Would You Sleep With Me for a Million Dollars?

Nothing important just an observation. TMZ reported - Harvey WeinsteinFlying to Europe Tonight For Sex Addiction Rehab on 10/10/17, 7:40 PM PDT. This was also reported by the Daily Mail in England and other newspapers. Alex Jones reported "REPORT: Trump’s Justice Department Moves on Weinstein, Orders FBI to Open Probe Over Fears he will ‘do a Polanski’" 

A note to my readers, I do not endorse Alex Jones, in fact I do not as a rule even link to him. I had to link to what he said, if I am to be fair when discussing this event, the subject of the post.

So here is the timeline. Weinstein is called out as a molester by multiple women in a magazine report. Other famous women come forward and a tape on which Weinstein appears to admit having groped women. His ship quickly sinks, his attorney quits his case and his wife announces she is leaving him after he is forced to leave the company he founded. It is then claimed that he is attempting to leave for Europe to attend rehab; but, ends up staying and it is reported he is headed to Arizona for rehab. In between was the Alex Jones report that the Justice Department is moving on him. See, the federal government does not have any jurisdiction over these matters and as far as I know, no criminal charges have made against Weinstein. That should mean that he would be free to leave the country, so why didn't he?

What if Mr. Weinstein was put on a "no fly" list? Guess what, they don't need to charge you with a crime to put you on a no fly list. Can they put people on no fly lists on the mere suspicion that they might be charged with a crime? The answer is yes.

After Mr. Weinstein decided to stay in the US, his daughter called the police to say he was suicidal. TMZ - Harvey Weinstein Suicide Threat Prompts Police Response.

While I could care less about Weinstein, I find this story interesting. Not the fact that he molested women, that would never surprise me in Hollywood. The fact that everyone had heard the rumors and said nothing does not surprise me. The abject fear it has caused in Hollywood surprises me. They may be afraid of who is taken down next. We cannot even imagine what secrets Weinstein knows about people in Hollywood or who he would be willing to sell out for a better plea deal if charged. This guy begged others executives to help him to keep his job and he is known for being vengeful. Maybe that is why it took a week for so many in Hollywood to say anything. The insane attempts to make this about Trump (the LA Times has chosen to make it about Bannon, it is a company town) is a desperate attempt to kill the story that is not proving successful. The attempt is being made because Weinstein still has power in this town and still owns lots of shares in the company and knows lots of secret.

Weinstein is sort of like Kaddafi when he was captured by his opponents. He is in shock that none come to help him, he cannot believe his kingdom is crumbling because he masturbated in a plant pot in front of an actress or asked for naked massages or even touched them. He cannot believe it because he thinks that is how this industry works and it has been since the beginning. Washington DC is no different. Power and sex go hand in hand, it does not take much power to get lots of sex. If people will cheat on their spouse for free or hook up for dinner and drinks than they will certainly have sex in exchange for becoming a celebrity or getting a promotion.

While it is easy to condemn people who abuse power as Harvey Weinstein did, the fact is that it is really a question of what people will do to get ahead, to achieve their personal dreams. If you could avoid the gas chamber by sleeping with your guard, would you? If you were homeless would you sleep with a cop to drugs and a hotel room for the night? Would you sleep with a Hollywood producer to get a million dollars? How about to get a career worth $100 million? 

I have talked about the Aussie sex worker who stayed with me and my family for a week or so (I don't remember exactly how long it was), she was stunned that I would not consider sleeping with her. She told me that she expected men in their 40s (as I was at the time) to seek it. 

For my male readers I will ask a question. Would you turn down sex from a woman who offered it to you if there was no price tag for the service? We live in a world where sex is a commodity, it is traded on a daily basis and I am not referencing prostitution. Contrary to popular belief, prostitution is not illegal in Hollywood, in fact porno movies pay people to have sex, the definition of prostitution. I pointed this out in law school over 30 years ago. I asked why we did not charge porno movie producers and directors as pimps as they paid people to have sex. I was laughed at; but, nobody has ever answered the question from a legal perspective. Is it okay to pay people for sex as long as you film it?

There is a schism in people's minds. They will tell you that we should not allow people to go to jail for prostitution; but, we should put people in jail for asking for sex in exchange for getting a job. What is the difference?

Now, lets get away from sex. Would you lie for your company if it meant you would make $! million a year? What about a hundred million a year? 

