheriffs and police officers with “National Ballot Security Task Force” armbands, to intimidate voters by standing at polling places in minority precincts during voting. Some of the officers allegedly wore firearms in a visible manner.

To settle the lawsuit, in 1982 — while Ronald Reagan was President (1981-1989) — the RNC and RSC entered into an agreement or Consent Decree, which is national in scope, limiting the RNC’s ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the court’s approval in advance. The following is what the RNC and RSC, in the Consent Decree, agreed they would do:

[I]n the future, in all states and territories of the United States:

(a) comply with all applicable state and federal laws protecting the rights of duly qualified citizens to vote for the candidate(s) of their choice;

(b) in the event that they produce or place any signs which are part of ballot security activities, cause said signs to disclose that they are authorized or sponsored by the party committees and any other committees participating with the party committees;

(c) refrain from giving any directions to or permitting their agents or employees to remove or deface any lawfully printed and placed campaign materials or signs;

(d) refrain from giving any directions to or permitting their employees to campaign within restricted polling areas or to interrogate prospective voters as to their qualifications to vote prior to their entry to a polling place;

(e) refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities in polling places or election districts where the racial or ethnic composition of such districts is a factor in the decision to conduct, or the actual conduct of, such activities there and where a purpose or significant effect of such activities is to deter qualified voters from voting; and the conduct of such activities disproportionately in or directed toward districts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations shall be considered relevant evidence of the existence of such a factor and purpose;

(f) refrain from having private personnel deputized as law enforcement personnel in connection with ballot security activities.

The RNC also agreed that the RNC, its agents, servants, and employees would be bound by the Decree, “whether acting directly or indirectly through other party committees.”

As modified in 1987, the Consent Decree defined “ballot security activities” to mean “ballot integrity, ballot security or other efforts to prevent or remedy vote fraud.”

Since 1982, that Consent Decree has been renewed every year by the original judge, Carter appointee District Judge Dickinson R. Debevoise, now 88 years old. Long retired, Debevoise comes back yearly for the sole purpose of renewing his 1982 order for another year.

U.S. District Judge Dickinson R. Debevoise

In 2010, the RNC unsuccessfully appealed “to vacate or modify” the Consent Decree in “Democratic National Committee v Republican National Committee,” Case No. 09-4615 (C.A. 3, Mar. 8, 2012). (I paid The Judicial Review $10 for the PDF of Case No. 09-4615 and uploaded the 59-page document to FOTM’s media library. To read Case No. 09-4615, click here!)

This is a summary of the appeals judge’s ruling, filed on March 8, 2012:

In 1982, the Republican National Committee (“RNC”) and the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”) entered into a consent decree (the “Decree” or “Consent Decree”), which is national in scope, limiting the RNC’s ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the court’s approval in advance. The RNC appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey denying, in part, the RNC’s Motion to Vacate or Modify the Consent Decree. Although the District Court declined to vacate the Decree, it did make modifications to the Decree. The RNC argues that the District Court abused its discretion by modifying the Decree as it did and by declining to vacate the Decree. For the following reasons, we will affirm the District Court’s judgment.

Surprise! The judge who denied the RNC’s appeal to “vacate” the 1982 Consent Decree is an Obama appointee, Judge Joseph Greenaway, Jr., of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

Judge Joseph Greenaway, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit

Guy Benson of Townhall.com points out that in last Tuesday’s election, Obama only won by 406,348 votes in 4 states:

  • Florida: 73,858
  • Ohio: 103,481
  • Virginia: 115,910
  • Colorado: 113,099

Those four states, with a collective margin of 406,348 votes for Obama, add up to 69 electoral votes. Had Romney won 407,000 or so additional votes in the right proportion in those states, he would have 275 electoral votes.

All four states showed Romney ahead in the days leading up to the election. But on November 6, Romney lost all four states by a substantial margin, all of which have precincts that inexplicably went 99% for Obama, had voter registrations that exceeded their population, and had experienced  problems with voting machines.

This election was stolen by the Democrats via vote fraud. Despite all the evidence of fraud, the Republican Party has been strangely silent about it.

Now you know why.

I’ll leave you with one last, even more disturbing thought:

The RNC and DNC made their Consent Decree 30 years ago, in 1982. The agreement in effect gives a carte blanche to the Democrat Party to commit vote fraud in every voting district across America that has, in the language of the Consent Decree, “a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations.” The term “substantial proportion” is not defined.

The Democrat Party knew this 30 years ago, more than enough time to put a plan in place to identify and groom their “perfect candidate” — in the words of Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) in 2008, a “light-skinned” black Democrat who has “no Negro dialect unless he wanted to have one.”

  • Being a black Democrat, this perfect candidate would get the support of almost all black Americans (96% in 2008!) and other racial minorities (two-thirds of Hispanics in 2008).
  • Being a “light-skinned” black with “no Negro dialect”, this perfect candidate would get the support of white Americans perpetually guilt-ridden about America’s original sin of slavery.

It doesn’t matter if this “perfect candidate” has dubious Constitutional eligibility to be president. They would see to it that his original birth certificate (if there is one) would never see the light of day. The same with his other documents — his passports, school and college records, draft registration, and medical records (so we’ll never know why Obama has that very long scar running from one side of his head, over the crown, to the other side).

Now, we understand the significance of the account Tom Fife wrote during the 2008 presidential campaign. Fife, a U.S. government contractor, claims that in 1992 while he was visiting Moscow, a woman with undying allegiance to Soviet Communism (the Soviet Union had recently collapsed, on December 31, 1991) told him that a black man named Barack, born of a white American woman and an African male, was being groomed by communists to be, and would be elected, President of the United States.

