Biden tries to address rising crime and voting laws

  

Category:  Op/Ed

By:  vic-eldred  •  3 weeks ago  •  91 comments

Biden tries to address rising crime and voting laws
Last month I met with a similar group to unveil my comprehensive strategy to do just that. And it's been--it's--it's been a, you know, I guess I look at the attorney general. We've been this a long--at this a long time. A long time. Seems like most of my career I've been dealing with this issue. Well there's no one size fit all approach. We know there are some things that work. And the first of those that works is stemming the flow of firearms used to commit violent crimes.

Joe Biden’s most recent speeches were a national embarrassment.  Did Joe Biden even read the speeches he was given before he went out there?

"And we've talked--you and I have talked about this, mayor, before. And it includes cracking down on holding rogue gun dealers accountable for violating the federal law. It include the Justice Department creating five new strike forces to crack down on illegal gun trafficking in the corridors supplying weapons of--to cities of New York from New York to the Bay Area."

Really? In addition to the many laws we already have on guns?

Five new strike forces to control guns?

Supporting local police?  Sorry, Joe it's a bit late for that.

We did learn that when people are released from prison they get $25 and a bus ticket!  Sniff, sniff.



Then we had the big lie on voting.

Where are the people who are being denied a vote?  Where are the camera crews or the reporters interviewing the people who didn't get to vote?

  “The 21st-century Jim Crow assault is real,” President Biden claimed Tuesday. “We’re facing the most significant test of our democracy since the Civil War—that’s not hyperbole"




We finally have someone ready to take on, as he calls it the Klu Klux Clams.

He told us "the world is wondering what America is going to do?

He said Merrck Garland is challenging Georgia's "vicious" anti-voting law." Of course, Joe can't tell us why it's vicious or anti-voting?


He did mention the Texas law requiring partisan poll watchers. We certainly don't want that, do we?  We don't want anyone seeing what's going on. That would be voter suppression don't ya know! He called it "intimidating." We wouldn't want to intimidate poll workers.
Then there is the matter of having to drive a long way to vote. That would stop a civic minded citizen every time. He said that "this year alone 17 states enacted laws to make it harder to vote." 

Who would believe such blatant bull shit?


He told us it's also "about who gets to count the vote."    That was the most frightening part of the speech.

In about 16 months the left's puppet will be defanged.

It's going to be about what can be done to stop them in the meantime.



Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  author  Vic Eldred    3 weeks ago

To the non-partisans:

Would you vote for him again?

 
 
 
evilgenius
Professor Participates
1.1  evilgenius  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 weeks ago

Between Trump, or one of his bigoted sycophant's? Yes, I would vote for Biden again. I was hoping I wouldn't have to, but it looks like the Republican Party is doubling down on Q Populist stupid.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Expert
1.1.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  evilgenius @1.1    3 weeks ago

"To the non-partisans:"

I don't think he was addressing you judging by whom he directed the question to.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.1    3 weeks ago

Obviously he can speak for himself.  Or can't he?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.1    3 weeks ago
I don't think he was addressing you judging by whom he directed the question to.

Seems weird that a bunch of wordsmiths would miss such a key part of the question---"TO THE NON-PARTISANS"

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Expert
1.1.4  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.2    3 weeks ago

At the moment he is away from the site so no.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.5  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.4    3 weeks ago

I'll remember that you speak for him.

Got it.  

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Expert
1.1.6  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.5    3 weeks ago

He asked me to watch the store while he was gone. Problem?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.7  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.6    3 weeks ago

I got it!

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Sophomore Principal
1.2  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 weeks ago

I didn't vote for either person we were given to choose from... I'm sorry... I didn't vote for either elected of the two-party system.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.2.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka) @1.2    3 weeks ago

If it came down to Harris and DeSantis in 2024, who would you vote for?

(BTW, I'm certain that a Harris campaign would face primary challengers)

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.2  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.1    3 weeks ago
They are trying to change the country in two years.

Democrats will have a tough decision to make--especially if Trump isn't the GOP nominee.

Go with Joe--who will be way too old, or go with Harris--unproven, untested, volatile, unable to handle things effectively.

Win, win for the GOP.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
1.2.3  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.1    3 weeks ago

I don't like either... so I would have to think long and hard on that.

But then again, this is assuming that Biden doesn't run again.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.2.4  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.2.3    3 weeks ago
But then again, this is assuming that Biden doesn't run again.

It's kind of a reasonable assumption. Based on the policies he's put in place, it doesn't look like he's worried about re-election.

