go away OSS. You suck donkey balls.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/10/candidate-challenging-rep-ayanna-pressley-hospitalized-broken-tibia-fight-biden-supporters/
Candidate Challenging Rep. Ayanna Pressley Hospitalized With Broken Tibia After Fight With Biden Supporters
A Republican who launched a write in campaign to challenge Rep. Ayanna Pressley in Massachusetts was hospitalized with a broken tibia after a fight with Joe Biden supporters on Monday.
Rayla Campbell, a black Republican woman, got into a scuffle with the leftists in a parking lot in New Bedford after she left a pro-Trump event….
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/10/13/watch-amy-coney-barrett-judges-cant-walk-in-like-a-royal-queen-and-impose-their-will-on-the-world/
Judge Amy Coney Barrett addressed the widespread misinformation that judges can brazenly make rulings based on the whims of the day, explaining the process and stressing judges cannot just “walk in like a royal queen” and “impose” their will on the world.
Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) prompted Barrett to explain how the process works, using the District of Columbia v. Heller as an example. Barrett briefly explained there has to be a law, lawsuit, appeal, and the court granting cert before it makes a ruling.
When asked if the process remains the same no matter the issue — including guns, health care, abortion, campaign finance — Barrett emphasized judges cannot just impose an agenda at random.
“Judges can’t just wake up one day and say, ‘I have an agenda. I like guns. I hate guns. I like abortion. I hate abortion’ and walk in like a royal queen and impose, you know, their will on the world,” she said.
“You have to wait for cases and controversies, which is the language of the Constitution, to wind their way through the process,” she continued.
Graham then asked Barrett another hypothetical. What if, he said, a state made a law only allowing individuals to own no more than six bullets.
In that case, Barrett said, parties would have to sue the state arguing that the law is unconstitutional. If it made its way to the Supreme Court and it decided to hear the case, “you hear arguments from litigants on both sides.”
“They write briefs. You talk to clerks as a judge. You talk to your colleagues, and you write an opinion. Opinions circulate and you get feedback from your colleagues so it’s an entire process,” she explained.
“It’s not something that a judge or justice would wake up and say, ‘Oh we’re hearing this case. I know what my vote’s going to be,'” she added.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/10/13/michigan-supreme-court-gretchen-whitmers-coronavirus-orders-are-voided-now-not-october-30/
Michigan Supreme Court: Gretchen Whitmer’s Coronavirus Orders Are Voided Now, Not October 30
The Michigan Supreme Court handed Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) another legal defeat on Monday when a majority ruled her coronavirus orders are no longer in effect.
On October 2, the Court ruled that the 1945 law Whitmer has been using to justify a “state of emergency” and her lockdown orders was unconstitutional, effectively negating any executive orders related to it.
Whitmer attacked the Court and claimed that her orders remained in effect until October 30.
“(The) Supreme Court ruling, handed down by a narrow majority of Republican justices, is deeply disappointing, and I vehemently disagree with the court’s interpretation of the Michigan Constitution,” she said.
“Right now, every state and the federal government have some form of declared emergency. With this decision, Michigan will become the sole outlier at a time when the Upper Peninsula is experiencing rates of Covid infection not seen in our state since April.”
In a motion filed last Monday, Whitmer argued she created that date to “allow for an orderly transition during which some responsive measures can be placed under alternative executive authority and the Governor and Legislature can work to address many other pandemic-related matters that currently fall under executive orders,” CNN reported.
On Monday, the Court responded: No.
“Justices ruled 4-3 that the orders issued under the 1945 Emergency Powers of the Governor Act ‘are of no continuing legal effect,'” according to ABC 12.
The majority said the decision “leaves open many avenues for our Governor and Legislature to work together in a cooperative spirit and constitutional manner to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic.”
Instead, after the initial ruling, Whitmer’s administration issued new guidelines through the Department of Health and Human Services, under the Public Health Code of 1978, which require “face coverings, gathering limits, nursing home safety measures and more.”
