True, but tell us something we don't know.
"The huge due process concern is about limiting any constitutional right based on what amounts to an arbitrary, mostly unreviewable, mostly secret, frequently clearly incompetent list of people," White told the Examiner. "It's hard to imagine a bigger due process violation."
"The list is notoriously full of people who have done nothing at all," he added.
Asked specifically about Manchin and Murphy, White said their attitudes were "completely contemptible."
"Either stupid or dishonest to be saying it," he said, adding, "there is no rational basis to believe that a list restricting any right based on this list is going to be treated any differently.
"What the Democrats are really saying is, 'Because this restricts gun rights, we don't give a s—-t.'
"And before, to be honest, the Republicans and most of the Democrats would say, 'Because this is related to terrorism, we don't give a s—-t.' I'm disgusted with them all," he concluded.
When I call these people 'oathbreakers', I'm not kidding. They took an oath to uphold the Constitution, yet every time you turn around they're finding some reason for 'We should ignore this part, because (fill in the blank).' And this should be reason to remove them from office.
It's reported that the Brit who murdered a politician a couple of days ago used a homemade gun.
There'll probably be a push to (further) censor the internet: "We cannot allow dangerous information like this to be freely available!"
There's a piece going around about how 'gun nuts LIE about what the founders said about guns!', etc. Here's a response. It includes
Except at Gun Cite, where legal scholar David Hardy quotes Publius’ words, and in this essay by Tea Party, whom frothing nuts like Arends hate with the passion of a thousand burning suns, and quoted here at the Rense Report, and cited here by conservative/libertarian economist and columnist Walter Williams. But maybe Arends didn’t mean these extremists? Maybe there are some other extremists running around who are afraid of Federalist 29? Nope. Maybe it’s because those of us who want to protect the right to keep and bear arms have actually read it and other Federalist Papers, as well as citations from other Founding Fathers supporting the Second Amendment’s definitive language that protects the individual right to keep and bear arms.And there’s a reason absolutely no gun extremist will ever direct you to that 1788 essay because it blows their baloney into a million pieces.
The suspect charged with murder in connection with a vacant building fire in Los Angeles was in the United States illegally and had a string of arrests to his name -- but the feds never deported him, officials said Friday.