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Sophomore Principal
1.2.5  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.1    3 weeks ago

I wouldn't.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.2.6  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka) @1.2.5    3 weeks ago

You'd stay home?

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Sophomore Principal
1.2.7  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.6    3 weeks ago

Yep

 
 
 
dennis smith
Masters Silent
1.2.8  dennis smith  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.2    3 weeks ago

Biden has spent 50 years trying to make change in government. Hell he couldn't even update Delaware's voting laws. 

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
PhD Quiet
1.3  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 weeks ago

Slow Joe is, as usual, a day late and a dollar short on the uptake. Did not vote for him the first time and it will be a cold day in Hell before I even think about a second term!

 
 
 
FortunateSon
Freshman Silent
2  FortunateSon    3 weeks ago
Voting Laws

States have plenary powers concerning elections.

The feds have no powers over state elections

Simple.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  FortunateSon @2    3 weeks ago

Merrick Garland is going to learn it the hard way.

 
 
 
FortunateSon
Freshman Silent
2.1.1  FortunateSon  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1    3 weeks ago

He is not the only one.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3  Tessylo    3 weeks ago

We would all vote for President Biden again in a heartbeat!

So you're a non-partisan?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @3    3 weeks ago

The question was for non-partisans

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Expert
3.1.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1    3 weeks ago

And I wonder who "we" is? If the poster is a spokesperson for some group known as we, "we" certainly isn't non-partisans

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @3.1.1    3 weeks ago

I'm not the topic of this 'article'.  

I ANSWERED IT ANYWAY.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.2    3 weeks ago
I ANSWERED IT ANYWAY.  

Which made no sense. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.3    3 weeks ago

We're even.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.5  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.4    3 weeks ago

I doubt that.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.5    3 weeks ago

You're correct, it's more like me 100%

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.7  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.6    3 weeks ago

But it's not about you, right?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.8  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.7    3 weeks ago

You and others should stop making it about  me.  

 
 
 
dennis smith
Masters Silent
3.1.9  dennis smith  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1    3 weeks ago

That appears to be very difficult for some to understand 

 
 
 
dennis smith
Masters Silent
3.1.10  dennis smith  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.2    3 weeks ago

Trolling again ?

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
3.1.11  bugsy  replied to  dennis smith @3.1.10    3 weeks ago

It seems like some on here have nothing better to do than throw little snippets or insults out there. Must suck to not have any other life.

 
 
 
devangelical
PhD Principal
3.1.12  devangelical  replied to  bugsy @3.1.11    3 weeks ago

thanks for being an NT example.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
3.1.13  bugsy  replied to  devangelical @3.1.12    3 weeks ago
thanks for being an NT example.

Says the guy that is the epitome of one that hurls insults.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4  Texan1211    3 weeks ago

Aren't the progressive liberals cute when they start talking law and order?

LMAO!

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
5  Sean Treacy    3 weeks ago

Networks shouldn't have covered that speech. It was just dishonest propaganda. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1  Tessylo  replied to  Sean Treacy @5    3 weeks ago

Projection.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
6  Sean Treacy    3 weeks ago

David Harsayni had an interesting reaction:

The second reason Biden likely gave this speech was to preemptively corrode trust in the 2022 and 2024 elections. Biden spent the first part of his talk bragging about how the United States had just conducted the cleanest election in history, grousing about efforts to undermine trust in our voting system. He then spent the rest of his time doing exactly that. Many of the Democrats who can’t stop talking about the horrors of Trump’s “Big Lie” had no compunction disputing results in Georgia or the presidential election only a few years ago. Now, they are creating a ready-made justification for delegitimizing any Republican victory.

You still see progressives here claiming the 2016 election was stolen.  This is fertile ground for Biden to  till.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
6.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sean Treacy @6    3 weeks ago
You still see progressives here claiming the 2016 election was stolen. 

That & Jan 6th is all they have. It won't save them from the red wave in 2022.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1    3 weeks ago

1/6/21 won't be forgotten in 2022.  THANKS GQP!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
6.1.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @6.1.1    3 weeks ago

Especially the part about holding people prisoner without a trial for, thus far, 6 months!

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.1.3  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.2    3 weeks ago

Which isn't happening.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1    3 weeks ago
That & Jan 6th is all they have. It won't save them from the red wave in 2022.

That will be fun to watch, because many progressives are convinced the midterms will result in Dems holding their razor-thin majorities.

