STOP THE UN GUN BAN

Dear Newsmax Reader:

 

Dear Fellow Patriot,

Anti-gun statists around the globe believe they have it made.

The United Nations is done with its dirty work finalizing the details of their so-called "Small Arms Treaty."

With the full backing of President Obama now in his last year in office, time is running out until an all-out Senate ratification showdown on the U.N. "Small Arms Treaty."

If you and I are going to beat this Treaty, we simply must fight back NOW before it's too late.

I'm doing everything I can to help expose the TRUTH about this radical scheme.

But today I'm asking you to join me by taking a public stand against the U.N. "Small Arms Treaty" by signing the Official Firearms Sovereignty Survey right away.

With the national media still pushing anti-gun propaganda after the horrific terrorist attack in San Bernardino, CA, President Obama and his anti-Second Amendment pals believe the timing has never been better to ram through the U.N.'s global gun control crown jewel.

Reading through the details of the Treaty, it's hard to see how our Second Amendment could survive such an assault.


In fact, Article V of the Treaty mandates countries establish a "National Control List" -- or NATIONAL GUN REGISTRATION database!

You and I both know gun registration is just the first step toward outright CONFISCATION.

But the truth is, the U.N. is already plotting the next step -- developing new "International Small Arms Control Standards" (ISACS). Their goal is to impose these radical anti-gun initiatives on every nation who signs the U.N. "Small Arms Treaty."

Introductory language already includes:

***  Mandated national "screening" for all persons seeking to own guns, giving bureaucrats the final say on whether or not you're "competent" enough to own a gun;

***  Licenses for gun and ammo sales, and perhaps even bans on certain types of firearms. This could include anything from semi-auto rifles to shotguns to handguns!

***  Restrictions on how many guns and ammo any properly-licensed individual may legally own;

***  Bans on magazines holding more than ten rounds;

***  Bans on owning a firearm for self-defense -- unless a citizen can somehow demonstrate need and get federal government approval.

That's why your IMMEDIATE action is so important.

To those who think government holds all the answers, the United States isn't a "shining city on a hill" -- it's an affront to their grand "utopian" designs for all of us.

And as long as Americans remain free to make our own decisions without being bossed around by bureaucrats, those who want big government on a global scale will be out of luck.

That's why I was so excited to see the National Association for Gun Rights leading the fight to stop the U.N.'s so-called "Small Arms Treaty!"

Their efforts over the past few years have stymied President Obama and Harry Reid every time they've sought to ram gun control through the Senate.

In fact, without NAGR's bare-knuckled, no-compromise tactics, I believe President Obama would have already succeeded in passing any number of anti-Second Amendment schemes.

But the truth is, NAGR depends on the action and support of good folks like you for their effectiveness.

So will you join them by going on record AGAINST global gun control and sign the Official Firearms Sovereignty Survey today?

Thanks to the help of good folks like you, the National Association for Gun Rights has taken the lead role in Washington, D.C. beating back gun control schemes.

But the stakes couldn't be higher with the U.N. "Small Arms Treaty."  So there's no time to waste.

After all, the last thing President Obama wants is for you and me to have time to mobilize gun owners to defeat this radical agenda.

The gun control crowd has made that mistake before, and we've made them pay, defeating EVERY attempt to ram the U.N. "Small Arms Treaty" into law since the mid-1990s.

Already, parts of the U.N.'s radical agenda are slipping through covertly. In fact, Obama's State Department even bragged that Project Gunrunner and Operation Fast and Furious are implementations of the U.N. anti-Second Amendment agenda!

Then you and I saw President Obama issue a flurry of anti-gun Executive Orders in the past months targeting law-abiding gun owners, many of which are rooted in the demands of the U.N. "Small Arms Treaty."

Once President Obama decides the time is ripe to submit the Treaty, this fight is going to move FAST.

So if you and I are going to defeat this U.N. Treaty, we have to turn the heat up on Congress right now before it's too late!

1.  Do you believe the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Second Amendment are the supreme law of the land?

2.  Do you believe any attempt by the United Nations to subvert or supersede your Constitutional rights must be opposed?

If you said "Yes!" to these questions, please sign the survey the National Association for Gun Rights has prepared for you.

With your help, the National Association for Gun Rights will continue to turn up the heat on targeted Senators who are working to implement the U.N. "Small Arms Treaty."

Direct mail.  Phones.  E-mail.  Blogs.  Guest editorials.  Press conferences.  Hard-hitting internet, newspaper, radio and even TV ads if funding permits.  The whole nine yards.

Of course, a program of this scale is only possible if the National Association for Gun Rights can raise the money.

But that's not easy, and we may not have much time.

So along with your survey, please agree to make a generous contribution of $250, $100, $50 or even just $35 .

And every dollar counts in this fight so even if you can only chip in $10 or $20, it will make a difference.

Thank you in advance for your time and money devoted to defending our Second Amendment rights.

For Freedom,

Rand Paul
United States Senator

P.S.   You and I could be facing a Senate ratification fight over the U.N. "Small Arms Treaty" at any moment now that Barack Obama is in his final months in office.

If we're going to defeat the U.N. "Small Arms Treaty" gun owners have to turn up the heat now before it's too late!

Please return your Firearms Sovereignty Survey and put yourself squarely on the record AGAINST the U.N. "Small Arms Treaty."

And if you can, please make a generous contribution to the National Association for Gun Rights of $250, $150, $100 or even just $35 right away!

And every dollar counts in this fight so even if you can only chip in $10 or $20, it will make a difference.

---

The National Association for Gun Rights is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, single-purpose citizens' organization dedicated to preserving and protecting the Constitutionally protected right-to-keep-and-bear-arms through an aggressive program designed to mobilize public opposition to anti-gun legislation. The National Association for Gun Rights' mailing address is P.O. 7002, Fredericksburg, VA 22404. They can be contacted toll-free at 1-877-405-4570. Its web address is www.NationalGunRights.org.

