Mediaboss Marketing

Bring charges after Jan. 6 hearings

Tuesdays Jan. 6 hearings showed Republican witnesses tie Trump directly to the fake electors plot. Moreover, a video produced by the House Select Committee detailed former President Donald Trump and his teams efforts to sway election officials and intimidate election workers by death threats and even a home break-in. This would be even more remarkable if the previous session didnt confirm a direct death threat to the vice president!

The truth is each session is more damning than the previous one and yet all of this will only serve history if our democracy survives this attack. Its important that the record is correct and accurate, but it is almost lost if there are no indictments or accountability and closure.

The U.S. has a proud history where the losing party is not persecuted; however, the previous administration has individuals that committed serious crimes. If we dont prosecute these criminals then I fear the hearings become little more than theater -- informative but passive. Ironically, no criminal charges would play right into the GOP conspiracy theories that this is all about politics and not about the insurrection or threat to democracy.

Henry Woodack, Bayonne

Listen to the people, not golfers

Please explain to me the problem with Liberty State Park. The people want to keep the park as is. How many letters and phone calls are you getting about this?

The people have spoken -- please take your fingers out of your ears AND LISTEN.

Ms. Agnes De Bethune (letter to the editor, Prohibit commercialization of Liberty Park) has suggested a few improvements with which I agree. We do not need a baseball stadium, a bigger or redesigned golf course. That seems to be the problem. The gentleman who owns the golf course is putting a lot of pressure on our elected officials to do his bidding. What he wants is something that will make his blasted golf course better. He has no concern about the damage he will do to the park. The wildlife in this park will be affected; this park is their home.

Our elected officials that are backing this project should be voted out of office. They are supposed to work for what the public wants, not what some golfers want. Next is the governor what in the name of God are you waiting for? tell this greedy man to keep his hands off our park.

Mr. Governor, do you want the demise of this park as your legacy? Please stand up and do the right thing what the people want and need.

Fred Regenye, Bayonne

Back then, it was BYO weapons

The Second Amendment is only one sentence and 27 words long. Theres a lot of controversy about it, but have we taken a good objective look at it in a while? Here it is:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The first part of the sentence is not to be ignored. Its presence there is for some reason. It not only establishes the purpose for which the amendment was thought to be needed, it is in itself a sort of regulation on the keeping and bearing of arms, which implies to me that some sort of regulation is possible within the basic rights given here.

In the original militias, as I understand it, the individual members had to bring their own rifles, powder and ammunition, since they werent given any. Therefore, the troops had to be allowed to own and maintain their own firearms, as the amendment provides.

Further details are not given in the Constitution. The Founding Fathers apparently thought they could rely on the citizens to develop rational regulations as needed for the future.

The rest is up to us.

David Mahler, North Bergen

Cops in schools a bad idea

In response to the stories dealing with police in schools, I can say this. After 38 years teaching in the deepest part of the inner-city in the second largest city in New Jersey, I believe that my experiences in this matter should be considered.

An armed policeman in a school will provide a false feeling of security. An armed policeman will become the first target for those that are sick enough to consider killing children and teachers. After the policeman, the perpetrator will continue on until he/she achieves his or her murders.

Entrance doors that are locked from the outside but remain open from the inside are probably the best solution. Individuals that can monitor these entrances would also be a help in keeping everyone safe. An armed policeman is not likely to use his weapon within a school building because of the real possibility of missing his target and hitting a child or possibly his bullet could penetrate a wall into a classroom. Many older schools have marble or some other stone inside the building and a misdirected bullet can kill an innocent individual.

A far better way to control this problem is to absolutely refuse to allow gun manufacturers to sell their guns to people under, I would say, 25 years old. These sales should be and must be approved by the local police. The potential buyer must pass a psychological exam by a licensed medical professional at his or her own expense and has trained under police guidance, again at their own cost, regarding on how and when to use this weapon. As of now, any mentally deranged individual can obtain a gun and shoot anyone he pleases until stopped by the police. You can even get the parts of a gun, from internet sales, and put it together yourself! These are ghost guns and will kill you as fast as a registered gun.