I think we will probably see some more screeching at the sky ala Clinton's loss after the elections.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
6.1.5  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.4    3 weeks ago
because many progressives are convinced the midterms will result in Dems holding their razor-thin majorities.

I'm not so sure of that. They'd rather rerun 2020 but they don't have the pandemic to help them this time.

They are trying to change the country in two years.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.5    3 weeks ago
I'm not so sure of that. They'd rather rerun 2020 but they don't have the pandemic to help them this time.

No Trump on the midterm tickets will hurt them, too.

They are trying to change the country in two years.

Yep, rushing to "change" before the midterms.

Got a feeling we'll see what Harris is made of--she can't exactly stop campaigning for Dems like she quit her race, can she?

 
 
 
devangelical
PhD Principal
6.1.7  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.2    3 weeks ago

the only people that care about those domestic terrorists that showed up in DC are the ones that didn't. let them rot in the gray bar hotel like the other violent criminals waiting trial. fuck'em.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
6.1.8  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.6    3 weeks ago
Got a feeling we'll see what Harris is made of--she can't exactly stop campaigning for Dems like she quit her race, can she?

As I say, If she runs for president, there will most likely be other democrats who will toss their hats into the ring. I don't know if she could win a primary?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.9  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.8    3 weeks ago
I don't know if she could win a primary?

I am not sure she can, based on her rather stunningly poor showing during her own previous campaign, which was an abject failure.

Plus, she isn't the most popular Democrat, and has made a few enemies within her party who won't mind taking her out.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
6.1.10  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @6.1.7    3 weeks ago

And fuck the constitution & the rule of law?

Sadly I think Merrick Garland, Nancy Pelosi and the FBI share your feelings.

We aren't standing at the precipice and we're looking into the abyss, we are in the abyss and it's going to take a lot to undue what the Biden puppet masters have done.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
6.1.11  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.9    3 weeks ago

She was only selected for VP for two reasons. Obviously neither had anything to do with fitness.

 
 
 
devangelical
PhD Principal
6.1.12  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.8    3 weeks ago

it still won't be as comedic as the popularity contest for the upcoming autocrat coronation.

 
 
 
devangelical
PhD Principal
6.1.13  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.11    3 weeks ago

... and both of those reasons are why you consider her unfit to serve.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.14  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.11    3 weeks ago
She was only selected for VP for two reasons. Obviously neither had anything to do with fitness.

Too true, sadly for the Democratic Party.

Elections have consequences, and the Democrats will feel them in 2022 and 2024.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.15  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @6.1.13    3 weeks ago
.. and both of those reasons are why you consider her unfit to serve.

Her incompetence is why she isn't the right person for the job.

Even a few Democrats are slowly recognizing that fact.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
6.1.16  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.15    3 weeks ago

Well said!

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.1.17  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.16    3 weeks ago

No.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Senior Principal
7  Nerm_L    3 weeks ago

How's that 'not Trump' thing workin' for ya'?

Democrats have lost the power of the protest.  Attacking civil society might have worked against Trump but Trump ain't in charge any longer.  Biden's on the hot seat now.  Resistance won't create unity any longer.

The writing is on the wall.  Democrats have embraced a lot of anti-Trump positions that just aren't very popular without Trump in charge.  So, Democrats are desperately searching for a new scapegoat.  Democrats can't do anything when they're not in charge and can't do anything when they are in charge.  The bottom line is that Democrats can't do anything at any time -- except make excuses for why they can't do anything.

Biden is preemptively making excuses for what is beginning to look like another Obama shellacking in the midterms next year.  Amazingly Biden is already blaming a rigged election. (sound familiar?)   Biden's Big Malarkey is just that, malarkey.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1  Tessylo  replied to  Nerm_L @7    3 weeks ago

What's that nonsense?

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Senior Principal
7.1.1  Nerm_L  replied to  Tessylo @7.1    3 weeks ago
What's that nonsense?

Haven't you noticed that the news media has shifted attention onto attacks on cops?  BLM isn't newsworthy any longer.  Even Biden has thrown BLM under the bus.

Who are Democrats going to resist and protest now?  Trump is yesterday's news.

 
 
 
pat wilson
Professor Guide
7.1.2  pat wilson  replied to  Nerm_L @7.1.1    3 weeks ago
the news media has shifted attention onto attacks on cops?

"shifted" ? The news media has been focused on 6/2021 since it happened, you know, those attacks on cops.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1.3  Tessylo  replied to  Nerm_L @7.1.1    3 weeks ago

See. 7.1

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Senior Principal
7.1.4  Nerm_L  replied to  pat wilson @7.1.2    3 weeks ago
"shifted" ? The news media has been focused on 6/2021 since it happened, you know, those attacks on cops.