Not produced or e-mailed at taxpayer expense.

U.S. Army to Introduce Enhanced M4 Magazine

TOPICS:Small Arms

U.S. Army will soon introduce the M4 Enhanced Performance Magazine. Photo: Army.

Posted By: Matthew Cox July 25, 2016

The U.S. Army TACOM is introducing a new M4 Enhanced Performance Magazine, according to a TACOM Maintenance Information Message first reported by Soldier Systems.net.
The new magazine will feature a tan body and blue follower and will be engineered to address feeding issues with M855A1 ammunition, according to Soldier Systems.
The M4 EPM has been assigned NSN 1005-01-630-9508 and will be introduced through attrition of the current magazine.
The Army first started to improve M4 magazines in 2008 after reliability tests found that the original follower caused many of the weapon’s feeding malfunctions during the test.
We will be watching for further updates.

LIST OF GOP TRAITERS

Brent Scowcroft, foreign policy adviser to four GOP presidents, said in a statement last month that Clinton “has the wisdom and experience to lead our country at this critical time.”

Henry Paulson Jr. former treasury secretary under President George W. Bush, said “Enough is enough. It’s time to put country before party and say it together: Never Trump.”

Richard Armitage, former deputy secretary of state to George W. Bush, told Politico last month, “If Donald Trump is the nominee, I would vote for Hillary Clinton.”

Ken Adelman, U.S. Arms Control director under Ronald Reagan, said “Not only am I not voting for Donald Trump, but also I am not voting for any Republican who endorsed or supported Trump.”

Dr. Patrick Cronin, senior official at USAID during the W. Bush administration, who said, “Only one candidate has thought through America’s challenges… and is ready to be president, and I intend to vote for her—Hillary Clinton.”

Philip Levy, member of President George W. Bush’s Council of Economic Advisors, said, “Never Trump and I meant it. If Secretary Clinton is the only viable alternative, I would expect to support her.”

Get The Beast In Your Inbox!

Daily DigestStart and finish your day with the top stories from The Daily Beast.

Cheat SheetA speedy, smart summary of all the news you need to know (and nothing you don't).

By clicking "Subscribe," you agree to have read the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

Tony Fratto, W. Bush administration deputy press secretary, said, “I’d prefer to have Hillary Clinton in the White House than Donald Trump.”

Kori Schake, former George W. Bush National Security official, said she is voting for @HillaryClinton.

Jim Cicconi, former White House staffer under Presidents Reagan and H.W. Bush, said in a statement, “Hillary Clinton is experienced, qualified, and will make a fine president. The alternative, I fear, would set our nation on a very dark path.”

Alan Steinberg, Bush administration regional EPA administrator, who worked with Clinton when she was New York senator, is voting for her and said, “She can work with people on the opposite side of the political aisle.”

Doug Elmets, former Reagan White House staffer, who worked with conservative icons Lee Atwater and Ed Rollins, said, “I can live with four years of Hillary Clinton before I could ever live with one day of Donald Trump as president.” This will be his first vote ever for a Democrat.

Max Boot, author and military historian, told Vox last month, “I am literally losing sleep over Donald Trump.” A lifelong Republican, he said he would vote for Hillary Clinton.

Retired Army Col. Peter Mansoor, former aide to David Petraeus, now a professor of military history at Ohio State University, told The Washington Post he thinks Trump is too dangerous to be president, and that Clinton will be “the first Democratic presidential candidate I’ve voted for in my adult life.”

Tom Nichols, Military College Professor and former GOP congressional staffer, @RadioFreeTom calls Clinton “a far more plausible Commander in Chief. And that’s all that matters now.”

Marc Andreesen, Silicon Valley venture capitalist and former Romney donor, said the idea of cutting off the flow of immigrants “makes me sick,” tweeting “#imwithher.”

Dan Akerson former General Motors CEO, says Clinton has “the experience and judgment to serve as an effective Commander in chief. In this election, I will cast my ballot for Secretary Clinton.”

Hamid Moghadam, Prologis CEO and immigrant from post-revolutionary Iran, says America is about tolerance and inclusion “and that’s why, as a lifelong Republican supporter, I endorse Hillary Clinton for president in this election.”

Douglas Brand, professor of political science at the College of the Holy Cross, wrote in Fortune Magazine, “To support Trump, we must sacrifice our principles and reconcile our minds to his. Better we should follow Hamilton’s example and support an opposing party whose principles we reject—and remain a principles party of opposition.”

Michael Vlock, Connecticut investor who has given nearly $5 million to Republicans in last two years, told The New York Times he won’t donate to Trump because “he is too selfish, flawed and unpredictable to hold the power of the presidency.”

William Oberndorf, California-based investor, who gave $3 million to Republicans in the last four years, told The New York Times that Trump is so unacceptable that he would vote for Clinton.

Mike Fernandez, a healthcare magnate and one of Jeb Bush’s billionaires in Florida, told the Miami Herald if the choice is between Trump and Clinton, “I’m choosing Hillary.”

Robert Smith, conservative former New York Supreme Court judge (and father of BuzzFeed editor-in-chief Ben Smith), says he’s voting for a Democrat for president. He said it’s “the first time I’ve done it in 36 years, and I think the decision is easy. Hillary Clinton is the only responsible choice.”

Dan Webb, former U.S. attorney, told The Chicago Sun-Times that Trump is “not fit to be president” and he thinks “a huge volume of Republicans” are saying the same thing. He urged them to “get off the sidelines, give Hillary some money and support her because we can’t afford to let him become president.”

Larry Pressler, former South Dakota Republican senator, endorsed Clinton after the mass shooting in Orlando, citing her support for gun safety measures. “If someone had told me 10 years ago I would do this, I wouldn’t have believed them,” he told The Hill last month.

Arne Carlson, former Minnesota Republican governor, worked with Clinton when she was first lady and praised her for doing “something first ladies since Eleanor Roosevelt haven’t done. And that was engage in public policy… She really drove the healthcare debate, and that was the first concerted effort to demonize her, orchestrated by the insurance companies.”

