ACTION

Tuesday Noon ~ thefrontpagecover

Posted by Rudy Tirre on April 2, 2019 at 11:57am
TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~  
District Judge: CA Magazine Ban 
Violates Second Amendment
5C8NUayJDoevvbzokVXDEN8wHT99mF12T9zjlu0Kth4WUaDBxEBEmWLxa5TC8KzDjXIP6dWXQF3dGdvKSoSdrnzz_1tCFJf58recbd5jhiviUrNO8iBPZ8164-lOhPbt_cHr3BuF-W440N5EEJsDSwpQxim-ArfXA3Monio=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
Nate Jackson  
AGHnzvDgAIc_dkrUO59jF21LrUmiQ79dA3RIshU-YlAdfSFPOhc54BmJs1OTRtvnrEX-cCbeiMVXdurlydL03p7YzXsWg_6cAavWTIOYU1PogQU4ftAjtXM=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
.
Federal Judge Rules Calif. Magazine 
Confiscation Law Unconstitutional
m-UOveTe3uGi6WxQFM_slTNDkcQyPQ6LgW4_hY9B8HYtUDv86Pa5kU943mHotfU7w7smEf8JHNEq0ZQO7WYouy5gkTtYPvjb5fVGRt7irt3r9A=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
by Stephen Gutowski
{ freebeacon.com } ~  A federal judge struck down California's ban on the possession of magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition. On Friday Judge Roger T. Benitez of the District Court for the Southern District of California ruled the confiscation effort is unconstitutional... "California Penal Code Section 32310, as amended by Proposition 63, burdens the core of the Second Amendment by criminalizing the acquisition and possession of these magazines that are commonly held by law-abiding citizens for defense of self, home, and state," he wrote. "The regulation is neither presumptively legal nor longstanding. The statute hits at the center of the Second Amendment and its burden is severe. When the simple test of Heller is applied, a test that persons of common intelligence can understand, the statute fails and is an unconstitutional abridgment. It criminalizes the otherwise lawful acquisition and possession of common magazines holding more than 10 rounds—magazines that law-abiding responsible citizens would choose for self-defense at home." In his order, Judge Benitez argued the debate over whether Californians should trade freedom for security was settled at the time of the founding and through the protections afforded by the Constitution. "This decision is a freedom calculus decided long ago by Colonists who cherished individual freedom more than the subservient security of a British ruler," he said. "The freedom they fought for was not free of cost then, and it is not free now."...
.
Was There Approved FISA Surveillance 
on General Michael Flynn?
Si7FhKy35z2Zex56kmXl9GZIIv88_Z-U_upsPXYV2PkBhop5PF0iqVtijBaSgvRX8z6Qq1ZW8_nBcTLYAtDDJ5t3VD5J07OHF0bgFCOFb0IxTLm7oDMgnnCopkOhW6Zse7HPY88dogkcXR1n3JM=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710xby sundance
{ theconservativetreehouse.com } ~  The official account of how the intelligence community gained the transcript of incoming National Security Adviser Michael Flynn talking to Ambassador Sergey Kisliyak on December 29th, 2016... surrounds “incidental collection” as a result of contact with an agent of a foreign power. Meaning the Flynn call was picked up as the U.S. intelligence apparatus was conducting surveillance on Russian Ambassador Kisliyak. If this version of events is accurate, it falls under FISA-702 collection: the lawful monitoring of a foreign agent who has contact with a U.S. person. In order to review the identity of the U.S. person, a process called ‘unmasking’, a 702 submission must be made. That submission, the unmasking, leaves a paper/electronic trail. In a 2017 congressional hearing, Senator Lindsey Graham asks Deputy Attorney General liar-Sally Yates and former DNI scumbag-James Clapper about this process.In the two years that have followed this testimony, despite the simplicity of the the process to discover the answer, we can identify no action taken nor reports of action taken that would deliver the answer as to: who unmasked General Michael Flynn? My suspicion is there never was an ‘unmasking request’...
.
Republicans Cast Doubt On White House 
Security Clearance Whistleblower  
i_Txy2FjBnl_1ZOX3OVKd9D8Gq5WW9s6SItuCU_r5AgoePnOzFQiwAx7Gp2ZiXdx9S-5e3n7nFT6GQXuk7aI9-uYybPUH4o3moGDKpJaW7938JAuFWlNDpIiuOXzOHGRZV4kPPAiYEIM9PMXyWB0laoLOShvAH4NUfiB323Kx8frF95XAkv3ZwuI9fYCfCRipID0h_qK2Vx9EAXR9gu8M8zkHhbo23-eT2tzZEbv3Sst7LwkHo4o_VM=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
by Saagar Enjeti
{ dailycaller.com } ~ GOP lawmakers on the House Oversight Committee are casting doubt on a White House whistleblower in a Monday morning memorandum... alleging that nearly two dozen White House aides were given security clearances despite initially being denied. Democratic staff revealed Monday morning that the whistleblower noted that 25 people, including senior White House aides, were given clearance despite having it rejected by career staffers. The whistleblower, Tricia Newbold, is a manager in the White House personnel office. “I know that this will not be perceived in favor of my intentions, which is to bring back the integrity of the office,” she said, according to a summary provided by the House Oversight Committee. GOP lawmakers responded in a Monday afternoon memo that “Ms. Newbold provided testimony that the Democrats are misusing to manufacture a misleading narrative that the Trump White House is reckless with our national security,” adding that, “The Democrats are inclined to use some information from the transcribed interview to embarrass senior White House officials. Ms. Newbold’s testimony discussed two officials with specificity, who the Democrats labeled as “Senior White House Official 1” and “Senior White House Official 2.”...
.
Ilhan Omar Is Under Investigation For 
Misusing Campaign Contributions  
hMqvOphfowwx7eQGwptHDJ52T1MvqWhFU8mTLSAunJgrIfzzPhOzUUbBK64Z9vxZfb3ICsVZOSbnMQ2WHvF2vb7uHdxCVcn36BnxoqFBX2fkA1GsPeEYpW-M_byh0Yxo_iyJ1br13mPTsXxBMS_XHXGAICEuqF2_Ho2vAsJ7Og=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
by Molly Prince
{ dailycaller.com } ~ Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar is facing a probe into her campaign spending after complaints alleged that she misused contributions for personal use... according to a report published on Monday. The Minnesota Campaign Finance Board is investigating Omar after Minnesota GOP State Rep. Steve Drazkowski filed two complaints alleging she spent nearly $6,000 in campaign funds for personal use while she served in the Minnesota legislature, reported WJLA. Some of the improper expenditures include payments to  Omar’s divorce attorney and spending on travel to Boston and Estonia.“I had observed a long pattern,” Drazkowski told WJLA. “Representative Omar hasn’t followed the law. She’s repeatedly trampled on the laws of the state in a variety of areas, and gotten by with it.” The campaign finance allegations come on the heels of a separate incident where the freshman congresswoman had to return $2,500 in speaking fees, according to The Pioneer Press. Omar accepted payment from Normandale Community College and Inver Hills Community College in 2017, despite Minnesota House rules barring lawmakers from accepting speaking fees from entities with business at the Legislature. Authorities have reportedly completed the investigation but have not yet compiled their findings or issued rulings...
.
rino-Jeff Flake: I Want A Democrat 
To Defeat Trump In 2020
w8EvlReV3k25xr73uPIZNpuUJmne_WUPz8DOQJdTeI_kpvY78PRQawl8rdT6m2Gv5zeBKkX90U9theZCbfOEw7K53qrpg7izDx2NMqafS5nwNwh7KUVJlW34Ny1ytBdKBu302BGiA0bJ3Az3VulLXVKnI2us8q636RawTc--i9i829WRYWqn=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
by PAUL BOIS  
{dailywire.com} ~ Former Sen. rino-Jeff Flake (R-AZ), the man who nearly derailed Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court... now openly hopes that a Democrat beats President Trump in 2020.  According to The Hill, rino-Flake expressed his 2020 hopes while speaking at a debate hosted by Intelligence Squared in New York over the weekend. The debate circled around whether the GOP should renominate President Trump; joining him to argue against the nomination was New York Times columnist Bret Stephens. "Are you willing to lose a cycle for the Republican Party because of the principles that you're arguing?" moderator John Donvan asked rino-Flake. "Oh yes, yes," rino-Flake replied. rino-Flake reasoned that Trump's policies on immigration will hurt the Republican Party over time despite it playing well with his base. "It can galvanize people for a while, maybe for a cycle or two. But in the end, it turns people off. It turns off minorities. It turns off women," said rino-Flake... rino-Flake is spreading lies.
.
AGHnzvDgAIc_dkrUO59jF21LrUmiQ79dA3RIshU-YlAdfSFPOhc54BmJs1OTRtvnrEX-cCbeiMVXdurlydL03p7YzXsWg_6cAavWTIOYU1PogQU4ftAjtXM=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
.
District Judge: CA Magazine Ban Violates Second Amendment
5C8NUayJDoevvbzokVXDEN8wHT99mF12T9zjlu0Kth4WUaDBxEBEmWLxa5TC8KzDjXIP6dWXQF3dGdvKSoSdrnzz_1tCFJf58recbd5jhiviUrNO8iBPZ8164-lOhPbt_cHr3BuF-W440N5EEJsDSwpQxim-ArfXA3Monio=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
Nate Jackson:  It’s not often that good news about the Second Amendment comes out of California, but that was the case Friday. U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez, a George W. Bush appointee, ruled that standard-capacity magazines will remain legal, at least for now. Buying and selling magazines holding more than 10 rounds has been against state law since 2000, but a 2016 law banned even possessing them. Benitez struck down the entire limitation.

