Virginia Congress Continues Gun Control Frenzy With 9 More Bills, Ignores Massive Protest

virginia-congress-continues-gun-control-frenzy-with-9-more-bills,-ignores-massive-protest

30-01-20 10:24:00,

Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,

Despite a massive and peaceful turnout on the Lobby Day rally on January 20th, the Virginia State Congress remained totally unphased by what the people wanted and proceeded to advance numerous unconstitutional gun laws over the following week.

While everyone has been focused on the Wuhan coronavirus, state lawmakers have been quietly eroding gun rights.

“Red Flag” gun law passed

Proving they don’t care at all about the opinions of the people of Virginia, the state’s Senate passed a “red flag” gun law only two days later. Here’s the summary of SB240.

Creates a procedure by which any attorney for the Commonwealth or any law-enforcement officer may apply to a general district court, circuit court, or juvenile and domestic relations district court judge or magistrate for an emergency substantial risk order to prohibit a person who poses a substantial risk of injury to himself or others from purchasing, possessing, or transporting a firearm. If an emergency substantial risk order is issued, a judge or magistrate may issue a search warrant to remove firearms from such person.

An emergency substantial risk order shall expire on the fourteenth day following issuance of the order. The bill requires a court hearing in the circuit court for the jurisdiction where the order was issued within 14 days from issuance of an emergency substantial risk order to determine whether a substantial risk order should be issued.

Seized firearms shall be retained by a law-enforcement agency for the duration of an emergency substantial risk order or a substantial risk order or, for a substantial risk order and with court approval, may be transferred to a third party 21 years of age or older chosen by the person from whom they were seized. The bill allows the complainant of the original warrant to file a motion for a hearing to extend the substantial risk order prior to its expiration. The court may extend the substantial risk order for a period not longer than 180 days.

The bill provides that persons who are subject to a substantial risk order, until such order has been dissolved by a court,

 » Lees verder

Congress Now Funding “Controversial” Geoengineering “Plan B” to Spray Particles in the Sky to Cool Earth – Activist Post

congress-now-funding-“controversial”-geoengineering-“plan-b”-to-spray-particles-in-the-sky-to-cool-earth-–-activist-post

27-01-20 03:20:00,

By Matt Agorist

It was reported this month that the top climate change scientist for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has received $4 million in funding from Congress along with permission to study two highly controversial geoengineering methods in an attempt to cool the Earth. According to Science Magazine, David Fahey, director of the Chemical Sciences Division of NOAA’s Earth System Research Laboratory, told his staff last week that the federal government is ready to examine the science behind “geoengineering”—or what he dubbed a “Plan B” for climate change.

What could possibly go wrong?

Before we go any further, it is important to point out to new readers that we are not a satire site. We are not a conspiracy theory site. The information you are about to read is factually accurate and 100% real despite the ostensible ‘skeptics’ who claim otherwise.

Over the past several years, the “conspiracy theory” of spraying particles into the sky to cool the Earth has become more mainstream. It came to a head last year when CNBC put out a video titled How Bill Gates-Funded Solar Geoengineering Could Help End Climate Change. 

The video is nothing short of an infomercial for chemtrails. It is truly bizarre how this subject has moved from the fringes of conspiracy circles and into the mainstream and no one is even batting an eye. Now that Bill Gates has endorsed and funded it, the world is suddenly open to the idea of attempting to modify the planet’s weather by spraying chemicals into the atmosphere to block out the sun.

Now, the government is throwing their hat into the mix as well. This “Plan B” approach is two-pronged, according to NOAA.

One is to inject sulfur dioxide or a similar aerosol into the stratosphere to help shade the Earth from more intense sunlight. It is patterned after a natural solution: volcanic eruptions, which have been found to cool the Earth by emitting huge clouds of sulfur dioxide.

The second approach would use an aerosol of sea salt particles to improve the ability of low-lying clouds over the ocean to act as shade.