Mark Salter, former top adviser to Sen. John McCain, told Real Clear Politics that Trump “possesses the emotional maturity of a 6-year-old,” and that he “views the powers of the presidency as weapons to punish people who’ve been mean to him—reporters, rival candidates, critics.”

Jamie Weinstein, Daily Caller editor, said in early May that if it’s Trump-Hillary with no serious third-party option, “there is just no question: I’d take a Tums and cast my ballot for Hillary.”

Mike Treiser, former Romney staffer, wrote on Facebook in early May, “In the face of bigotry, hatred, violence, and small-mindedness, this time, I’m with her.”

Evan Siegfried, Republican strategist, told the New York Daily News in early May, “I’m voting for GOP candidates in other races. But for the good of the country, I must do the unthinkable and say, I’m with her.”

Mark Lenzi, former spokesman for the New Hampshire GOP, told Manchester television station WMUR that he “wrestled with the decision for a long time” but as a former U.S. Fulbright Scholar on NATO, he finds Trump’s views toward Europe and our NATO allies dangerous. “There is a palpable fear in these countries about him becoming president.”

Craig Snyder, Republican lobbyist with Ikon Public Affairs, wrote in an email to fellow former staffers of the late Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter, “I’ve been a Republican since high school and certainly never thought I would take any sort of public role in a Democratic presidential campaign, but I never imagined Donald Trump as the Republican nominee.”

Fact check: Hillary Clinton's false and misleading claims

D'Angelo Gore and Eugene Kiely, FactCheck.org 2:11 p.m. EDT July 24, 2016

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

Breaking down Hillary Clinton's most controversial claims with FactCheck.org.

(Photo: Justin Sullivan, Getty Images)

In advance of the Democratic National Convention, which begins July 25 in Philadelphia, we present a wrap-up of some of the more egregious falsehoods from Hillary Clinton, who is set to accept her party’s nomination for president later this week.
We focused on claims most relevant for the general election and those that Clinton has repeated, or that could likely be repeated by her or others this week. For more on each statement, follow the links to our full stories. And all of our articles on Clinton can be found here.

USA TODAY

Fact check: Donald Trump's false and misleading claims

Claims About Her Emails

The New York Times on March 2, 2015, reported that Clinton “exclusively used a personal email account to conduct government business as secretary of state.” The emails were stored on a private server at her New York home. At the State Department’s request, Clinton turned over 30,490 work-related emails totaling roughly 55,000 pages, and deleted 31,830 emails she deemed personal. Clinton’s defense of her unusual email arrangements resulted in numerous false and misleading claims.
Clinton said she “fully complied with every rule that I was governed by” in preserving her emails. But department policy says all “correspondence and memorandums on substantive U.S. foreign policy issues” should be retained “at the end of the Secretary’s tenure or sooner.” Clinton left office Feb. 1, 2013; she gave her emails to the department on Dec. 5, 2014. The department’s Office of Inspector General in a May 26 report confirmed that “Clinton should have surrendered all [work-related] emails” before leaving government and, by not doing so, “she did not comply” with the Federal Records Act.
Clinton claimed the “vast majority of my work emails went to government employees at their government addresses, which meant they were captured and preserved immediately” by the State Department. The department’s IG report said that is “not an appropriate method of preserving any such emails that would constitute a Federal record.”
Clinton has frequently remarked that her decision to use a personal email account exclusively for government business was “allowed” and “permitted” by the State Department. But the IG report cited department policies dating to 2005 that require “normal day-to-day operations” to be conducted on government servers. The IG report also said Clinton, who was secretary of State from January 2009 to February 2013, “had an obligation” to discuss her email system with security and information technology officials, but she did not and, if she had, the request would have been denied.
Clinton said “turning over my server” to the government shows “I have been as transparent as I could” about her emails. But she did so in August of 2015 after the FBI opened an investigation. Five months earlier, she rejected calls to turn over the server to a neutral party, saying “the server will remain private.”
Clinton has said that previous “secretaries of State” did the “same thing” in using personal emails for government business. But the State Department has said that only Colin Powell used a personal email account for official business, and Powell did not use a private server. In addition, the IG report said the rules governing personal email and the use of nongovernment systems were “considerably more detailed and more sophisticated” during Clinton’s tenure, making comparisons to her predecessors invalid. “Secretary Clinton’s cybersecurity practices accordingly must be evaluated in light of these more comprehensive directives,” the report said.
“Clinton Spins Immigration, Emails,” July 8, 2015
“More Spin on Clinton’s Emails,” Sept. 8, 2015
“IG Report on Clinton’s Emails,” May 27, 2016
Clinton has repeatedly denied mishandling classified information. At a March 10, 2015, press conference, she said, “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.” But FBI Director James Comey said that the FBI found that about 2,000 of the 30,490 emails Clinton turned over to the State Department contained classified information, including 110 emails that contained classified information at the time they were sent or received. In addition, the FBI recovered “several thousand” emails that Clinton did not turn over to the State Department, including three that had classified material. Finally, Comey said three emails had “portion markings” that indicated the presence of classified information, although the State Department has since said that at least two of them were marked in error.
Clinton said her lawyers “went through every single email” on her private server to determine which ones were personal and which were work-related, and that they were “overly inclusive” in which ones were provided to the State Department. But Comey said the lawyers did not go through every email. Rather, they used header information and search terms to identify work-related emails, and, he said, it is “highly likely” they missed some.
“Clinton’s Handling of Classified Information,” July 5, 2016
“Revisiting Clinton and Classified Information,” July 7, 2016

Claims About Trump

Donald Trump officially accepts the Republican presidential nomination on the final night of the GOP convention in Cleveland on July 21, 2016. (Photo: Meg Vogel, The Cincinnati Enquirer)

