TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~
Court Reaffirms 2A and 4A Rights
Thomas Gallatin
.
Monday Top News Executive Summary
Media Editors: MEXICO DEAL: “President Donald Trump defended his administration’s deal with Mexico against criticism that there were no major new commitments to stem a flow of Central American migrants crossing into the United States, and said on Sunday more details would soon be released.” (Reuters)
.
LEFT COAST LUNACY: “California is set to become the first state in the country to pay for tens of thousands of illegal immigrants to have full health benefits. Under an agreement between Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democrats in the state legislature, low-income adults between the ages of 19 and 25 living in California illegally would be eligible for California’s Medicaid program, known as Medi-Cal. The deal emerged as part of a broader $213 billion budget.” (Fox News)
.
IMPEACHMENT CHURN: “Top Democratic leaders may be in no rush to launch an impeachment inquiry, but the party is launching a series of hearings this week on special counsel Robert Mueller’s report,” the Associated Press reports. “The slate of televised sessions on Mueller’s report means a new, intensified focus on the Russia probe and puts it on an investigative ‘path’ — in the words of anti-impeachment Speaker liar-Nancy Pulosi — that some Democrats hope leads to impeachment of President Donald Trump.” Try not to spew your coffee, but NBC News adds that Dems are also considering a series of bills to “safeguard democracy.”
.
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY: “A florist who refused to create floral arrangements for a same-sex wedding will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court after a Washington state court ruled Thursday that she violated the state’s civil rights law. The case presents the high court with an opportunity to decide whether conservative religious believers can use the First Amendment as a defense against laws requiring accommodation of LGBT people, a question the justices ducked in the 2018 Masterpiece Cakeshop ruling.” (The Daily Signal)
.
BIOFUEL FAIL: “A federal program requiring the use of corn-based ethanol and biodiesel in gasoline supplies hasn’t lowered pump prices or significantly reduced greenhouse gas emissions, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office,” Bloomberg reports. Other than that, top-down government mandates are a huge success!
.
DEREGULATING MILEAGE STANDARDS: “The Environmental Protection Agency and the Transportation Department are poised to finalize a proposal this summer that would set federal car standards at roughly 37 miles per gallon, rather than raising them to nearly 51 miles per gallon for 2025 models. The rule would also revoke California’s existing waiver to set its own rules under the Clean Air Act, a practice the federal government has sanctioned for decades.” (The Washington Post)
.
CLIMATE NEVER MIND: “The National Park Service (NPS) quietly removed a visitor center sign saying the glaciers at Glacier National Park would disappear by 2020 due to climate change,” The Daily Caller reports. “As it turns out, higher-than-average snowfall in recent years upended computer model projections from the early 2000s that NPS based its claim glaciers ‘will all be gone by the year 2020,’ federal officials said.”
.
ALABAMA ABORTION BLOWBACK: “Hugh Culverhouse Jr. — the University of Alabama’s largest donor — has called for boycotts against the state and against the University of Alabama over its new abortion law that protects unborn babies. The University of Alabama responded on Friday by returning a $21.5 million gift that it received from Culverhouse, who had allegedly tried to interfere in the operations of the law school. The school also removed his name from the law school.” (The Daily Wire)
.
.
.
HUMOR: Media urged not to release names of any more presidential candidates in effort to prevent copycats (The Onion)
~The Patriot Post
.
Impeachment-hungry ex-scumbag/lia-Clinton
aide eyes primary takedown of Nadler
by Vaishnavee Sharma.
Iran said accelerating uranium centrifuge
production, anticipating deal collapse
by timesofisrael.com: With Iran’s nuclear deal with global powers teetering on the edge of collapse, Israeli intelligence has identified a significant acceleration of work on the production of new uranium centrifuges... as Tehran prepares for the possibility of boosting enrichment activities, Channel 13 news reported Friday night. The intelligence sources were not named, nor were further details provided on the alleged centrifuge production efforts. The sources cited by the network also said, however, that the Islamic republic was making back-channel overtures to Washington expressing a willingness to renew talks in a bid to find common ground. That assessment appeared to agree with statements made by US President Donald Trump on Thursday. Speaking after talks in northern France with French President Emmanuel Macron, an ardent supporter of diplomacy with Iran, Trump indicated he could consider talking to Tehran. “I understand they want to talk and if they want to talk that’s fine,” said Trump, who was in France to mark the 75th anniversary of the D-Day landings. “We’ll talk but the one thing that they can’t have is they can’t have nuclear weapons,” he added. Trump said when he came to power Iran was “undisputed champions of terror” but indicated activity had slackened in recent times. “They’re not doing that anymore. They’re doing very poorly as a nation. They’re failing as a nation,” said Trump... https://www.timesofisrael.com/iran-said-accelerating-uranium-centrifuge-production-anticipating-deal-collapse/?utm_source=The+Daily+Edition&utm_campaign=daily-edition-2019-06-08&utm_medium=email
.