 » Lees verder

US Congress cracks down on ABC News for ‘Epstein coverup,’ demands to know WHO killed the story and WHY

us-congress-cracks-down-on-abc-news-for-‘epstein-coverup,’-demands-to-know-who-killed-the-story-and-why

18-11-19 08:38:00,

In the wake of an explosive revelation that ABC News allegedly knew the extent of Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes years ago but chose not to report them, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy has demanded answers from the network’s execs.

In his letter to ABC News president James Goldston, McCarthy demanded the names of those involved in the decision not to run the story, as well as their motives. In a video clip leaked earlier this month, ABC News anchor Amy Robach is caught on a “hot mic” speaking to colleagues about the alleged cover-up.

Also on rt.com
‘We had Clinton, we had everything’: ABC’s ‘Epstein coverup’ exposed by ‘p***ed’ news anchor in Project Veritas leak

“I’ve had this interview with Virginia Roberts… we would not put it on the air,” Robach says about the woman who now, three years later, publicly accuses Epstein of using her as a sex slave, and pimping her out to his powerful friends, including Britain’s Prince Andrew.

The network rushed to defend its coverage (or lack of it), claiming that the story was killed only because their journalists could not corroborate details. It immediately launched a hunt for the whistleblower who leaked the video to conservative group Project Veritas. McCarthy’s letter, signed by several House Republicans and obtained by journalist Megyn Kelly, slammed ABC’s damage control of the situation.

We believe that uncovering the source of the information is incomparably less important than the possibility of exposing the source of a human trafficking operation.

Also on rt.com
‘Epstein didn’t kill himself’ is a FASCIST recruiting tool, establishment cries after meme goes mainstream in Congress

The lawmakers also want to know what additional information ABC executives may have learned about Epstein following the first interview with the victim, and whether they informed authorities of it at any point.

Who was involved in deciding this story was not of public interest, and what were their reasons for deciding so?

READ MORE: MSM execs part of ‘network of people’ that covered for Epstein – Project Veritas founder to RT

Another question urges Robach to “expand on the ‘outside forces’ she mentioned as potentially responsible for the story not running.” In the clip she said: “First of all,

 » Lees verder

Here’s Why 97% Of Congress Get Re-Elected Each Year

here’s-why-97%-of-congress-get-re-elected-each-year

21-10-19 09:39:00,

Submitted by Adam Andrzejewski, first published in Forbes

How is 97 percent of Congress able to get re-elected each year even though only 17 percent of the American people believe our representatives are doing a good job?

It’s called an incumbent protection system. Taxpayers have a right to know how it works.

Recently, our auditors at OpenTheBooks.com, mashed up the federal checkbook with the congressional campaign donor database (source: OpenSecrets.org). We found powerful members of Congress soliciting campaign donations from federal contractors based in their districts.

We followed the money and found a culture of conflict-of-interest. The confluence of federal money, campaign cash, private employment, investments, prestigious committee appointments, political power, nepotism, and other conflicts are a fact pattern.

Furthermore, members of Congress own investment stock in, are employed by, and receive retirement pensions from federal contractors to whom they direct billions of taxpayer dollars.

Moreover, members sponsor legislation that affects these contractors. The contractor’s lobbyists then advocate for the legislation that helps the member and the contractor. Oftentimes, the contractor’s lobbyist also donates campaign cash to the member.

Here are five case examples detailing the conflict-of-interest among five powerful members of Congress:

Rep. John Larson (D-CT1): United Technologies (UT) executives, employees, political action committee, and affiliated lobbyists are the #1 campaign donor to Larson’s committee ($377,050). UT collected federal grants (subsidies) $83.8 million and federal contracts $16.1 billion (2014-2018). Mr. Larson owns UT stock 2012-2018 (last disclosure). Larsen is a ranking member on House Ways and Means.

Seven years ago, Larson’s wife got a state job from the wife of a campaign donor, who was also the state insurance commissioner. She beat out 199 other candidates and was the only one to fill out a job application. Since her hiring, she’s earned an estimated $600,000 in cash compensation.

Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK4): The Chickasaw Nation and affiliates are the #1 campaign donor to Cole’s committee ($258,461). The Nation received $700 million in federal grants and $434,000 in surplus military equipment from the Pentagon, including mine-resistant vehicles, night vision goggles,

 » Lees verder