Late Night Shows, Harvey Weinstein and Las Vegas. Now with 2 updates.

So the new mantra on late night television talk shows involves the host saying (after a week of saying nothing) that Harvey Weinstein is a bad man and that nobody knew. That is a lie and they knew. A bold statement you may say, not really I was born in this town, let me tell you things I know.

I have mentioned that I was a stage manager, well, I was offered into one of the unions when I was 16 and qualified for two unions at the time. At 12, my Catechism teacher was a producer who was responsible for the most expensive television pilot up until then. At 16 my brother and I were offered work in movies and television by a friend of mine's father who lived next to John Davidson and was a producer. That's just two of the producers I knew. I cannot tell you how many child stars I knew or knew friends. My sister even dated one of Johnny Carson's sons once. It is a small town in some ways, it is an industry town in many ways. Let me be clear, even though I barely noticed at the time, I crossed paths with many a Hollywood person including having had my first date with a lady who became an actress and model and had won a national talent show before she turned 18. I know, you cannot imagine the Pimpernel with an artsy type; but, she had the most wonderful heart and I knew her since 6th grade.

Before moving to where I live now, I lived in Burbank right next to Warner Brothers. The women there are stunning beautiful, even the waitresses often work in the business. Just so you understand, the average SAG member (actors and actresses) make like under $15,000 a year. The caste system in Hollywood is unbelievable. One of my friend's wives was a stand in for an actress on one of the Star Trek shows, she didn't make a bunch, maybe $40,000 a year; but, her husband had a great job. When they were making one of the movies she got a line in the film, sort of a thank you for being a good egg. Her husband told me how she was treated on the day of her line and how she was usually treated. Little things like having your name over your space where you get made up or getting picked up or a million little things that you get as perks as you rise in the talent arena.

While it seems boring and stupid to me to mention these things because I never really thought about it having grown up around it. One person I knew was a director on a national late night talk show, she lived with one of my very good friends. In fact, I lived with him for a few months after separating from my ex. We lived in Santa Monica where I was actually hit up on by young actresses and models. Again for those who do not know me, I was never that good looking and am not now. Each of my daughters witnesses some of this and each has a separate answer on why women found me attractive, I blame it on poor eyesight. Theirs not mine. I personally think they thought I might a writer or something in the business, I kind of look like that is possible.

The reason I mention all this is because I do not believe for one second that the talk show hosts of today never heard any stories about Weinstein. The town doesn't work that way. Hollywood has a bigger support system than an air force jet. There are hairdressers, stylists, caterers, drivers, agents, managers, accountants, lawyers, and hundreds of other professions and they all talk. One famous child star came out after the Corey Feldman story about their being sexually assaulted and mentioned how all the kids and adults knew at the time, nothing has changed. One does not accost Angelina Jolie and Gwyneth Paltrow without it getting around. Gwyneth even said she had told her boyfriend of the time, Brad Pitt, about it. Lena Dunham claims he had accosted her and she still worked at a Clinton fundraiser with him; but, felt bad about it.

The director of the late night talk show told me a story about a famous male singer (sold over 100 million records and in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame) who came to her door at 2 in the morning seeking sex even though he knew she was married to another famous musician. She had plenty of stories about people in the business, bad stories about people I liked and good stories about some I didn't care for. The fact of the matter is that the people who work on late night talk shows have a duty to know about the people who go on them and are surrounded by directors, producers, writers, makeup artists and talent scouts who darn well better know how to get people on the show and all about those people.

The talk show hosts waited a week to say anything and then all claimed to know nothing and have heard nothing. They are liars and the people who work for them know they are lying. Weinstein bought political influence for the industry and that is why they ignored his indiscretions. He was a lobbyist for the industry hiding behind being a donor. I say hiding because he didn't have to follow the laws as regular lobbyist, like reporting certain things. Remember when Clinton deregulated the news media allowing it to consolidate to where 6 companies control 90% of all the news in this country? Yeah, Weinstein brought millions to Bill Clintons campaign and the DNC and he was there for Hillary too. Funny how Hillary and the late night talk show people all decided to talk about him a week later and at the same time, I guess they all grew morals at the same time and oddly enough the exact same talking points which end with "But Trump". LOL.

Tell me another fairy tale because I don't know any better and just might buy the lies; but, don't count on it.