Gun manufactures look the other way! They make their living making guns and care not who buys them as long as they make a profit. They claim they are not responsible for the deaths that occur. Now lets be honest. If you cant buy a gun without some reasonable training and background check, wed all be better off. America needs to clean up its act regarding the liberties we enjoy. If not, well continue killing babies because of in-action.

James K. Aumack, Retired Jersey City Educator, Cape May

Send letters to the editor and guest columns for The Jersey Journal to jjletters@jjournal.com.

See the original post:
Prosecute them; Listen to the people on LSP; Second Amendment open to regulation; Cops in schools a bad idea - NJ.com

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on Wednesday condemned parts of the recently announced bipartisan gun safety deal, describing some provisions as constitutional deficiencies and vowing to introduce amendments as it comes to the Senate floor.

Unfortunately, this legislation was assembled as many are in secret, absent well placed leaks to journalists, Paul wrote on Twitter. There doesnt appear to be a willingness or time provided to read, understand, debate or amend this bill.

I will try anyway, he continued. To this end, I will introduce amendments to correct the constitutional deficiencies of this bill and hope my colleagues and the Senate leadership will do the same.

Senate negotiators on Tuesday released the text of a long-awaited deal on gun safety that would take firearms away from dangerous people and provide billions of dollars in new mental health funding, among other measures.

The Senate quickly voted 64-34 on Tuesday evening to advance the legislation, with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and 13 other GOP senators supporting the measure.

Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said he expects the bill to pass the Senate by the end of the week.

Schumers timeline aims to get ahead of the Senates upcoming two-week recess. But a quick passage of the legislation requires an agreement from all 100 senators, so Paul could delay the final vote if he doesnt give way.

Paul said he supports some of the bills provisions, like a section that includes juvenile records in background checks for gun buyers under the age of 21.

Looking at the recent criminal past of anyone is a good idea before assessing gun ownership, Paul said. However, that idea was paired with many questionable or bad ones in this legislation.

He specifically raised concerns over a proposed $750 million in funding for states to implement crisis intervention orders, including red flag laws that allow a court to confiscate a firearm from someone deemed to be a significant danger to themselves or others.

Paul raised due process concerns over some states existing red flag laws, explicitly referencing those implemented in New York, Washington state and Washington, D.C.

He also criticized a prohibition on using the funds to train or equip school personnel with firearms.

In fact, we should be doing the opposite, encouraging schools to train and arm proper personnel as desired and needed in their schools, Paul said.

Original post:
Rand Paul vows to introduce amendments to gun safety bill - The Hill

Meanwhile, as Congress argues over the details of how to make America a safer place to live, Rhode Island quietly and quickly raised the minimum age to buy rifles, shotguns and semi-automatic rifles from 18 to 21 and also banned high-capacity magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.

The Hill:House Fails To Pass Bill Creating Active Shooter Alert SystemThe House on Wednesday failed to pass a bill that sought to create a communications network that would alert people when an active shooter is in their community. The legislation, dubbed the Active Shooter Alert Act, was considered under suspension, a process that allows legislation to be passed quickly with two-thirds support. The bill did not reach that threshold, failing in a 259-162 vote despite having bipartisan sponsorship 16 Republicans helped introduce the legislation. (Schnell, 6/22)

CNN:Guns: Senate Will Take Critical Vote To Advance Bipartisan Bill Toward Final PassageThe Senate is poised to take a critical vote on Thursday to advance a major bipartisan gun safety bill toward final passage. The vote is expected to succeed with Republican support, putting the legislation on a path to pass the Senate as soon as this week. The bipartisan gun deal represents the first major federal gun safety legislation in decades. It includes millions of dollars for mental health, school safety, crisis intervention programs and incentives for states to include juvenile records in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. It also makes significant changes to the process when someone ages 18 to 21 goes to buy a firearm and closes the so-called boyfriend loophole, a victory for Democrats, who have long fought for that. (Foran, Fox, Zaslav and Barrett, 6/23)