Clinton has falsely claimed that Trump cited hosting the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow when “asked about his foreign-policy experience.” She was referring to a Trump interview with Fox News anchor Bret Baier. But Baier never asked Trump for an example of his foreign-policy experience. Baier asked Trump whether he had talked to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump refused to answer, and went on to say that “I know Russia well” because “I had a major event in Russia two or three years ago,” referring to the 2013 pageant. Clinton recently repeated the false claim, saying Trump “says he’s qualified to be commander in chief because he took Miss Universe to Moscow.”
“Pageants and Foreign Policy, ” June 10
“Groundhog Friday,” July 15
At a campaign rally in Kentucky, Clinton said that she “read” that Trump “said he wants to … abolish the VA.” That claim, which Clinton said she did not verify, was based on a Wall Street Journal article that said Trump’s campaign co-chair and chief policy adviser indicated that Trump “would likely push VA health care toward privatization and might move for it to become more of an insurance provider like Medicare rather than an integrated hospital system.” But the same policy adviser told the paper that Trump doesn’t “want to take away the veterans hospitals and the things that are working well.” In fact, in a speech last year, Trump said, “I don’t want to get rid of it,” when talking about the Department of Veterans Affairs and its health care system.
“Trump ‘Wants to Abolish VA’?” May 20
Clinton also went too far in a CBS News interview when she claimed that Trump said “we should pull out of NATO.” Trump has said that he would “certainly look at” pulling the United States out of the international security alliance because it is “obsolete” and “is costing us a fortune.” But Clinton’s campaign provided nothing indicating that Trump advocates pulling out now.
“What’s Trump’s Position on NATO?” May 11
In a speech criticizing Trump, Clinton again twisted the Republican nominee’s words when she claimed that he said “women will start making equal pay as soon as we do as good a job as men.” Trump doesn’t support equal pay legislation, but he has said that he believes in paying people based on performance rather than gender.
“Clinton’s Equal Pay Claim,” June 23

Guns

Clinton, pushing for changes to background checks, falsely claimed that the FBI needed “just one more day” to stop Dylann Roof from being able to purchase the handgun that he allegedly used to kill nine people at a church in Charleston, S.C. One more day wouldn’t have mattered in that case. The FBI director said that clerical errors led to Roof being able to legally purchase the gun in April 2015, and the FBI didn’t confirm that the sale shouldn’t have been allowed until after the shooting two months later.
“Clinton’s ‘Charleston Loophole’ Claim,” Feb. 18

Health Care

Clinton, at a Democratic debate, claimed that private insurance premiums have “gone up so much” in some states that didn’t expand Medicaid because hospitals shifted their costs for providing emergency care for the uninsured. In doing so, she was singling out Republican-controlled states. But we found no evidence to support that claim, and experts disagree on whether such cost shifting occurs.
“Clinton’s Shaky Cost-Shifting Claim,” Dec. 23
A Clinton TV ad made the misleading claim that “in the last seven years drug prices have doubled.” To support that claim, her campaign cited a report that said brand-name drug prices, on average, have more than doubled in that time. But more than 80% of filled prescriptions are for generic drugs, the prices of which have declined by nearly 63%, according to the same report.
“Clinton’s Misleading Ad on Drug Prices,” Jan. 7
During another Democratic debate, Clinton defended the Affordable Care Act by saying, “We now have driven costs down to the lowest they’ve been in 50 years.” Instead of going down, costs have continued to increase, although at historically low rates. Also, economists say the cause of the slowdown was mainly the economy — not the actions of politicians or the Affordable Care Act.
“FactChecking the Fourth Democratic Debate,” Jan. 18
Clinton claimed a recent study showed “white middle-aged Americans without a high school education … are dying earlier than their parents and their grandparents.” The study found an increased mortality rate since 1999 among middle-aged white Americans with a high school degree or less — not just those without a high school education — and it made no comparisons with past generations. Princeton economist Angus Deaton, a co-author of that study, told us his work “doesn’t establish any of what she says.”
“FactChecking the MSNBC Democratic Forum,” Nov. 9

FacebookTwitterGoogle+LinkedIn

Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail

 Fullscreen

Clinton meets with local residents at the Jones St. Java House on April 14, 2015, in LeClaire, Iowa.  Charlie Neibergall, AP

Economy

Clinton has continued to make variations of the false statement that “Americans haven’t had a raise in 15 years.” The latest numbers from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics show real average weekly earnings for production and nonsupervisory employees have actually gone up 9% since January 2001.
“Groundhog Friday,” July 1
“FactChecking the Sixth Democratic Debate,” Feb. 12
Clinton has repeatedly made the claim that the U.S. economy does better when a Democratic president is in the White House, citing research by two Princeton economists who do not credit Democratic fiscal policies for the economic growth.
“Clinton: Economy Better Under Democrats,” Oct. 20
In addition, Clinton has often wrongly said that “the average American CEO makes 300 times more than the typical American worker.” Clinton was referring to a study that looked at pay disparity between CEOs and average workers only at the top 350 companies. That’s a small fraction of the 246,240 chief executives in the U.S., who, on average, earn far less than the average CEO at the biggest 350 firms.
“Clinton Misuses Stat on CEO Pay,” May 21

Wall Street

Arguing that she has been tough on Wall Street, Clinton falsely stated that she is “the only candidate” in the presidential campaign “on either side” who has been attacked in advertising funded by “Wall Street financiers and hedge fund managers.” Actually, several candidates have been the target of ads funded in part by those in the financial industry, and Trump appeared at that time to be the top target.
“Clinton Wrong About Wall Street Attacks,” April 5
Prior to that, Clinton said that “the Wall Street guys are trying so hard to stop me.” But Clinton and political action committees that support her have raised more than $39 million from Wall Street workers in the securities and investment industry, the most of any candidate, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
“FactChecking the MSNBC Democratic Debate,” Feb. 5
Clinton distorted the facts when she claimed Bernie Sanders “took about $200,000 from Wall Street firms” through the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. The DSCC did provide about $200,000 to support Sanders’ 2006 Senate race, and the DSCC did receive about $10 million from the political action committees and employees of companies in two financial industries: securities and investment, and commercial banks. But the DSCC also received $2 million in that campaign cycle from Clinton’s PAC, Friends of Hillary. By Clinton’s logic, Sanders “took about $200,000″ from Friends of Hillary.
“Clinton’s Exaggerated Wall Street Claim,” Feb. 11