Before we get to the merits of Benitez’s decision, we’ll make an important observation about news coverage. Don’t ever let the Leftmedia dictate gun terminology. That goes for anything from describing the parts of a gun to mislabeling AR-15s as “assault weapons” to calling murderous psychopaths “gunmen” so as to draw the attention to the tool.

In this case, so-called “high-capacity magazines” are actually standard capacity, and they were designed by gun manufacturers to fit particular guns out of the box. But USA Today, for example, began its coverage with the following summary: “High-capacity gun magazines will remain legal in California under a ruling Friday by a federal judge who cited home invasions where a woman used the extra bullets in her weapon to kill an attacker while in two other cases women without additional ammunition ran out of bullets.” What the paper means by “extra bullets” is that the woman’s weapon held the standard-capacity rounds of ammunition.

Now, to the ruling: Benitez rightly concluded that standard magazines are “arms” under the U.S. Constitution, and, thus, the California law “burdens the core of the Second Amendment by criminalizing the acquisition and possession of these magazines that are commonly held by law-abiding citizens for defense of self, home, and state.” He cited both legal and practical justifications, including the real-world self-defense cases USA Today highlighted.

What’s next? The case was already sent back to Benitez by the Ninth Circuit to further develop a ruling on the law, but now it will almost certainly return to the Second Amendment-hostile Ninth Circuit when the state appeals. President Donald Trump’s judicial appointments are more important all the time.

In any case, as Benitez said, the California law “turn[ed] the Constitution upside down,” but it all comes down to one simple thing: “Individual liberty and freedom are not outmoded concepts.” Even in California.  

~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/62104?mailing_id=4167&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4167&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  
E-mail me when people leave their comments –
Follow

You need to be a member of Command Center to add comments!

Join Command Center