Houston Chronicle:Texas Republican Representing Uvalde Supports Bipartisan Gun BillThe Texas congressman whose district includes Uvalde says he plans to vote for a bipartisan gun bill that the Senate is poised to pass this week even as many of his Republican colleagues are likely to oppose it. U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, a San Antonio Republican, tweeted Wednesday that he supports the gun bill drafted by a bipartisan group of senators, including U.S. Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, after recent mass shootings, including a gunmans attack on an elementary school in Uvalde that resulted in the deaths of 19 kids and two teachers. (Wermund, 6/22)

The Hill:Rand Paul Vows To Introduce Amendments To Gun Safety BillSen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on Wednesday condemned parts of the recently announced bipartisan gun safety deal, describing some provisions as constitutional deficiencies and vowing to introduce amendments as it comes to the Senate floor. Unfortunately, this legislation was assembled as many are in secret, absent well placed leaks to journalists, Paul wrote on Twitter. There doesnt appear to be a willingness or time provided to read, understand, debate or amend this bill. (Schonfeld, 6/22)

In updates from Texas and Rhode Island

Houston Chronicle:Uvalde Massacre Prompts Calls To Expand Mental Health ResourcesDespite growing calls for gun reform in the wake of the Uvalde school shooting, a Texas Senate committee discussing legislative responses to the massacre spent little time debating firearm safety measures in two days of public hearings. While senators questioned mental health, law enforcement and school safety experts for hours, the group flew through testimony from gun control activists. The advocates had gathered at the Capitol to call for stronger background checks, waiting periods when purchasing assault-style rifles, and red flag laws that would temporarily remove firearms from people deemed a danger to themselves or others. (Harris and Scherer, 6/22)

Stateline:Rhode Island Raises Rifle-Purchasing Minimum Age To 21Rhode Island has joined a growing list of states that have increased the minimum age to buy rifles, shotguns and semi-automatic rifles from 18 to 21.Democratic Gov. Dan McKee this week signed a package of gun measures passed after recent high-profile mass shootings in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas. The package includes bills that ban high-capacity magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, prohibit the open carry of loaded firearms in public and raise the age limit for purchasing firearms and ammunition to 21. (Vasilogambros, 6/22)

Read more:
Active Shooter Bill Fails In House; Senate Votes Today On Gun Safety Bill - Kaiser Health News

Picture a split screen on your TV. On one side a parade of prominent Republican officials in the Trump administration, in the Trump family, in the Trump Justice Department, in the Trump 2020 reelection campaign are spilling the beans about Jan. 6. Finally, Americans are hearing the truth about Trumps Big Lie from his own people. And they pull no punches.

The defeated president knowingly deceived millions in the country about an election he lost. He pursued what he knew was an illegal plot to stay in office. He understood the criminality of his malfeasance but plowed ahead anyway. Thats what Trumps senior advisors, White House counsel, campaign manager, attorney general, daughter and others testified under oath.

On the other side of your split TV screen are 2022 Republican midterm candidates. Almost to a man, they dismiss the explosive truths dropping on the Jan. 6 half of the screen. These pols intentionally reinforce what they know is false about a stolen election that wasnt, and the need to restore integrity to elections based on massive fraud that wasnt.

They know there is no evidence supporting either claim but repeat them anyway. Again, key Republicans in the Trump orbit reaffirmed there was no there, there about Trumps declaration that he won but for the cheating. But there is a mountain of evidence that the former president deliberately violated the law and, as a federal judge deemed probable, corruptly attempted to obstruct Congress. New, damning revelations about the nefarious lengths Trump went to stay in power are jaw-dropping.

Yet campaigning Republicans continue to parrot Trumps Big Lie without regard for the electoral damage inflicted. So, heres a question for general election voters in Ohio Republicans, independents, Democrats: How can candidates who are asking for your vote in November be trusted if theyre willing to lie to win favor from a likely criminal still conning the country about an election his own cybersecurity chief called the most secure in American history?