Science

Clinton was flat out wrong when she told a Good Morning America town hall participant that “you can’t do any research about” marijuana because it’s a Schedule I drug. That classification makes it difficult, but not impossible, to conduct research on the substance.
“Clinton on Marijuana Research,” April 22
Clinton was also off in another interview when she said late-term abortions “are because of medical necessity.” That gave the impression that most, if not all, late-term abortions are medically necessary. What little data that exist on the topic do not support her claim.
“Clinton Off on Late-Term Abortions,” Sept. 29

Hillary Clinton reacts to applause as she speaks at a rally in Entertainment Hall at the Florida State Fairgrounds in Tampa on July 22, 2016. (Photo: Andrew Harnik, AP)

Foreign Policy

Clinton claimed that all government investigations into the terrorist attacks on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi concluded that “nobody did anything wrong” at the State Department. But an independent board found “systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels.” Four State Department employees were placed on administrative leave on the day the report came out, and all four were later reassigned. Also, a bipartisan Senate report said department officials ignored “increasingly dangerous threat assessments” that indicated the Benghazi facility was “particularly vulnerable.” That report said the department should have increased security or “closed or temporarily shut down” its Benghazi mission, calling the decision to leave the facility open “a grievous mistake.”
“Clinton and the Benghazi Reports,” Oct. 7
A TV ad from the Clinton campaign said that she was responsible for “securing a massive reduction in nuclear weapons” as secretary of State. That’s an overstatement. The agreement, known as New START, does not require the U.S. or Russia to destroy nuclear warheads or reduce their nuclear stockpile, nor does it place limits on short-range nuclear weapons. Besides, Russia was below the limit for deployed strategic, or long-range, nuclear warheads when the treaty took effect in 2011, and it has increased them since then.
“Clinton Overstates Nuclear Achievement,” April 27
And more than once, Clinton revised history when she claimed that she said she had “hoped” that the Trans-Pacific Partnership would be the “gold standard” of trade agreements. What Clinton originally said in 2012 was that “[t]his TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field.”

MAKE MONEY

MAKE MONEY

Oath Keepers Step Up In Baton Rouge, Louisiana to Back Up Cops Against Cop Killers

2 0 0 0

by Stewart Rhodes , July 22, 2016

Baton Rouge Oath Keepers Leader Paul Richy Presents Pledge of Support to

Major Anthony Ponton, Chief of Uniform Patrol for East Baton Rouge Sheriffs Office

The Baton Rouge, Louisiana chapter has stepped up to lead the way in backing police up, against cop killing terrorists.   U.S. Army 1st Air Cav Div veteran, Paul Richy, leader of the Oath Keepers there in Baton Rouge, has reached out to the officers of the East Baton Rouge Sheriffs Office, and the Baton Rouge Police Department, to personally deliver the following pledge of support:

Sheriff Gautreaux,
We grieve along with you and the rest of the citizens of Baton Rouge, during this violence that is being directed at our men and women in uniform. Please accept our deepest sympathy as you go about the painful business of burying the dead, caring for the wounded, and attempting to heal your community and keep it safe.
As a group of current and formerly serving military and police officers, as well as fire-fighters, EMTs, and other first-responders; we at Oath Keepers wish to extend our hand to help in any way we can. One of our programs, “Family Safe,” is designed specifically to free up officers that would otherwise need to be assigned for over- watch duties to protect military and law enforcement families that have come under threat. Our trained professionals have volunteered their services around the country for several years now and have protected police and military families in several states.
Those same police and military veterans can also serve as over- watch and extra eyes and ears in public places in your community to further free up officers so they can concentrate on “front line” duties. Finally, under our “Operation Backstop” (started first by our South Carolina Chapter and successfully conducted there and in WV for the past year) Oath Keepers members are now available to directly over-watch and back up police officers whenever they are vulnerable and wherever needed (with proper coordination with police leadership).
We stand ready and willing to assist you in this dreadful hour. Many of our members are recent military combat veterans and police veterans who will stand with you shoulder-to-shoulder against any enemy of our Constitution.
Please, feel free to call us at 1-318-914-2224 or correspond by email with us at la@oathkeepers.org, if we can in any way assist you and your community. United we stand; divided we fall.
Sincerely,
Paul Richey, U.S. Army Vet, Baton Rouge Oath Keepers POC.  paulrichey54@yahoo.com
Duncan Simmons, (Police veteran, USMC vet), Louisiana Oath Keepers State Coordinator. la@oathkeepers.org
Stewart Rhodes (U.S. Army Airborne veteran), National Founder and President of Oath Keepers. stewart.rhodes@oathkeepers.org
John Shirley (Houston PD, Retired) Lead National Oath Keepers Peace Officer Liaison, National BOD Member
Greg McWhirter, (Indiana police veteran, current Montana Corrections), National Peace Officer Liaison, Montana Liaison
John Karriman (Missouri Police Academy Defensive Tactics Instructor), National Peace Officer Liaison, MO State Coordinator

Letter presented to Lt. Watkins and CPL Gunter, Baton Rouge Police Department

Our national leadership and the Louisiana leadership co-authored that letter, to be sure the peace officers in the Baton Rouge community know that we are willing to stand shoulder-to-shoulder, with deeds, not just words, and defend our community against a common terrorist enemy.
We will be sending a similar letter pledging support to departments all over Louisiana and then all over the nation as part of our Operation Backstop and Operation Family Safe initiatives.   It is imperative that we reach out, right now, to step up and work with our local police, across the country, to stand against terrorists and racist/Marxist extremists.   Those of us who are trained and experienced military veterans, retired police, and trained EMTs, Fire-fighters and other first responders, must step up and lead the way in uniting our local communities, and helping them organize to defend against the wave of terrorism we now see hitting our nation, whether it is by racist Marxist cop killers, or Jihadists.  Let’s work together with the good cops in our local departments.
For the Republic,
Stewart Rhodes

