This article was originally published on LET in the middle of 2019 – before the 2020 election. All we can say is… told ya so.
They don’t want to take your guns, the media tells us. Then this.
“Why should we allow people to have military-style weapons including pistols with 9-mm bullets and can hold 10 or more rounds?”
Those were the words from former Vice President and now presidential-hopeful Joe Biden.
Of course it wasn’t exactly at an event with rural Americans. He made the comments on Friday at a $2,800 per head fundraiser in Seattle.
From the Seattle Times:
Joe Biden raked in campaign cash at two private Seattle fundraisers on Friday, including one at the home of a top Amazon executive, where the former vice president ever-so-gently raised the role the company has played in the loss of some middle-class jobs.
Speaking at the Queen Anne neighborhood home of David Zapolsky, Amazon’s general counsel, who introduced him as someone “who can bring stability,” Biden lamented the Democratic Party’s failure to speak to working-class constituencies who have grown pessimistic about their economic futures…
While saying he supports the Second Amendment, Biden called the absolutist arguments of some gun-rights supporters “bizarre.” Noting people can’t own machine guns or bazookas, Biden said:
“Why should we allow people to have military-style weapons including pistols with 9-mm bullets and can hold 10 or more rounds?”
He also claimed we protect Canadian geese more than we protect our children.
From the same Seattle Times story:
Mentioning his own shotgun ownership, Biden talked about Delaware goose-hunting restrictions that limit hunters to three shotgun shells.
“We protect geese from Canada more than we do people,” he said.
Late last month, Joe Biden made headlines when he made the comment that “cops don’t pull over white girls”.
Since then, he’s continued to push the bounds of hypocrisy.
First, he admits to doing the same thing President Trump is accused of in the most recent push to impeach. President Trump spent the better part of two years fighting claims of collusion between he and Russia. Now, Biden is in bed with a foreign agent working with a former Soviet-bloc nation.
And just for fun, throw in the fact that Biden is now pushing the same false narrative about the incidents surrounding Michael Brown and Ferguson, Missouri.
Biden, a Democratic front-runner, has a new Super PAC helping fund his campaign, and it’s being run by a registered foreign agent for the government of Azerbaijan. Larry Rasky, a lobbyist who previously worked as a top campaign operative for Biden, is listed as the treasurer of the PAC, according to records filed with the Federal Election Commission.
“A former Joe Biden aide has filed paperwork to form a super PAC, called Unite the Country, that is set to boost the former vice president with millions of dollars in spending in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary,” according to Politico.
Documents were filed with the Department of Justice that show Rasky just happens to be a registered foreign agent, lobbying on behalf of the government of Azerbaijan, which is a former Soviet country.
The records, which were filed pursuant to the Foreign Agent Registration Act, show that Rasky was hired by the Azerbaijani government on April 23, 2019. Federal documents signed by Rasky show that he reports directly to Elin Suleymanov, Azerbaijan’s ambassador to the United States.
Rasky and his firm were also actively lobbying for a political party in B Bangladesh up until January of this year.
He is earning around $15,000 per month per the filings.
For those unfamiliar with the term, super PACs are independent political action committees that Democrats have criticized because they allow unlimited donations. They also restrict direct contact and coordination with the campaigns they represent.
Biden appears to have accepted super PAC spending because of fundraising shortcomings. His campaign has struggled to keep up with Sanders and Warren.
A recent Politico article identified Rasky as “a longtime Biden friend who worked on Biden’s 1988 and 2008 presidential bids.” It did not delve into Rasky’s service as an agent for the Azerbaijani government.
Biden broke an earlier pledge not to use a super PAC. After doing so, he encountered harsh criticism from fellow Democrats and the media.
Former Rep. O’Rourke (D-TX) emailed supporters, noting that:
“Joe Biden went back on his no super PACs pledge and decided to encourage billionaires to form a super PAC to bankroll his campaign.”
CNN’s John King noted that Biden had lied about not changing his position on super PAC money.
The revelation that Biden’s super PAC is run by a foreign agent also bolsters concerns raised by Republicans about the former vice president allegedly using his office to sell influence, as his son Hunter enjoyed lucrative business ties in Ukraine, China, and elsewhere, seemingly without any other notably business qualifications or experience.
Following days of criticism over an apparent softening of his stance toward super PACs, former Vice President Joe Biden’s campaign warned a newly formed independent entity not to attack Biden’s Democratic competitors.
“Our campaign would be extremely frustrated if the super PAC was used to attack other Democrats,” Biden’s campaign manager Greg Schultz.