Now, we finally understand the cryptic remark made in May 2010, by Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan: “Obama was selected before he was elected.”

In 2008, this “perfect candidate” won the presidential election. And despite his many failures in his first term, he would be reelected in 2012 for a second term via massive vote fraud. But nothing would be done about the vote fraud, because of that Consent Decree signed by the RNC 30 years ago.

The Republican Party is dead — and with it, the U.S. two-party system as well — and the sooner we voters recognize that the better.

The question that remains is whether the American Republic is also dead.

UPDATE (Nov. 16, 2012):

Since I published this post yesterday, we’ve been asking each other: “What can I/we do about this?” Here are my suggestions:

1. If you are a registered Republican, QUIT! Switch your voter registration ID to non-partisan Independent.

2. Stop donating money, not even one penny, to the GOP. Tell them why.

3. Spread the word. Please send the URL of this post (
http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2012/11/15/why-the-gop-will-not-do-anything-about-vote-fraud/
) to:

  • EVERYONE on your email list.
  • Media people for whom you have email addresses.
  • Tea Party groups you know.
  • Post the link on your Facebook page.
  • Post the link as your comment on websites and blogs you visit.

4. Write your state’s attorney general and ask him/her to investigate vote fraud in your state. Click here!

UPDATE (Nov. 21, 2012):

5 days after I’d published this and 7 days after PolitiJim of GulagBound published his acount, someone in the conservative establishment media is writing about this — WND’s Bob Unruh. Click here for his article, “GOP Legally Barred From Fighting Vote Fraud”. But it’s still the sound of crickets from conservative talk radio, even though I’ve sent my post to Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, and a reader had also sent it to Mark Levin.

Just so you know: It makes no monetary difference to us how many people read this post. Fellowship of the Minds (FOTM) is an ad-free blog. We don’t make even a penny in revenue because we deliberately don’t have ads. In fact, I paid WordPress a $99 annual fee so WordPress can’t insert ads on FOTM either. All of our writers work our butts off, for no pay, as a labor of love for our country.

~Eowyn

Harry Reid in Hell

On August 23, 2012, I wrote a post asking if Reuters is turning against the POS.

What prompted my query was this photo of the teleprompter president, taken by Reuters’ Kevin Lamarque on August 21, 2012, at the POS’s campaign event at Capital University in Columbus, Ohio:

We now have yet another Reuters photo, taken by Jason Reed, this time of Dingy Harry — Senate Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) — when he spoke at the 2012 Democratic National Convention yesterday.

At casual glance, the backdrop of leaping flames behind Reid makes it appear the Demonrat is in hell. LOL

The background actually is a scenic view of Nevada’s red canyon rocks, provided by the 2012 DNC, as you can see in this video of Dingy’s speech. I suggest you hit your “mute” button first ;)

I’m beginning to really like Reuters….  :D

H/t Drudge Report

~Eowyn

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words

I don’t know who created this stunning image.  Thank you to the unknown artist!

H/T  Roger Fredinburg

LTG

Harry Reid Double-crosses Himself

Here We Go Again

Just how do I get off this crazy thing, anyway?

Is it just me, or does it seem that every time you turn around we are in yet another financial crises, and if the congress does not act immediately by spending billions we do not have, in three day’s time the Earth is going to promptly reverse its rotation, and all life on this planet will cease to exist?

Well, that is how Sen. Harry Reid always makes it sound, anyway.

Via the Washington Times:

Calling for a weekend to “cool off,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid set up a Monday vote on replenishing the almost-empty federal disaster relief accounts as all sides race to beat a deadline to keep money flowing to disaster-stricken states and to keep the federal government at large running.

“Cool off a little bit. Work this through. There’s a compromise here,” Mr. Reid said Friday, minutes after the Senate blocked back a bill drafted by House Republicans that would have replenished the disaster fund accounts through Nov. 18.

Without an agreement, the government could shut down in a week, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency could run out of money even before then.

The House, on the strength of Republican votes, passed a bill early Friday morning that directs an additional $3.65 billion to FEMA, with some of the spending offset by cuts to a clean-energy program popular with Democrats and the Obama administration.

You can read the rest here.

Harry Reid has rejected the House bill in favor of his own, which eliminates the cuts inserted by the republicans and will therefore add to the swelling budget deficit and thus the growing national debt.

This is exactly the sort of thing this country can no-longer afford to do.

-Dave

No. 1 Chinese Tourist Attraction in the Year 2020

Photo credit: Flickr

~Eowyn

Breaking News. Obama and Republicans Reach Debt Compromise

This evening (Sunday, July 31, 2011), Obama reached a compromise with Republican congressional leaders on the debt ceiling, to avoid a financial default.

Few details are available but the AP’s David Espo reports that the deal would:

  • Cut more than $2 trillion from federal spending over a decade. Thousands of programs – the Park Service, Labor Department and housing among them – could be trimmed to levels last seen years ago.
  • But the federal debt limit would rise in two stages by at least $2.2 trillion, enough to tide the Treasury over until after the 2012 elections.
  • No Social Security or Medicare benefits would be cut, but the programs could be scoured for other savings. Both could be on the table along with changes in tax law as part of future cuts.
  • Taxes would be unlikely to rise.

No votes were expected in either house of Congress until Monday at the earliest, to give rank-and-file lawmakers time to review the package. But leaders in both parties were already beginning the work of rounding up votes.

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid bombastically proclaimed that “in the end, reasonable people were able to agree on this: The United States could not take the chance of defaulting on our debt, risking a United States financial collapse and a world-wide depression.”

To read the full AP article, go here.

H/t beloved fellow Anon!

~Eowyn

Dennis Miller Rips Harry Reid a New One

Totally awesome!

DCG