PS- it is also imperative that we make it clear that police in this nation must side with the Constitution, as we all swore the same oath to defend it.  So long as they do so, we will stand with them, but we cannot, and will not, support any violations of the Constitution.  We cannot, as oath sworn veterans.   We all know that it is part of the agenda of the radical left and the elites to divide and conquer the American people along racial lines and also to pit the police against the people, and especially to pit the police against veterans, and to nationalize the police.    That is what far left groups such as Southern Poverty Law Center are doing – trying to convince the police that all veterans are a threat to them, and thus turn the police into a tool of oppression against patriotic veterans, which causes the veterans to see the police as the enemy as well.   The domestic enemies of the Constitution would love to see the warrior class of this nation turn on itself, so that police (many of whom are veterans) and the military veterans kill each other.  We must present a better way, which is local veterans and the police working together to secure their communities, standing together against terrorists, while also pushing local police to respect the Constitution and refuse unlawful orders.

Parroting SPLC’s Oath Keepers ‘Hate Group’ Lie Betrays NewBostonPost’s Claimed Principles

Does this look like the member of a “hate group” to you?

Despite the self-promoting claim that they “provide a home for conservative, libertarian, classical liberal, and moderate voices in an effort to promote constructive and civil debate,” an article by NewBostonPost “Politics” contributor Evan Lips proves to be both destructive and flat-out antagonistic. It’s all the more insulting because it’s a textbook example of lazy “journalism,” and it’s evident Lips made little attempt to research his subject matter or even fact-check to determine truth and achieve balance. That’s despite his identifying contradictions in the claims he relied on, and the negligence he then showed by not exploring what else might prove unreliable.
“‘Hate groups’ to make appearances at RNC in Cleveland,” Lips’ July 14 headline declared. That’s accompanied by a photo of Oath Keepers, which is then featured along with the New Black Panther Party and the Westboro Baptist Church. Lips’ source: The Southern Poverty Law Center.
In fact, Oath Keepers never made plans to have a presence at the RNC. Founder Stewart Rhodes explained why the group would not be attending and why reports stating otherwise were false. And SPLC is hardly the undisputed “defender of civil rights” Lips appears to take at face value.
As reported by Breitbart News, the FBI distanced itself from SPLC after the Family Research Council and “fourteen other conservative and Christian leaders [wrote a letter calling SPLC] a heavily politicized organization producing inaccurate and biased data on ‘hate groups’…”
Such SPLC bias against Oath Keepers has been well documented. None of that made its way into Lips’ assessment though, despite his own admission that “The SPLC … does not specifically identify the nature of the group’s hate but has claimed members seek to overthrow the government.”
Had Lips done even minimal fact-checking, he’d have quickly (like by spending two minutes on this website) discovered Oath Keepers Bylaws, which specifically mandate:

Section 8.02. Restrictions on Membership:
(a) No person who advocates, or has been or is a member, or associated with, any organization, formal or informal, that advocates the overthrow of the government of the United States or the violation of the Constitution thereof, shall be entitled to be a member or associate member.
(b) No person who advocates, or has been or is a member, or associated with, any organization, formal or informal, that advocates discrimination, violence, or hatred toward any person based upon their race, nationality, creed, or color, shall be entitled to be a member or associate member.

So much for an “anti-government” group that has as its reason for existence fidelity to the oath its members took to the Constitution. So much for Oath Keepers being “haters.”
That brings us to another thread Lips couldn’t help but notice, yet still managed to avoid pulling.  He even admits:

The SPLC claims the Oath Keepers “served as a private security force to prevent white businesses from looting,” but a St. Louis Post Dispatch report notes that members worked to protect a black-owned bakery after it had been vandalized during the unrest.

SPLC may have meant to write “protect” instead of “prevent,” but was too wrapped up in the smear job to notice. Still, Lips should have questioned the disconnect. And again per Rhodes:

The Southern Poverty Law Center is now trying to rewrite history by saying that during the Ferguson riots, “Oath Keepers served as a private security force to protect white businesses from looting.” The truth is that we guarded businesses owned by blacks (Natalie’s Cakes and More), Asians (Korean owned beauty supply and Asian owned Chinese restaurant), as well as whites (a white owned dental office). Their color didn’t matter to us, as we protect all Americans, but since the left likes to focus so much on race, let’s make that clear. And we also protected lives, not just property, since we protected the families of all colors who lived in apartments above those businesses – men, women, and children – from the deadly threat of murder by arson. And we didn’t ask the race of the people who lived there before deciding to protect them, because it was irrelevant to us. But of course, the SPLC can’t tell the truth about us as that doesn’t fit their agenda.

Further, following the attack at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Oath Keepers declared:

[W]e will train any other American or group of Americans who are targeted by Islamist terrorists, be they churches, Synagogues, school staff, or LGBT groups or nightclubs. We stand for the right of all Americans to defend themselves, and we stand united against all terrorists who would murder them.

Having the SPLC smear and conflate Oath Keepers with the New Black Panther Party and the Westboro Baptist Church is SOP for its lucrative agenda and hardly unexpected.  Having establishment media repeat the smear is also sadly something that’s frustratingly familiar. But a supposedly liberty-oriented media source parroting SPLC talking points without question shows, at minimum, ignorance and laziness. Both are inexcusable traits, assuming this was indeed just a case of journalistic malpractice and not agitprop.
Lips, writing for a venture that bills itself as “The hub of conservative thought,” would do well to research his subject matter in the future and not rely exclusively on “progressive” sources, that is if he expects to have credibility with his target readership. And NewBostonPost publisher Tina McCormick, editor Jennifer C. Braceras, and editor-at-large Mary McCleary would do well to drill that expectation into their writers before sloppiness and shoddy reporting torpedo their relatively new venture and scuttle their efforts and investment.
Because you know what they say about “Loose Lips.”

