Sometimes politics is easy, and Republican voters in Arizona have a no-brainer in next year’s U.S. Senate race against “independent” Kyrsten Sinema. The Democrats are going to pick one of the various “progressive” kooks in their clown-car primary, and Sinema will run for re-election as an independent, creating a dream scenario for Republicans, who will probably need just 40% of the vote to win in the resulting three-way race. The candidate for Arizona Republicans is obviously Mark Lamb:
Sheriff Mark Lamb is a husband, father, grandfather, and God-fearing patriot. Lamb has served as Sheriff of Pinal County since 2017. Lamb serves on the frontlines at the Southern Border, fighting the criminal cartels to prevent the flow of deadly fentanyl and human trafficking. In 2020, Sheriff Lamb took a courageous stand against COVID lockdowns, as well as mask and vaccine mandates, ensuring that his people lived free, businesses remained open, and children stayed in school. Through this steadfast dedication to liberty, Lamb earned the nickname “America’s Sheriff”.
Now, Lamb is determined to take his fight to the U.S. Senate. Our Constitutional rights are under attack, the timeless values of our Republic are eroding, and America’s standing on the world stage has been imperiled by the failed leadership of Joe Biden and the Democrats. Lamb will fight to secure the border, stand up for Law and Order, protect the Second Amendment, bring fiscal sanity to Washington, and restore American strength on the world stage. Sheriff Mark Lamb is the conservative fighter Arizona needs to defend our values of God, family, and freedom.
“Gee, Stacy, what caused you to endorse this candidate?”
The answer: Research. Because of his frequent appearances on Live PD, I was already familiar with Sheriff Lamb, but it was while researching a completely unrelated topic that I came across this story:
Talk about a backhanded endorsement! Left-wing writer Matt Shuham has exactly one job at HuffPo, doing smear-jobs on Republicans, and if he’s attacking Lamb as “far right,” what more do you need to know?
He’s repeatedly referred to immigration at the southern border as an “invasion” and called for labeling drug cartels as terrorist groups “just like we did to ISIS.” As sheriff, he refused to enforce anti-COVID measures in his county — even saying at one anti-vaccine rally, “We’re going to find out who is willing to die for freedom.” He also teamed up with True the Vote, the conspiracy-theory-driven group that spent years fundraising on the lie that the 2020 election was stolen by Democrats.
On the morning of Jan. 6, 2021, Lamb blamed the mob in D.C. on Democrats, and on the Supreme Court not “hearing our voices.”
Lamb may still find willing ears in Arizona’s electorate, and his presence in the Senate would swing the relatively moderate caucus, at least compared to their House counterparts, sharply to the right. . . .
(Please, please, stop begging! I endorse him 100%!)
During an interview last October with Jack Posobiec — a far-right media personality who the Southern Poverty Law Center noted months prior had “extensive ties to white supremacists” — Lamb echoed the so-called “Great Replacement” theory, or the racist idea that Democrats are attempting to “replace” Americans (typically portrayed as white Americans) with immigrants. . . .
“He is very much both a mouthpiece for, and a creation of, the far-right movement in Arizona and nationally,” [left-wing activist Devin] Burghart said.
It’s never been my habit to over-interpret anything — a Foucault-style textual analysis is just more work than it’s worth — but today I saw Ace of Spades take a shot at Donald Trump and thought, “Hmmmm.”
So now comes my least favorite phase of every new Trump indictment, the ranting by Trump’s more passionate defenders that Ron DeSantis isn’t doing enough to defend the man who slurs him as a pedophile and homosexual!! His statements aren’t STRONG enough in swearing for the honor of a man who smears him dishonorably!!! and that Trump’s legal problems — almost all of which are self-inflicted– are a reason to elect him president to fuck up all over the place some more, rather than a reason to elect a strong president who will pardon Trump and let him live peacefully and free as a private citizen.
Every one of Trump’s problems gets weaponized against DeSantis, and then people wonder — Gee, why aren’t DeSantis’ supporters more interested in talking about Trump’s problems?