UPDATE:

Lets play connect the dots. Harvey Weinstein owned Miramax, Disney bought Miramax in or around 1993 from him and ABC owns the Jimmy Kimmel Show. Small point of interest, in 2009 Weinstein vocally gave support to Roman Polanski to not be extradited to the United States to face trial for raping a 13 year old girl. Tell me again how these late night hosts and Hillary Clinton never heard any rumors about him. By the way, Bill Clinton deregulated the media in 1996 leading to 6 companies owning 90% of all of it. I wonder if Weinstein's contributions to his campaigns and later Hillary led to this decision. Funny how donors are not treated like lobbyists, even when they are lobbying.

Gwenyth Paltrow says that Weinstein accosted her while she was dating Brad Pitt and that Pitt threatened to harm Weinstein when he saw him again. Later Pitt married Angelina Jolie who also says she was accosted by Weinstein. Hmm, what has he to say about all this, what does he say about  his choosing to work for Weinstein on Inglorious Bastards? The sound of tumbleweeds on a windy night is all we hear. Hollywood is a bunch of timid narcissists that will say and do anything to get noticed. Heck, Lena Dunham says she was accosted by him; but, worked with him to fundraise for Hillary. Funny that she was more concerned about Trump than being with the man who actually accosted her, Weinstein.

Hollywood is more willing to go after the President than Weinstein because they feared Weinstein effecting their careers more. Notice how Kimmel made the Weinstein story about Trump. He failed to mention how his owner, ABC, owned Miramax the old Weinstein company. What a surprise. Follow the money, always a good starting point.

You can click your tongues over Democrats; but, this is deeper, this is about a media owned by oligarchs and the power they wield to make sure you only hear what they want you to. When the presidential campaign began I told you, I was focused on the media, still am. Ignore the party, focus on the propaganda machine that is now for all practical purposes a monopoly.

UPDATE 2:

So the Las Vegas police said that the Mandalay Bay shooter had shot a security guard after firing into the crowd and is now saying that he was shot before he began shooting into the crowd. You might ask what difference it makes, it makes a lot. It means the hotel could be held liable for not having stopped the shooting after it began when they knew what was going on. In fact, it took almost an hour before police arrived at the room. What happened after the security guard was shot, why wasn't it picked up by the security cameras and the security staff on it immediately?

YouTube - Vegas shooter had access to Mandalay Bay service elevators.

Vegas, like Hollywood, is a company town, an oligarchy now and they don't snitch on one another. The state of Nevada determines who gets to have a casino license. The Nevada state investigation office has almost certainly asked for all of the gambling records on the killer and I assure you, the casinos provided it along with all of their security footage. Every floor is recorded 24 hours a day from multiple cameras at the Mandalay Bay. The security people know this, it is not a secret; but, it is also not being discussed in the mainstream corporate media. Where is the video of the last time the gunman entered his room? Where is the video of the security guard being shot, along with the timestamp?

Mandalay Bay is owned by MGM Resorts International. They own quite a lot of casinos, not just in Vegas, worldwide. They own Bellagio, Circus Circus, Aria, Mandarin, Vdara, Excalibur, Luxor, Mandalay Bay, Delano, MGM Grand, the Mirage, Monte Carlo, New York, New York and a whole bunch of other casinos in multiple states. They make up a significant percentage of the jobs and income of Nevada.

Read my previous post, TTIIY - What if he Was Truly Gambling With People's Lives.

Vegas is terrified that he did this because he lost lots of money. The casinos are all discussing how this may hurt business. They have had the video since it happened and have yet to release it to the public. The police would have seen the video almost immediately and lied about when the guard was shot. By the way, there are cameras in the service elevators, that's frequently how the money is moved. Every hotel in the casinos is monitored, they are looking out for people that might rip them off. This guy brought enough guns that he could have robbed the whole hotel and casino.

Ignore idiots that talk about ISIS being involved, like that moron Alex Jones, a distractor at best. Ignore the mainstream corporate media that wants you to focus on bump stocks. Ask yourself how having more cameras around to film you makes you safer when a important Vegas casino that films everyone 24/7 couldn't catch this guy, that is what they are hiding from you.

Really short and quick post.

Foreign Affairs Magazine - The Future of History, Can Liberal Democracy Survive the Decline of the Middle Class.  You should read it just to become familiar with what the establishment believes is coming.