Biden has denied changing his opinion over whether he would welcome the assistance of super PACs, which allow for backers to spend unlimited sums to boost a candidate. As previously mentioned, Federal law prohibits super PACs from coordinating directly with campaigns.
“The super PAC was not encouraged. It was not discouraged. And the reality is, Trump does not want to run against Joe Biden. He’s spending $10 million to date against him,” said Schultz.
“Our campaign was at a disadvantage in that Joe Biden didn’t walk in with his own email list. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have built their email list at a national level for years and years with millions and millions and millions of dollars of investment,” said Schultz.
Despite the fundraising gap, the Biden campaign has insisted he has enough funds to compete through Super Tuesday.
Frankly, I was completely oblivious to the stances Biden was taking on many subjects, other than what was talked about on TV. So, I went to his campaign website. There is very little there. But I was able to find a link to a “plan” he laid out to deal with a “flawed” criminal justice.
Here are some excerpts from what I found.
Biden plans to: Expand and use the power of the U.S. Justice Department to address systemic misconduct in police departments and prosecutors’ offices.
Using authority in legislation spearheaded by Biden as senator, the Obama-Biden Justice Department usedpattern-or-practice investigations and consent decrees to address circumstances of “systemic police misconduct” and to “restore trust between police and communities” in cities such as Ferguson.
Several of the items Biden wants to have the DOJ Division intervene on and govern are:
Proportionality and De-Escalation:
The Division’s reform agreements universally include policies and training that instruct officers to use only force that is proportional to the threat faced, and to rely upon de-escalation tactics.
Some of the Division’s agreements — such as the agreement in Ferguson, Missouri—emphasize officers’ responsibility to intervene to deescalate encounters or prevent unreasonable uses of force by other officers.
First it was Kamala Harris. The it was Elizabeth Warren. Now, Joe Biden is pushing the false narrative that Michael Brown was murdered, and the cops were at fault in Ferguson.
Prohibiting the Use of Retaliatory Force:
The Division’s reform agreements often explicitly prohibit the use of retaliatory force, such as force used after a threat has diminished, or to punish individuals for fleeing, resisting arrest, or disrespecting an officer.
So, Joe, are you saying that someone resisting arrest should have an additional level of force applied to get them to comply? Resisting puts the officer on scene at greater risk for injury, not to mention the different degrees of danger it can put the suspect or the general public into.
Limits on Choke or Neck Holds, and Head Strikes:
The Division’s reform agreements frequently contain policies prohibiting the use of neck holds, also known as chokeholds, or head strikes with hard objects, except in situations where lethal force is authorized.
Limits on Use of Force on Handcuffed or Restrained People:
The Division’s reform agreements generally promote policies that prohibit the use of force against persons in handcuffs, except in limited circumstances such as to prevent imminent bodily harm to an officer or another person.
Clear Policies on Specific Weapons, Including Firearms and Less-Lethal Weapons:
Especially in places where the Division has found a pattern or practice of unlawful lethal force or unreasonable use of a particular type of force, the Division’s reform agreements emphasize the importance of clear policies governing specific weapons, often incorporating best practices from police experts on the use of a particular weapon. The Division’s agreements frequently address policies and training governing firearms, electronic control weapons (“ECWs,” also known as Tasers), oleoresin capsicum spray (“OC spray,” also known as pepper spray), canines, and other instruments of force.
Systems for Handling Encounters with People with Disabilities or in Mental Health Crisis:
Increasingly, the Division’s reform agreements have addressed the need for special steps to address force resulting from officers’ encounters with people with disabilities in crisis. Unofficial data representing one the best current sources on police shootings suggests that, in 2015, at least one in four people shot and killed by police showed signs of mental illness.
So, there are a couple of angles on this. One, how many of those that were shot were presenting and immediate and imminent danger to the officers involved or the general public. Mental illness dies not make someone less of a threat when they are brandishing a weapon. Two, while officers can certainly receive training in evaluative practices, Biden’s plan is asking cops to go through a block of training, to “diagnose” the subjects in question as being mentally stable, or otherwise. Clinical psychologists spend years learning how to make those diagnosis. But Biden wants cops to learn the same functional skills in a few days?
Ensuring Equitable Policing.
In other departments, discrimination manifests as too little policing rather than too much – systemic failure to respond to calls for service in certain neighborhoods, or lack of attention to certain crimes or crime victims. In those places, the Division’s reform agreements have focused on tracking data about police activity, re-training and adjusting priorities to ensure that policing decisions are not based on racial, ethnic, or gender-based bias.