Those new regulations are not affected by the Court’s ruling.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/10/12/read-left-wing-radicals-post-online-guide-to-disrupting-the-country-if-election-is-close/
An organization of radical left-wing activists has posted an online guide to “disruption” that outlines a plan to shut down the country and force President Donald Trump from power in the event that the 2020 election is too close to call.
The guide, “Stopping the Coup,” available as a Google doc, is being circulated by a group called ShutDownDC. It casts its plan for disruption as a response to an imagined “coup” by the president in the case of a close election.
In an email promoting the guide, ShutDownDC declares: “Preventing Donald Trump from stealing the election and remaining in office is likely to take mass, sustained disruptive movements all over the country.” The guide is a manual to that “disruption.”
Parts of the guide are committed to ensuring a “fair election.” Parts of it, however, read like a manual for staging a coup rather than a guide to preventing one:
In the context of a coup or highly contested election we need to be clear that our actions must directly affect the structures and pillars of power. Our largest asset in this regard utilizes the ideas of non-compliance through massive, broad based direct action. Where we can, we need to be in the streets, on the highways, or at the sites of power and power holders. In our jobs and lives we must refuse to allow those taking control the legitimacy of the power they seek through strikes, slowdowns, and boycotts, and public refusal to accept an illegitimate ruling party.
Another section urges activists to stop American life from continuing if the election does not go their way (original emphasis):
In order to really win we will need to force some pillars of power (business, military, media, or other major institutions) to decide to side with the people, or at least get out of the way. If everyday life goes on, a despot will not leave power, and so there will be no incentive for real systems change. You want to think about what it might take to stop business-as-usual.
The guide also says that activists plan on “physically protecting the vote count from counter-protestors, federal agents, or white supremacist militias.”
The guide indicates that activists intend to “demand that no winner be announced until every vote is counted,” and that they will launch “mass coordinated action” to that end.
The signal for action will be if President Donald Trump is declared the winner on Election Night:
Trump may try to declare himself the victor before the votes are counted, or Fox News might call the race. Those who can should be prepared to take action against those who are feeding into the stolen election narrative, including social media companies that are letting falsehoods or incitements to violence spread.
The guide imagines a number of bizarre nightmare scenarios — such as Attorney General William Barr trying “to seize all mail-in ballots and invalidate them” — and uses them to motivate readers and justify plans for “direct action.”
One section says that in the case of a contested election, “we must take action” (original emphasis):
In the end, the actual electorate might be split, half truly believing that Trump was elected legally, and half knowing that he was not.
It is in this muddied context of legal and political wrangling that we must take action. We cannot wait to see how the chips fall. That will only ensure more power for the violent white supremacist machine that is the Trump administration and its supporters.
We want to be clear here, though: we are not a group of Biden supporters. This is not about ensuring that the Democrats win, but actually preparing for the possibility that white supremacist violence will continue.
The guide also suggests that activists will continue their “disruption” regardless of who wins the election: “We’re absolutely not saying the election is useless, but rather the reactivity of the right and the white supremecist [sic] will be present no matter who wins.”
The guide also links …
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/federal-court-rules-against-louisiana-high-school-after-painting-over-students-trump
Many of us in the free speech community have long complained that the 1969 case of Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District is often dismissed in cases addressing the free speech rights of students. The famous decision declared that students “do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”
Yet, courts have regularly curtailed free speech rights in deference to school officials maintaining discipline and order in their schools, even in the regulation of speech outside of schools. One rare victory emerged this week in Louisiana where a federal judge ruled that Superintendent Frances Varnado and Washington Parish School District board violated the rights of a high school senior by painting over his mural of President Donald Trump. U.S. District Judge Eldon Fallon relied on Tinker and declared the mural to be protected political speech.
Seniors at Pine Junior-Senior High School can pay $25 for an assigned parking spot and paint the spot as they deem fit, so long as the painting does not include profanity, lewd images and other students’ names. Ned Thomas painted an image of President Trump donned in stars and stripes sunglasses and a bandana.