Tell you what: If Trump issues a STRONG statement clearing him from the previous lies that DeSantis is a pedophile, gay, cheats on his wife, killed more people with Covid than Democrat governors Newsom or Cuomo, then I’ll join you in your calls for STRONG statements clearing Trump of crimes which, let’s face it, he probably did commit.
To repeat myself: “Hmmmm.”
Something I realized long ago, sort of Rule Number One for survival in the conservative blogosphere: Never piss off Ace of Spades.
Ace has very good instincts about who is or is not Down For The Agenda. If he ever starts taking shots at somebody, you can bet that sooner or later that person will prove himself to be an unprincipled quisling.
But why bring up Allahpundit at this late date, eh?
If you look at the RCP average, Trump is beating DeSantis 3-1 and, quite frankly, DeSantis is starting to look like This Year’s Scott Walker. It is therefore remarkable that Ace would take this stance just now, when Trump looks like a shoo-in for the 2024 GOP nomination.
After my experience in 2011-2012, I stopped trying to influence Republican primaries because, despite what some people may imagine, the voters don’t seem to give a damn about the opinions of bloggers. If my herculean efforts to stop Mitt Romney from getting the GOP nomination were futile, why even bother commenting on primaries?
Basically, I’m agnostic on the matter of who gets the Republican nomination, as long as it’s not someone named “Bush,” or a useless blob of frustrated impotence like Chris Christie. Everything I’ve seen so far suggests to me that Trump is a lead-pipe cinch for the 2024 nomination, however much anyone may wish otherwise, or however much better DeSantis might be as a candidate in the general election.
Is there some way that could change? I don’t know, but maybe some of Trump’s more outspoken supporters should think about toning down their rhetoric just a wee bit, because they appear to be in danger of violating Rule Number One: Never piss off Ace of Spades.
In April 2021, the president of the Oakland Chinatown Chamber of Commerce was assaulted on the streets by a man who yelled, “F–k you Chinatown! F–k you Chinaman!” A week later, 25-year-old James Lee Ramsey was charged with felony assault and a hate crime against Carl Chan, and the case was scheduled for trial in August 2021.
Ramsey, 25, pleaded no contest to assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury in exchange for the hate crime allegation being dismissed.
“As long as he’s receiving help and not going out into the community hurting people. I think that’s the important thing,” says Chan.
The district attorney’s office has the option to ask the judge to sentence Ramsey to serve his time in a secured mental health facility. He faces up to four years in state prison.
On April 29th, James Ramsey, a 25-year-old Black Oakland resident with a documented history of serious mental illness, allegedly knocked over, potentially by accident, 62-year-old Chinatown Chamber of Commerce President Carl Chan.
Mr. Ramsey has been diagnosed with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder and told officers he had been off of his medication for about a month when he was arrested for the alleged assault. Instead of being provided sufficient treatment, James is potentially facing years in prison.
[The Oakland Police Department] is using this alleged assault as justification to get more money from the City, and Carl Chan, in his role as Chinatown Chamber of Commerce President, is pushing for more policing.
The Anti Police-Terror Project condemns anti-Asian hate and stands in solidarity with Asian people and oppressed people everywhere. However, in this case, we see a man with disabilities in need of intensive care, not someone committing a hate crime.
James Ramsey’s sentencing hearing was rescheduled for Thursday, November 18th at 9:30am.
Join us at the Rene C. Davidson Courthouse at 1225 Fallon St, Oakland, CA 94612 to demand the charges be dropped!
Whoa! It’s one thing to give the guy a plea bargain — proving “hate crime” charges can be difficult — but it’s something else entirely to “demand the charges be dropped.” Crazy is as crazy does. The state cannot be in the business of policing people’s delusions and fantasies, so whatever was going through Ramsey’s mind while he was off his meds is between him and whatever psychiatrist may be assigned to treat him. But assault? We’re going to just give crazy people a free pass on assault?