Every Republican running for federal office in Ohio has pledged allegiance to a man with no allegiance to the rule of law, as witnessed by his team of Republican enablers who drew the line at insurrection. In every congressional race, in every GOP gerrymandered district, proud defenders of an indefensible crook who watched the violent attack at the U.S. Capitol to stop the peaceful transfer of power and did nothing for hours have the gall to pitch themselves as principled politicians.

Please.

Noble these Trumpian toadies are not. Consider five Republican incumbent congressmen seeking reelection who voted, baselessly, to overturn the 2020 presidential election results after the Capitol was rampaged by a bloodthirsty Trump mob chanting Hang Mike Pence! One of those lawmakers, ranking Trump sycophant Jim Jordan from Ohios 4th U.S. Congressional District, is directly implicated in the presidents lawless scheme to seize a second term.

A participant in the Jan. 6 rally and a QAnon proponent whose devotion to the would-be dictator was splayed across his lawn with a giant painted Trump sign campaigns for Congress in the 9th District as someone who can unify our communities. You cant make this stuff up. But J.R Majewski, who also suggested that every red state should secede from the union, is in a toss-up district in a predicted red wave election year with a Trump endorsement.

That could be all it takes to unseat Democrat Marcy Kaptur, a 20-term incumbent with nearly four decades of public service.

The Ohio GOP candidate for an open U.S. Senate seat, is an elite coastal venture capitalist and carpetbagger. J.D. Vance moved back to Ohio to buy political prestige with Big Tech billions and strategically morphed from a Never-Trumper to an Ultra-Trumper. But Vances craven adulation of a man he once described as noxious and reprehensible was enough to snag a last-minute nod from the incorrigible fraud and win the Republican nomination.

Now the nominee shamelessly champions Trumps deceit as gospel. The 2020 election was stolen. Large-scale fraud. Joe Biden is a fake president. Vanity Fair wrote about an interview Vance did on a far-right podcast where he practically drew a blueprint for a successful coup in 2024. After winning (or losing?) Trump would declare himself absolute ruler, dare the courts to enforce constitutional order and unilaterally wipe out the institutions of the left in a kind of de-Baathification program, a de-woke-ification program.

Before you panic about brownshirts clicking down Pennsylvania Avenue, be empowered to act. Be inspired by the real patriots investigating the Jan. 6 carnage and warning of the clear and present danger an unaccountable Trump presents. Be categorically unwilling, as an American, to surrender your democratic birthright to alt-right demagogues who a spin a violent insurrection to overthrow a free and fair election as legitimate political discourse.

And be repelled by those campaigning to represent you who defiantly stand with the only president in our history who trashed the peaceful transfer of power, cracked a fundamental pillar of our government and threatens to do it again. On your split TV screen one side is fighting for the rule of law and accountability. One is openly marching lockstep with a narcissistic fascist who knowingly tried to steal another term.

Nov. 8 will decide whether truth wins.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

SUBSCRIBE

Continued here:
Trump and his mob tried to overthrow American democracy and threaten to try again - Ohio Capital Journal

For me, John Lennons mega-hit Imagine was always a song popular for the wrong reasons. Imagine that the world will live as one is the best way to end in hell.

Those who cling to pacifism in the face of the Russian attack on Ukraine remain caught in their own version of imagine. Imagine a world in which tensions are no longer resolved through armed conflicts Europe persisted in this world of imagine, ignoring the brutal reality outside its borders. Now its the time to awaken.

The dream of a quick Ukrainian victory, the repetition of the initial dream of a quick Russian victory, is over. In what looks more and more as a protracted stalemate, Russia is slowly progressing, and its ultimate goal is clearly stated. There is no longer any need to read between the lines when Putin compares himself with Peter the Great: On the face of it, he was at war with Sweden taking something away from it He was not taking away anything, he was returning He was returning and reinforcing, that is what he was doing Clearly, it fell to our lot to return and reinforce as well.