We have entire communities that have told the police that they are not welcome there. Sending an individual officer in to investigate puts him or her in extreme danger.
Lack of attention to certain crimes? I wonder if the former VP is aware that that issue is more of a concern when the DA’s office refuses to prosecute certain types of offense and drops the charges, often releasing an individual who will wind up being arrested again.
But in Biden’s defense, at least he didn’t say what Bernie said, “Respect officers and what they are doing so that you don’t get shot in the back of the head.”
In case you missed it, those comments were made on the heels of Biden’s comment that “Cops don’t pull over white girls.”
Yes, you read that correctly. In just a single statement, 2020 hopeful Joe Biden just called every single police officer in America a racist.
On Saturday at the Second Step Presidential Justice Forum, multiple POTUS wannabes used their time with the microphone and a captive audience to preach about how bad police are.
During the Q & A section of the event, the former vice president was asked a question by a black female student.
“If I were your daughter, what advice would you give me the next time I am stopped by the police?” the woman asked the 2020 candidate.
No one saw his response coming.
“If you were my daughter, you’d be a Caucasian girl and you wouldn’t be pulled over,” Biden said. “That’s what’s wrong.”
Biden doubled down on his statements by tweeting out a clip of his answer, letting America know that cops are racist and saying that he’ll put an end to it if he’s elected.
“Institutional racism should no longer exist. As president, I’ll put forward change to help put an end to it,” he said in the clip.
Institutional racism should no longer exist. As president, I'll put forward change to help put an end to it. pic.twitter.com/DQtPzGIfNq
— Joe Biden (Text Join to 30330) (@JoeBiden) October 27, 2019
Meanwhile, you’ve got other presidential candidates that have repeatedly thrown the entire community of law enforcement under the bus.
Senator Elizabeth Warren has been quoted saying that the entire criminal justice system was racist, front to back, while defending criminals who fought back against police.
And Bernie Sanders may have topped them all, suggesting that police would shoot unarmed minorities in the back for not cooperating.
Is this real life?
At Saturday’s event, a black student at the forum asked Sanders how he should handle getting pulled over by a cop.
.@BernieSanders to black student on how to handle getting pulled over by the police: “Identify who the police officer is – respect what they are doing so that you don’t get shot in the back of the head.”
— chris evans (@notcapnamerica) October 26, 2019
“Respect what they are doing so that you don’t get shot in the back of the head.”
The question-and-answer session took place at the forum at Benedict College, which is a historically black college.
The student posed to Sanders:
“If I’m your son, what advice would you give me next time I’m pulled over by a police officer?”
Sanders said to identify the police officer “in a polite way.”
“I would respect what they are doing so that you don’t get shot in the back of the head, but I would also be very mindful of the fact that as a nation, we have got to hold police officers accountable for the actions that they commit,” he said.
Did you know that Law Enforcement Today has a private new home for those who support emergency responders and veterans? It’s called LET Unity, and it’s where we share the untold stories of those patriotic Americans. Every penny gets reinvested into giving these heroes a voice. Check it out today.
And make sure it’s being recorded, he said.
“I would be very cautious if you were my son in terms of dealing with that police officer, but I would also defend my rights and know my rights and make sure if possible that police officer’s camera is on what goes on.”
According to CBS News campaign reporter LaCrai Mitchell, the question seemed to “stump” Sanders and he struggled to answer it, ultimately not getting much applause or crowd approval when he did, she said.
Sanders came under attack for his response.
One of those people coming after him was Morehouse College adjunct professor David Dennis Jr., who said:
“Bernie Sanders does not understand race in America.”
Unlike Biden, Sanders didn’t post his reponse on Twitter… instead sharing a clip of him commenting on the criminal justice system.
“If you are wealthy and powerful, or maybe the president, you are above the law. But if you are poor, if you’re black, if you’re Hispanic, it’s a different story,” he said in the clip.
If you are wealthy and powerful, or maybe the president, you are above the law. But if you are poor, if you're Black, if you're Hispanic, it's a different story. Maybe I'm old fashioned but I happen to believe in equal justice for all people. pic.twitter.com/GLLgI3KBVc
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) October 27, 2019
These potential future leaders have made it clear that they have absolutely no support for those who enforce the laws that they’ve helped create.
Let’s hope every officer in America sees this before making their choice.
- READ: UNIVERSITY ‘FACULTY’ ON OREGON STATE POLICE LEAVING CAMPUS: “WE DIDN’T WANT YOU PIGS HERE ANYWAY”