The Anti-Police Terror Project is a radical-left anti-police activist organization based in Oakland, California. The organization advocates defunding the police, supporting cutting half of the budget of the Oakland Police Department and redirecting those funds towards various social welfare programs including mental health and wellness services.
The group has alleged that the police have caused “community trauma” in the Black community and other communities of color. It has demanded more resources to research “police-related trauma” and the use of any research to shape the policies of the police. . . .
Cat Brooks is the co-founder of the organization. . . .
According to its 2021 tax return, the organization the organization had $5,709,289 in revenue and $313,631 in expenses. It had $5,403,517 in assets.
So, what do we know about Cat Brooks? Conn Carroll explains, “In June [2021], the Oakland City Council voted to cut $18 million from the city’s police budget and spend that money instead on a variety of social programs.” Cat Brooks actually organized a protest at the home of one of the two council members who voted against this measure:
Foremost among those advocates [of defunding the police] is Cat Brooks, the co-founder of the Anti Police-Terror Project, one of the main groups pushing for defunding the Oakland Police Department. She was brought up in Las Vegas by a white mother who was an anti-domestic violence activist. Her father, a black man, struggled with substance abuse and ended up in prison. “I watched him be terrorized and traumatized by law enforcement,” she recalled.
While pursuing a career in acting in Los Angeles, Brooks stumbled into political activism, which eventually brought her to Oakland. In 2018, she ran for mayor, coming in second with about a quarter of the vote.
When I asked Brooks about the two Council members — both black — who voted against the reduction in the police budget she was unambiguous in her contempt. They are “representing the interests of the police, and they’re representing the interests of development,” she said. “If they were representing the interests of the people, then they, too, should want black bodies to stop falling.” . . .
When I asked Brooks if she supports the abolition of police, she said, “Absolutely. Unapologetically.” Describing the role of the police in society, she said, “Their job is to maintain the status quo. And the status quo is race-based capitalism. And so they are the front line soldiers of the larger system of white supremacy, which is the engine of this country, both here locally and globally.”
So, her father was a dopehead who went to prison and therefore, the cops are the bad guys, “front line soldiers . . . of white supremacy.” And rich people gave her $5.7 million to promote this lunatic idea.
James Lee Ramsey, a 27-year-old Oakland resident, was arrested on July 21 after kicking and assaulting an 88-year-old Asian woman and reportedly attacking a witness at the scene, NBC News reported. Ramsey avoided prison in 2021 after having hate crime charges against him dropped by former Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley.
The elderly woman was rushed to the hospital and is currently in stable condition, according to NBC News.
Ramsey is now in police custody and is being charged with elder abuse, assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury, and battery causing serious bodily injury. He pleaded not guilty to all charges and is being held without bail. San Fransisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins called the crime “horrific” and promised Ramsey would finally face proper justice, according to NBC.
“The crimes that Mr. Ramsey is accused of are horrific. I am grateful to the witness who was able to detain him until police arrived ensuring that he did not flee,” Jenkins said in a statement. “My office, on behalf of the victims, and every San Franciscan who is fed up with brazen violence like this, will stand for justice and seek to hold him accountable for his crimes.”
O’Malley previously dropped hate crime charges against Ramsey in 2021 after he assaulted Carl Chan, president of the Chinatown Chamber of Commerce. Ramsey plead no contest and walked free after his public defender cited mental health challenges, the San Fransico Chronicle reported.
It is not mercy to let crazy people run around the streets attacking innocent strangers, and certainly it is not justice. It is folly to permit our sympathy for those afflicted with mental illness to override the need to protect public safety, which is the first duty of any government.
Hunter Biden pled not guilty on Wednesday to gun and tax charges, refusing to accept a new plea deal laid out by prosecutors.
The original plea deal fell apart after the judge questioned if it covered future potential charges of the Justice Department’s ongoing investigation. The prosecution reportedly said the deal did not include any alleged Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) violations.