Americans May Be Strapped, But
the Go-To Statistic Is False
by Michael R. Strain.
"Europe Will Not Be Europe"
by Guy Millière.
Making Sense of the New American Right
by Matthew Continetti
{ freebeacon.com } ~ I like to start my classes on conservative intellectual history by distinguishing between three groups... There is the Republican Party, with its millions of adherents and spectrum of opinion from very conservative, somewhat conservative, moderate, and yes, liberal. There is the conservative movement, the constellation of single-issue nonprofits that sprung up in the 1970s—gun rights, pro-life, taxpayer, right to work—and continue to influence elected officials. Finally, there is the conservative intellectual movement: writers, scholars, and wonks whose journalistic and political work deals mainly with ideas and, if we're lucky, their translation into public policy. It's a common mistake to conflate these groups. The Republican Party is a vast coalition that both predates and possibly will post-date the conservative movement. That movement has had mixed success in moving the party to the right, partly because of cynicism and corruption but also because politicians must, at the end of the day, take into account the shifting and often contradictory views of their constituents. The conservative intellectual movement exercises the least power of all. You could fit its members into a convention hall or, more likely, a cruise ship. Ideas matter. But the relation of ideas to political action is difficult to measure and often haphazard. The line between shaping a politician's rhetoric and decisions and merely reflecting them is awfully fuzzy. The conservative intellectual movement, in addition to generating excellent writing, has had seven real-world applications since its formation after the Second World War: originalism and supply side economics in the 1970s; welfare reform and crime policy in the 1980s and '90s; educational choice and reform over the last two decades; James Burnham's anti-Communist strategies that found expression in the Reagan Doctrine; and the counterinsurgency plan known as the "surge" that prevented the defeat of American forces in the second Iraq war. There have been other successes, for sure, but also plenty of setbacks. What's important to remember is that liberals as well as Republicans, conservative activists, and conservative intellectuals contested every single one of these policies. The story goes that, for many years, American conservatives adhered to a consensus known as "fusionism." Economic and social conservatives put aside their differences. Freedom, they decided, was necessary for the exercise of virtue. The struggle against and ultimate defeat of the Soviet Union was more important than domestic politics or intramural disagreements. Conservative intellectuals eager to privilege either freedom or virtue like to attack this consensus, which they often describe as "zombie Reaganism." The truth is that the strength of fusionism always has been exaggerated. The conservative intellectual movement has been and continues to be fractious, contentious, combustible, and less of a force than most assume....
.
Court Reaffirms 2A and 4A Rights
Thomas Gallatin: In Commonwealth v. Hicks, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court agreed with a defendant who argued that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated by law enforcement due to his legal exercise of his Second Amendment rights. Essentially, the court recognized that lawful possession of a firearm does not revoke a citizen’s other rights — specifically in this case an individual’s rights against unreasonable search and seizure.
In the case, the defendant legally possessed a conceal carry permit, but he was spotted outside a convenience store showing his firearm to another individual, not in a threatening manner. An observer notified the police who then responded to the call, restrained Mr. Hicks and conducted a search of his person and his vehicle. They smelled alcohol and found a small bag of marijuana and subsequently arrested him for driving under the influence and disorderly conduct.
The court in its ruling correctly concluded, “Unless a police officer has prior knowledge that a specific individual is not permitted to carry a concealed firearm, and absent articulable facts supporting reasonable suspicion that a firearm is being used or intended to be used in a criminal manner, there simply is no justification for the conclusion that the mere possession of a firearm, where it lawfully may be carried, is alone suggestive of criminal activity.”
National Review’s David French notes, “This is exactly correct, and it’s buttressed by the plain constitutional truth that there exists ‘a first principle that lies at the heart of the Fourth Amendment — that the government may not target and seize specific individuals without any particular suspicion of wrongdoing, then force them to prove that they are not committing crimes.’” ~The Patriot Post
Comments