Politico - Joe Biden’s Platform for 2020: Anti-Populism. The establishment sees you as the unruly and unwashed masses. Here is a line from the article, "If you’re looking for someone who can simultaneously persuade the angry mobs to put away the pitchforks and still bring white working-class voters back into the Democratic fold, perhaps you’ve found your answer in the Pride of Scranton."  To be specific, the article lays out how Biden is a globalist (does not believe in America first) and international trade agreements that weaken democracy like the TPP.

Bloomberg - California Considers Following China With Combustion-Engine Car Ban. 

Puerto Rico and More Media Lies

I'm just going to point this out because of the incessant lies by the corporate mainstream media really annoys me sometimes.

First this reporter tells us and interviews someone who says they don't have any electricity or internet, then at 5:27 or so into the video she claims that people in Puerto Rico were upset by Trump's tweets. How would they possibly know what he tweeted if they had no internet connection? We had been told that the cell towers were down in Puerto Rico and that there is no electrical system left. She then goes into how this is worse than Katrina even though they have lost only 16 people and in Katrina they lost almost 1,500 people; but, she assures us it is worse in Puerto Rico because people lost everything. Does she not know that even more people lost everything in Katrina? That many have had to move from Louisiana because of it for the rest of their lives?

Lets be honest, we dedicated $9 billion and sent 10,000 people to Puerto Rico which is more than 1/10th of their national debt ($72 billion) and is the same as the debt for their electrical company alone. If the United Sates mainland loses it's electrical grid, will Puerto Rico give us $1.8 trillion (1/10th our national debt)? I think not. She complains that Trump is discussing the debt and costs while he is the only one saying their debt needs to be restricted. Yes, Trump discussed the debt and the need to relieve them of it. In fact all of the interviews she showed were of Puerto Ricans saying give Trump a chance and then judge him. Watch the video above, listen to what she says and what the people she interviewed say then listen to what she said people felt. Which people, not the one's she interviewed.

What if he Was Truly Gambling With People's Lives

I may or may not post this, writing just helps me to figure things out sometimes. I generally don't feel comfortable about discussing fresh big news. I prefer to write about longer term trends. Writing about Pastor Daniels was a fluke, I just couldn't see something and still can't. I have previously discussed what I thought; but, I cannot understand what happened in Vegas. I don't care about the gun debate, I have made my views on gun control in the past on this blog, nothing has changed. No, this doesn't add up.

I accept the fact that this miscreant killed all these people. I just cannot make sense of why or how he got to that place. Nothing about the guy makes sense. I have previously mentioned the BTK case. Prior to him reappearing, I accurately predicted where he lived, that he was still alive, that he had never been arrested, that he attended church, that he was in code enforcement, the city he lived in and many other details. I went by the nickname catchputz on the Kansas City newspaper site. These things can be checked. Readers of this site that know me personally can vouch for this. It didn't make sense to me when I first read about it and this doesn't either.

I practically lived in Vegas for 20 years, that is how much I was there. I was hosted and had markers. I didn't pay for a room in that town for over a decade, including two years after I stopped going when my father died. The media keeps saying that this guy played high stakes video poker. I played low stakes stuff and was still hosted. This guy they tell us was a millionaire who had won $250,000 once according to his brother. The doesn't make any sense. It was reported tonight that the guy spent 8 hours playing high stake video poker before going on his killing spree. That makes no sense. They also said that he had stayed at another hotel previously across from a concert. The first thing I would ask is did he play high stakes poker for 8 hours that time too. If he did, did he win or lose and how much?

Here is what I am starting to see. The casinos know his patter of play, they had to. This guy had to be hosted or all the talk about him being a big gambler is a lie. Here is a simple question, was his room comped? That is the first thing I would have checked, how did he pay for his room? How much did he gamble? Was he picking the event he would act up at based on whether or not he lost big? Why hasn't anyone reported on his gambling record, the casinos have it and that is not a guess. What kind of tipper was he. I guy sits down playing video poker, high stakes, and the waitress notices him. That is not a guess either, I practically lived in those casinos. Cocktail waitresses loved me and always made sure I was taken care of. They would have noticed him.

There is a lot of talk about whether or not this guy was with ISIS (I doubt it a lot nobody what they said). This guy did not expect to come out alive and didn't intend to. I know they said he prepared a way out; but, he wasn't captured, he killed himself and it took an hour for them to get in his room. He could have left at anytime or at least tried to. This does not make sense.

I grew up in the wake of the tower shooting at Austen University, that guy made sense. He snapped and wanted to die; but, he didn't make preparations like this in advance. This guy prepared weeks in advance, I don't buy that he just snapped. It was a plan; but, to do what?