MSNBC reported the court took a ten-minute recess to determine if the two parties could quickly come to an agreement. When the deal got back on track, reports indicated it would “be more limited in scope,” only including specific charges related to tax and gun wronging. “The two sides have agreed that this deal does not shield him from potential future charges,” CNN reported.
But the judge said she was not ready to accept the plea deal and asked both the prosecutor and Hunter Biden to submit additional briefs, according to reporters inside the courthouse. The parties will have to return to court in the future.
The hearing ended with Hunter Biden pleading not guilty.
Sen. Josh Hawley told CNN the high court drama shows the plea “sweetheart” deal was flawed, and additional charges could be brought:
It’s very telling that the judge intervened here and said basically, ‘No, I’m not going to approve some sweeping blanket deal.’ … I mean, that tells you the court has serious concerns about other potential charges here, and also the scope of the deal, which has seemed outrageous from the beginning.
“This, I think, signals that they’re [sic] still very much potential for prosecution forward,” he added.
U.S. prosecutor David Weiss admitted in July that the FBI informant form alleging the Biden family bribes is part of an ongoing investigation.
The Hunter Biden plea deal has fallen apart with the parties given 30 days to clarify the judge’s questions.
"This was an extraordinary scene that unfolded in the federal courthouse," @CBS_Herridge reports. The judge also raised constitutional questions. pic.twitter.com/pxd9gLY07q
Hunter Biden arrived in a Delaware federal court on Wednesday morning expecting that, in a few short hours, he would walk out a free man with full immunity from prosecution for an exceedingly wide range of alleged criminal conduct, ranging from gun and drug charges to foreign influence peddling. His expectation was that his deal would be insulated from challenges from the presiding judge, or from a prosecutorial change of heart under a future administration. His expectation was that his legal ordeals were coming to a close.
Instead, U.S. District Court Judge Maryellen Noreika picked apart his plea deal with surgical precision, exposing its legal contradictions, and upbraiding both defense counsel and the Department of Justice for structuring an unprecedented deal that in her view — and mine — was illegal and unconstitutional. . . .
Seeing reports that the federal judge is balking at Hunter Biden's plea deal, I just want to thank Cocaine Mitch again for ramming through all of Trump's judicial appointments. pic.twitter.com/zmocQdbd9h
In 2021, Scott McGreal, writing in Psychology Today, reported that an American study demonstrated a link between high levels of neuroticism and liberal politics. Additional findings from a British study later that same year indicated a similar link between left-wing political views on economics and the environment (among other issues) and the occurrence of generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and phobias. One interesting aspect of these findings is that they run counter to the hypothesis that persons expressing generally conservative political views hold their views due to “increased threat sensitivity.” Another is that the researchers presenting these findings had no axe to grind against political liberals or leftists. Quite the reverse, in fact, and they were startled by their own findings.
These findings are of a piece with those of a much larger longitudinal study of the mental health of American adolescents over the years 2005 to 2018. That study showed both a marked increase of “internalized symptoms” of poor mental health and a consistent disparity between the mental health of self-reported teenage “liberals,” who consistently evinced greater levels of these internalized symptoms, and “conservatives,” who consistently evinced lower levels, even as mental health deteriorated for the entire age cohort as an aggregate. The study broke the subjects down by socioeconomic group, sex, race, and their parents’ educational level. The findings generally indicated that these social factors, along with parental ideology, had significant though differing influences driving the increase in anxiety, depression, and loneliness among those with “internalized symptoms.” The results showed white, liberal adolescent girls faring the worst in mental health. The findings of that study were buttressed by a 2020 Pew Research Center study that demonstrated, yet again, a correlation between liberal politics and mental health problems, prompting headlines to the effect of “white liberal girls in mental health crisis.” . . .
People who elect Democrats are self-evidently daft, demented, deranged, bonkers, berserk, off their rockers, nuttier than a Snickers bar, a few fries short of a Happy Meal, and cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.