More than focus on particular issues (is Russia really just returning, and to what?) we should read carefully Putins general justification of his claim: In order to claim some kind of leadership I am not even talking about global leadership, I mean leadership in any area any country, any people, any ethnic group should ensure their sovereignty. Because there is no in-between, no intermediate state: either a country is sovereign, or it is a colony, no matter what the colonies are called.

The implication of these lines, as one commentator put it, is clear: there are two categories of state: The sovereign and the conquered. In Putins imperial view, Ukraine should fall into the latter category.

And, as it is no less clear from Russian official statements in the last months, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Finland, the Baltic states and ultimately Europe itself fall into the latter category.

We now know what the call to allow Putin to save his face means. It means accepting not a minor territorial compromise in Donbas but Putins imperial ambition. The reason this ambition should be unconditionally rejected is that in todays global world in which we are all haunted by the same catastrophes we are all in-between, in an intermediate state, neither a sovereign country nor a conquered one: to insist on full sovereignty in the face of global warming is sheer madness since our very survival hinges on tight global cooperation.

But Russia doesnt simply ignore global warming why was it so mad at the Scandinavian countries when they expressed their intention to join Nato? With global warming, what is at stake is the control of the Arctic passage. (Thats why Trump wanted to buy Greenland from Denmark.) Due to the explosive development of China, Japan and South Korea, the main transport route will run north of Russia and Scandinavia. Russias strategic plan is to profit from global warming: control the worlds main transport route, plus develop Siberia and control Ukraine. In this way, Russia will dominate so much food production that it will be able to blackmail the whole world. This is the ultimate economic reality beneath Putins imperial dream.

Those who advocate less support for Ukraine and more pressure on it to negotiate, inclusive of accepting painful territorial renunciations, like to repeat that Ukraine simply cannot win the war against Russia. True, but I see exactly in this the greatness of Ukrainian resistance: they risked the impossible, defying pragmatic calculations, and the least we owe them is full support, and to do this, we need a stronger Nato but not as a prolongation of the US politics.

The US strategy to counteract through Europe is far from self-evident: not just Ukraine, Europe itself is becoming the place of the proxy war between US and Russia, which may well end up by a compromise between the two at Europes expense. There are only two ways for Europe to step out of this place: to play the game of neutrality a short-cut to catastrophe or to become an autonomous agent. (Just think how the situation may change if Trump wins the next US elections.)

While some leftists claim that the ongoing war is in the interest of the Nato industrial-military complex, which uses the need for new arms to avoid crisis and gain new profits, their true message to Ukraine is: OK, you are victims of a brutal aggression, but do not rely on our arms because in this way you play in the hands of the industrial-military complex

The disorientation caused by the Ukrainian war is producing strange bedfellows like Henry Kissinger and Noam Chomsky who come from opposing ends of the political spectrum Kissinger serving as secretary of state under Republican presidents and Chomsky one of the leading leftwing intellectuals in the United States and have frequently clashed. But when it comes to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, both recently advocated for Ukraine to consider a settlement that could see it dropping claim to some land to achieve a quicker peace deal.

In short, the two stand for the same version of pacifism which only works if we neglect the key fact that the war is not about Ukraine but a moment of the brutal attempt to change our entire geopolitical situation. The true target of the war is the dismantlement of the European unity advocated not only by the US conservatives and Russia but also by the European extreme right and left at this point, in France, Melenchon meets Le Pen.

The craziest notion floating around these days is that, to counter the new polarity between the US and China (which stand for the excesses of western liberalism and oriental authoritarianism), Europe and Russia should rejoin forces and form a third Eurasian block based on the Christian legacy purified of its liberal excess. The very idea of an Eurasian third way is a form of todays fascism.