Yes, shifted.  Since Jan. 6 cops are the victims.  The 'insurrection' succeeded in changing the narrative that BLM created.  BLM protesting cops has lost traction in the news cycle.

Democrats have used the 'insurrection' to portray cops as protectors.  Democrats have complained that cops didn't take adequate measures to protect the Capitol; cops should have gotten tough.  Democrats deployed the military to protect the Capitol because cops weren't tough enough.  Democrats have adopted a much more militant stance for the role of cops.

The 'insurrection' was the perfect counter to BLM protests.  If Trump had planned the protest and 'insurrection' as a counter to BLM then the plan worked beautifully.  Democrats oppose anything Trump.  So, if Trump supports violent protest then Democrats will automatically oppose violent protests.  Planned or not, BLM is under the bus.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Nerm_L @7    3 weeks ago
So, Democrats are desperately searching for a new scapegoat. 

It seems to be the rest of us.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Senior Principal
7.2.1  Nerm_L  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.2    3 weeks ago
It seems to be the rest of us.

Democrats strategy is to throw everything against the wall and see what sticks.  Now Democrats are losing the news cycle because they've lost the power of resistance and protest.

Whining like Trump isn't newsworthy any longer.  Trump is yesterday's news.  Until the midterms.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.2.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Nerm_L @7.2.1    3 weeks ago
Now Democrats are losing the news cycle because they've lost the power of resistance and protest.

It's their policies. The country got a good taste. 

Remember when they had dreams of turning Texas blue? Take a look at what democrat representatives from those southernmost Texas precincts are now saying. Open borders did that! Look at what they've done to the cities. Did we really think that NYC democrats would nominate a strict law & order candidate?

The hand writing is on the wall for democrats.

My only question is why the electorate has to subject itself to so much damage to relive what we experienced the last time they held power?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.2.3  Tessylo  replied to  Nerm_L @7.2.1    3 weeks ago

See 7.1

 
 
 
dennis smith
Masters Silent
7.2.4  dennis smith  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.2.2    3 weeks ago

None are so blind as those who refuse to see.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8  author  Vic Eldred    3 weeks ago

There are choices that our leader can make for himself

R.418b753cece3bdf6d2d0ccae16dbf0ec?rik=5JewDa%2fkk1LIzQ&pid=ImgRaw

And our courageous media isn't afraid to ask him about

but when it comes to voting or crime Biden listens to his handlers.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
9  author  Vic Eldred    3 weeks ago

It looks like this one might just be a wrap so:

In conclusion:

The rising crime problem is one that was unnecessary and self created by democrats during the violent George Floyd riots, when democrats proposed defunding the police. This one cannot be easily fixed. The police were demonized, emasculated and in some precincts defunded and or held more liable. We have lost a lot of brave courageous police officers. Many have taken early retirement or quit. Few now want such a job.

When it comes to voting laws, I defy anyone to tell us the recent changes significantly, or even moderately, different from what they were before 2020. Voting was best when it was a civic duty, accomplished within a single 18 hour day with the necessary ID. Voting can be easy, but it should also be secure.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
9.1  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @9    3 weeks ago

How about removing voting areas from places that they now have to wait hours to vote, like they did in Texas? 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
9.1.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @9.1    3 weeks ago

How long has there been rural voters in Texas?

 
 
 
dennis smith
Masters Silent
9.2  dennis smith  replied to  Vic Eldred @9    3 weeks ago

Except in Delaware.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
10  Texan1211    3 weeks ago

Which voting places were removed by law in Texas?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
10.1  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Texan1211 @10    3 weeks ago

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
10.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @10.1    3 weeks ago

Do you mean the provision that was removed before it passed the House?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
10.1.2  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Texan1211 @10.1.1    3 weeks ago

Can you show me a link to that, because I can't find any.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
10.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @10.1.2    3 weeks ago

It is in the link you gave me.

Although the provision was removed from the bill when passed in the House, it remains on the table as a conference committee of lawmakers begins hammering out a final version of the bill behind closed doors.
 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
11  Tacos!    3 weeks ago
that’s not hyperbole

When you have to claim that, there's an excellent chance that what you're saying actually is hyperbole. And you know it.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

SteevieGee
Jack_TX
Paula Bartholomew
Transyferous Rex
zuksam
pat wilson
Snuffy
Tessylo
Ed-NavDoc


26 visitors