17 arrested in flag-burning melee outside GOP convention

July 20, 20

CLEVELAND (AP) — Police arrested 17 people Wednesday after a melee broke out during a flag-burning in the streets outside the Republican National Convention.

It was the most turbulent protest since the four-day convention began on Monday. The chaos briefly prevented delegates and members of the media from getting into the Quicken Loans Arena for the evening's proceedings.

Among those arrested was Gregory "Joey" Johnson, whose torching of the flag at a GOP convention three decades ago led to the landmark 1989 U.S. Supreme Court decision that said flag-burning is speech protected by the First Amendment.

Two officers were assaulted and suffered minor injuries, police said. One officer was seen bleeding from an elbow. Two of those arrested were charged with felonious assault on a police officer, the rest with failure to disperse.

Police Chief Calvin Williams said a protester whose pants caught fire got defensive when a police officer tried to put out the blaze. The man assaulted the officer, and "things escalated from there," Williams said.

The melee brought to 22 the number of people arrested during the convention, far fewer than some law enforcement authorities had feared.

"Right now, I think so far, so good," Williams said Wednesday night. "We're still out there, we're still vigilant, to make sure we finish this day and the last day tomorrow on a positive note."

The protest took place just outside an entrance to the arena and near a row of popular restaurants where cable news networks had set up for the week.

Carl Dix of the Revolutionary Communist Party said the group organized the burning of the American flag as a "political statement about the crimes of the American empire. There's nothing great about America."

Moments after the flag was set on fire, officers charged in to put it out with an extinguishing spray that some in the crowd thought was pepper spray because of similarities in the design of the canisters and the eye irritation caused by the fire-suppression substance.

"You're on fire! You're on fire, stupid!" a Cleveland officer shouted at a protester while firing the extinguishing spray.

"Burn that rag! Burn that rag!" supporters of the group yelled.

Pushing and shoving broke out, and police quickly had several group members on the ground in handcuffs. Some in the crowd jeered the officers, yelling, "Blue lives murder!"

About 10 more minutes passed before the crowd was under control.

Earlier in the day Wednesday, blocks away from the arena, a right-wing religious group lifted a banner reading "Jesus is angry with you sinners," while kissing lesbians mocked their message, helping turn Cleveland's Public Square into part-carnival, part-debate floor.

The expansive square was a free-flowing mix of ideas and beliefs along with colorful characters pounding on bongos and wailing on a sousaphone.

The day's demonstrations started when a few dozen people holding banners printed with a red-brick design formed a human wall to mock Donald Trump's plan to seal off the Mexican border.

"We want to wall off the hate of Trump," said Tim Chavez, of Columbus.

A half-dozen Trump supporters defended the GOP nominee from attacks by immigration activists.

Police officers used bicycles and their bodies to separate those with opposing views.

___

Associated Press writer Mark Gillispie contributed to this report.

___

This story has been corrected to show that police used fire-extinguishing spray, not pepper spray, and that the charges included failure to disperse, not inciting violence

Police and Law Enforcement

Kansas police officer shot and killed responding to shooting report

A Kansas City, Kan. police officer was shot and killed Tuesday afternoon while responding to a reported drive-by shooting.

ADVERTISEMENT

Officials said Capt. Robert David Melton, 46, was pronounced dead at University of Kansas Hospital at 2:55 p.m. local time.
Later Tuesday, authorities said the suspected shooter was caught about a block away from where Melton was shot. The suspect was being questioned along with a second person suspected in the initial drive-by. A third person who had been taken into custody was determined not to have been involved and was released, police said.

"There's a lot of pain and brokenness in our community and our nation right now, and we just want to ask everyone to be prayerful and thoughtful right now," Mayor Mark Holland of the Unified Government of Wyandotte County said.
Tuesday marked the second time this year that a Kansas City, Kan., police officer had been shot in the line of duty. Detective Brad Lancaster, 39, was shot and killed near Kansas Speedway during a violent crime spree on May 9. Melton had been part of the police honor guard at Lancaster's funeral.

Chief Terry Zeigler tweeted news of the shooting just after 2 p.m.
Ida Ford, 87, was watching television in her two-story brick home when gunfire erupted just outside. Ford said she thought someone was knocking on her air conditioner until her son rushed downstairs and told her the three loud noises she had heard were gunshots. Ford said she looked through her window and saw the officer sprawled and unresponsive on the asphalt road in front of her home. She watched for a few minutes as paramedics worked on the officer.
"I'm just so sorry for his family," she said.

The shooting happened after police responded to a report around 1:30 p.m. from a person who said several people in a car were firing shots. The suspect vehicle took off as police arrived, but it crashed into a fence and the occupants bailed out at 1:36 p.m., police spokesman Tom Tomasic said. Two people were taken into custody within three minutes of the wreck, he said.

Assaults on Law Enforcement Officers | Graphiq

About a half-hour after the initial call, Melton saw someone who matched the description of the third suspect about 20 blocks from the original scene and pulled up to them, police spokesman Tom Tomasic said. Before he could get out of his car, he was shot multiple times.
Tomasic told reporters it was too early to determine whether the shooting was linked to other attacks on police officers in Dallas and Baton Rouge.
"As far as we know this started out as a crime that we were investigating, so to just say that he was shot for no reason, we don't know that yet. We do believe that he was investigating a crime so he was out here doing his service."
Tomasic went on to describe Melton as a "good friend, good person. [I] knew him well, worked with him everyday."
Melton was a 17-year veteran of the Kansas City, Kansas, Police Department. According to his LinkedIn profile, he had also served in the Kansas Army National Guard and was deployed to Afghanistan from September 2010 to March 2012
Outside the hospital where Melton died, local Baptist preacher Jimmie Banks -- a friend of the city's mayor -- sat dejected on a bench, head lowered, after attending the news conference announcing the officer's passing. He said it was painful to sit in that room and see the grief-stricken faces.