So what will happen when voters in Europe and America, faced with soaring energy costs and broader inflation driven by sanctions against Russia, might lose their appetite for a war that seems to have no end, with needs that are only expanding as both sides head for a protracted stalemate? The answer is clear: at that point, the European legacy will be lost, and Europe will be de facto divided between an American and a Russian sphere of influence. In short, Europe itself will become the place of a war that seems to have no end

What is absolutely unacceptable for a true leftist today is not only to support Russia but also to make a more modest neutral claim that the left is divided between pacifists and supporters of Ukraine, and that one should treat this division as a minor fact which shouldnt affect the lefts global struggle against global capitalism.

When a country is occupied, it is the ruling class which is usually bribed to collaborate with the occupiers to maintain its privileged position, so that the struggle against the occupiers becomes a priority. The same can go for the struggle against racism; in a state of racial tension and exploitation, the only way to effectively struggle for the working class is to focus on fighting racism (this is why any appeal to the white working class, as in todays alt-right populism, betrays class struggle).

Today, one cannot be a leftist if one does not unequivocally stand behind Ukraine. To be a leftist who shows understanding for Russia is like to be one of those leftists who, before Germany attacked the Soviet Union, took seriously German anti-imperialist rhetoric directed at the UK and advocated neutrality in the war of Germany against France and the UK.

If the left will fail here, the game is over for it. But does this mean that the Left should simply take the side of the west, inclusive of the rightist fundamentalists who also support Ukraine?

In a speech in Dallas on 18 May 2022, while criticizing Russias political system, the ex-president Bush said: The result is an absence of checks and balances in Russia, and the decision of one man to launch a wholly unjustified and brutal invasion of Iraq. He quickly corrected himself: I mean, of Ukraine, then said Iraq, anyway to laughter from the crowd, and added 75, referring to his age.

As many commentators noted, two things cannot but strike the eye in this rather obvious Freudian slip: the fact that the public received Bushs implicit confession that the US attack on Iraq (ordered by him) was a wholly unjustified and brutal invasion with laughter, instead of treating it as an admission of a crime comparable to the Russian invasion of Ukraine; plus Bushs enigmatic continuation of his self-correction Iraq, anyway what did he mean by it? That the difference between Ukraine and Iraq doesnt really matter? The final reference to his advanced age doesnt affect in any way this enigma.

But the enigma is dispelled the moment we take Bushs statement seriously and literally: yes, with all differences taken into account (Zelenskiy is not a dictator like Saddam), Bush did the same thing as Putin is now doing to Ukraine, so they should be both judged by the same standard.

On the day I am writing this, we learned from the media that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assanges extradition to the US has been approved by the UK home secretary, Priti Patel. His crime? Nothing other than to render public the crimes confessed by Bushs slip of tongue: the documents revealed by WikiLeaks revealed how, under Bushs presidency, the US military had killed hundreds of civilians in unreported incidents during the war in Afghanistan, while leaked Iraq war files showed 66,000 civilians had been killed, and prisoners tortured. Crimes fully comparable with what Putin is doing in Ukraine. From todays hindsight, we can say that WikiLeaks disclosed dozens of American Buchas and Mariupols.

So while putting Bush on trial is no less illusory than bringing Putin to the Hague tribunal, the minimum to be done by those who oppose Russian invasion of Ukraine is to demand Assanges immediate release. Ukraine claims it fights for Europe, and Russia claims it fights for the rest of the world against western unipolar hegemony. Both claims should be rejected, and here the difference between right and left enters the stage.

From the rightist standpoint, Ukraine fights for European values against the non-European authoritarians; from the leftist standpoint, Ukraine fights for global freedom, inclusive of the freedom of Russians themselves. Thats why the heart of every true Russian patriot beats for Ukraine.

Slavoj iek is a philosopher. He is a senior researcher at the Institute for Sociology and Philosophy at the University of Ljubljana, Global Distinguished Professor of German at New York University, and international director of the Birkbeck Institute for the Humanities of the University of London

More here:
Pacifism is the wrong response to the war in Ukraine - The Guardian