There used to be a show on HBO called Taxicab Confessions. A compulsive gambler ended up in the secret cab that had the secret camera. He tells the driver that he is a compulsive gambler and almost killed himself because he couldn't stop himself. While I used to love Vegas, I was never a compulsive gambler. I mean, I had a gambling budget and really didn't care if I won or lost. I just enjoyed getting away from all the pressure in my life and being treated like I mattered. There are more people like me that gamble in Vegas that there are compulsive gamblers. I know all the different types of gamblers including professional ones. Heck, I had a professional poker player live with me when he was homeless. LOL. I once emotionally destroyed the man responsible for the whales comfort at a significantly famous and big casino. I know that town and I know the different types of gamblers.

Somewhere over the last ten years I wrote a post about when Tiger Woods got called out for hookers in Vegas. I pointed out then that the casinos knew and let him get caught. Don't know why; but, they did. Casinos look out for the big players. Casinos look out even for regulars that are little guys like me. I would love to know what the casinos knew about this guy and we are not hearing it.

I have not heard one thing that makes me associate this guy with country and western or country fans. Nothing. What if he was looking for a big event; but, wanted his play to determine which one. What if he was gambling on which event to kill at based on his play during the day? That sounds insane as I write it; but, I think it is worth looking into. That is sick beyond all belief. What if it is true? What if he was truly gambling with people's lives?

The casinos monitor patterns of play, that is how they determine your comps or freebees. When the school teacher from Omaha gets into Vegas, she signs up for the rewards program to get comps for her play. Most play a couple of hundred dollars and pay for their rooms, which they booked in advance. Some upon returning home are offered free rooms and some sort of giveaway next time they come, as long as it is during the week. The guy played high stakes video poker, he expected to get a free room whenever he wanted and he expected to get free meals. What were the things he did ask for?

The Zodiac Killer mentioned a film in his letters. The Most Dangerous Game. It is about a rich man who likes to hunt people. A game. If high stakes are not enough, what stakes could be higher than the lives of hundreds?

Vegas is not like it used to be, there are only a couple of conglomerates that own all the casinos and they all share their rewards card information. A gamblers pattern is nectar to a casino and this guy had one. I played tournament poker, gamblers look for patterns of play and betting just like casinos do. You don't play the cards, you play the person. They guy does not fit in with any expected patterns so we should consider what patterns he does fit in with. He is a compulsive gambler with no history of hate towards any group. He didn't face the sudden loss of a family member or loved one, he was not broke, he was not dying and he planned it out multiple times. What if it really is as simple as I said it could be.

UPDATE:

I posted the above at 2:46 in the morning. At 8:00 tonight the following article was published by USA Today - Paddock's high-roller status would have bought him perks, casino experts say. Shock of shock, after talking to casino and gambling experts the writer said, " This likely makes figuring out exactly how much money Paddock spent on gambling prior to the mass shooting a key part of any investigation. How much money was wagered? Was he winning or losing?"  I highly recommend that people read the article, it will confirm the things I wrote above, last night.

UPDATE 2:

LA Times - In the solitary world of video poker, Stephen Paddock knew how to win. Until he didn't.
Read the article, then read what I wrote days ago. I know Vegas and I'm not alone. This guy had a profile at every casino and a record of all his bets and play. This was not terrorism, this was a personal insanity.

UPDATE 3:

Las Vegas Review Journal - Las Vegas gunman Stephen Paddock lost money in 2 years preceding shooting.  Here is the line that sums up what I have been asking since it happened. "
Lombardo speculated that the financial losses might have contributed to Paddock’s decision to spray a country music festival with bullets, killing 58 people and injuring more than 500 others. “I think that might have a determining factor on what he determined to do,” Lombardo said in the interview, which aired Wednesday night.

UPDATE 4:

It is now November 19, 2017 and this is an update. I was absolutely correct, the shooter had a host and on November 17, 2017 they spoke to them on Coast to Coast AM. I'm going to listen to it now, just found out.

Media Trust and Reality

The corporate mainstream media continues to create their own trap. Trump ends DACA. The fact that DACA was never a law and provided no path to citizenship is ignored by the media and instead Trump is called a racist. Trump works with the Democratic party on some agreement to make DACA a real law and provide a passage to citizenship for people under it. The mainstream media attacks Democrats for working with Trump and the people who it applies to begin saying they don't want DACA made law if it means working with Trump or it means that we will secure our borders. Seems strange doesn't it and quite a bit insincere.