"The contributions that peace officers make to protect and serve -- they deserve better," said Banks. "When they leave home, the family expects them to return. It's shameful this has happened."

BODY ARMOR

Shooting guns is fun, and so is hunting, and clay shooting, and 3-gun competitions.  But that's not the purpose of the 2nd Amendment.  It's there to fight against a tyrannical government and to ensure that we can exercise our other rights.  Be sure that you have the tools you need to throw off an oppressive government when the time comes.

We have many of those items on sale and Team Infidel Members get an additional 10% discount on these as well! (Perks of Membership!) Join today! Membership is just $9.99/month and pays for itself on your first purchase of $100 or more!  What are you waiting for?

---

What's up with Team Infidel?

If you've been to any tactical website or brick and mortar store recently, you'll notice that the shelves are a little bare or there's a lead time to get the items you want (if the store is being honest).  Since the shootings and bombings these past two weeks, we've been extremely busy.  We've sold out of all our level III+ and level IV armor and we're getting low on level III and IIIa.  We've reordered supplies to stock more, but logistics and increased demand on the raw materials mean longer lead times for us.  If demand stays the way it is, there's 2-4+ week lead time on the level III+ and IV armor.  And once the level III is out, it will be about 3 weeks to get more.

The lesson here is this.  Don't put off buying something because you don't need it now.  Plan for the future.  For instance, those who purchased last month when things were "normal" got their orders shipped out next business day and now have armor.  Those that didn't, but are now trying to buy what they need, are stuck waiting up to a month for it to come in.

My advice: If you need armor, order it now.  There's a waiting list now for the III+ and IV (we still have level III as of this e-mail).  The sooner you get in line, the sooner you'll get your stuff.  With Sept 11th anniversary coming up, the elections (November 8th) and the end of the Shemitah year(October 2nd), things are likely to get worse, not better.  I'm not trying to be all doom and gloom or use scare tactics to get you buy stuff.  I honestly think we're in for rough days ahead and I want you to be prepared.

Don't let up.  Don't maintain.  Continually improve.

Chad Cooper, CEO

---

Unintended Consequences

Excerpts by John Ross (printed in 1995)

"America has served as a beacon for oppressed people all over the world.  We have led by example, and we have watched our example of individual freedom be embraced by others who cherish liberty.  It is a bitter irony that today, as we watch the Soviet Union disintegrate and we watch people all over the planet throw off their yokes of oppression, we ourselves stand meekly by while our own government slowly strips us of our final guarantee of freedom."

"Another shameful thing involves those of you who have always thought of yourself as supportive of law enforcement.  You must realize that when the police are ordered to violate your rights, they are not your friends.  Do not hope police officers will resign instead of carrying out orders the dislike.  They will not.  The State Police did not resign thirty years ago.  Instead, they used tear gas, Billy clubs, and German Shepherds on civil rights marchers.  Federal Police in Waco, Texas last year did not resign.  Instead, they used machine guns and tanks on a group of people they suspected had not paid a $200 tax, and then burned all eighty-six of them alive.  In Los Angeles, St. Louis, and Chicago, the police are not resigning.  Instead, they are conducting warrantless searches in public housing projects.  They are seizing guns that have not been stolen, and they are seizing them from people who do not have criminal records.  Federal forms for applicants to the Special Forces contain the question 'Would you seize weapons from U.S. citizen if ordered to do so?' I guarantee the answer they're looking for is 'Yes', not 'No'."

"The recent policies of raising your taxes, banning your guns, seizing your property, and chilling your freedoms are the last gasp of an evil monster.  That evil monster is socialism, and it is dying.  I want to see every one of you at the funeral.  Thank you."
   _________________

Chad again.  There has been a tremendous show of support for police officers since the Dallas, Baton Rouge, New York, Minnesota and others.  I think that's great and I support honest law enforcement officers.  We all need to encourage and support those who defend justice.  I offer a warning however.  We should not provide unconditional support to law enforcement.  We should support law enforcement personnel and agencies only so far as they uphold the Constitution.  When they fail to uphold the Constitution, they will not receive my support.  As many of you know, I'm a former police officer and US Air Force Veteran and I have studied the law and understand my rights.  Many of my customers are police officers.  My hope is that my words will encourage you to continue to uphold the law.  I urge you (and everyone) to re-read the Bill of Rights and pledge to protect our rights against all enemies foreign and domestic. 

---

Driven 2 is nearly ready for release.  ETA is one week.  Get ready!!!

You can watch the trailer for it here: https://vimeo.com/168665482/driven2dvdtrailer
As with my warning about not procrastinating your armor purchase, this DVD and book will sellout FAST.  We're also giving away 1000 survival paracord bracelets with every order.  So, when I announce that we're ready to sell, I suggest you jump on it!

---

Did you know you can order a  kit or a backpack from us that has everything you'd want already packed and assembled ready to go out of the box?!!! For more information: http://infidelbodyarmor.com/build-a-kit-c-17/

Infidel Body Armor is committed to assist you in gaining knowledge, skills, and equipment necessary to protect your loved ones in the event of an emergency or a SHTF situation- whether that be a global apocalypse or a home invasion.

Many of our customers have purchased the Driven DVD and Book, which serves as a basis for application of combat knowledge in a bug-out SHTF situation.  If you have not purchased it yet, please consider doing so.  It's on sale for $39.99 and comes with a membership you'll really use.  Click HERE for more information.

If you're happy with your experience shopping with Infidel, I invite you to leave a review on the product you purchased.  I'll ensure that your identity remains secure.  Reviews help others to make an informed purchase- and we post them all.