Now lets look at Puerto Rico. Trump says that we have to do something about their debt and the media chastises him for mentioning it at all. Once arriving in Puerto Rico Trump says that the banks are going to have to eat that debt, basically saying they will get to declare bankruptcy (something that came up two years ago and congress and President Obama failed to deal with). What does the media discuss, not that, they discuss him throwing paper towels at people (otherwise known as handing out supplies). Yep, that is your corporate media for you.

Lets go back in time, Trump convinces Carrier to keep jobs in the United States and the media says he didn't keep them all and at the same time says it is wrong for him to try to keep manufacturing jobs here. I know, I wrote those posts at the time and they are still here.

It seems that every time Trump says something, the media attacks him and says he should do X; but, when it turns out that he was working on just that all the time and proposes it, they say it is not enough and that he is racist or evil for doing what they said he should do.

The establishment and the corporate media cannot see what they are doing to themselves. Even progressives within the Democratic party that hate Trump are calling out the media for their lies and hypocrisy. I write about the news all the time, I read so many news sources a day that I cannot tell you on any given day which ones I read. I read from the left, from the right, from other countries, from alternative sites, from overseas sites and from everything else that looks like it might contain additional information like specialty sites (science, anomalous events, cryptozoology and whatever else you can think of). Nobody who knows me thinks they are better informed on these events than me; but, even those of my friends who follow none of these things are telling me that they know the media and establishment are exposing themselves in a negative light and they cannot figure out why. Everyone knows something is different, even the most uninformed.

Here is where it really gets weird. If Trump gets DACA approved as a real law providing a real path to citizenship, we already know they will say he is evil and a racist. If Trump gets a bankruptcy approved for Puerto Rico and gets their electrical grid back up better than it was before the hurricane they will say he is evil and racist. The problem for the media is that everybody sees what they are saying even the people who hate Trump.

Pimpernel was a sneaky, sneaky person back in the day. I would set trap doors for those who attacked me to make sure if they did wrong their heads fell off and they never saw them because there were always too many to catch them all. Making people fight themselves is easier than you might think, it is chess if you play well and it is most definitely tournament poker. You just don't see it often in politics, not to this degree.

While I have little if any sympathy for the corporate media or the establishment as they continue to lose credibility and expose their hypocrisy, I am concerned that down the road people will not hear them if and when they are ever honest and correct again. It is easier to convince people you are dishonest than to convince them after you have proven it that you can be trusted again. That is the predicament the media is in.

Media Manipulation and the Meaning of Terrorism

There is an organized attempt to use the story of what happened in Las Vegas for political ends. While I personally think now is not the time to have these discussions, I want my readers to know that they are being played and explain how they are being played.

The first talking point (organized, planned propaganda to lead people to a belief) is the universal statement by late night media and others that "sending your thoughts and prayers is not good enough" and that we must make changes to the law now. I follow a general rule, if it happens once, it is an anomaly. If it happens twice it is a coincidence. If it happens three times, it is a pattern. When I see every late night host say the exact same thing, it is an agenda. Emotions are intentionally being played so that laws be passed quickly without serious discussion. This is the same dishonest manipulation that went on after 9-11 and convinced people to support the Patriot Act, including legislators who said they didn't even have time to read it.

Some people were baffled by Hillary Clinton's tweets after the tragedy calling for outlawing silencers when none were used as far as we know and they don't really silence except in the movies. Let me explain, silencers are completely useless with many guns. I know you have seen people in movies or on television put silencers on revolvers, you don't use silencers on revolvers because they have zero effect on the noise. Silencers also don't have any effect on assault rifles or machine guns. They certainly don't silence them. After Hillary said this, others began saying the same thing, that we should outlaw silencers. Strange, right? Even people who admitted they didn't work on assault rifles or machine guns said they didn't work on the weapons the murderer used and that he didn't use them. What they left out is that there is a law about to be voted on regarding the legality of silencers and other things in a couple of weeks. A federal law.

The federal government is interesting in what it can and cannot legislate. Most people do not know that there was no federal law regarding killing the President until after Kennedy was killed. Prior to that, state laws regarding murder were considered to be the prevailing law. The federal laws require a federal interest. You may have also noticed that the media is pushing the narrative that this is terrorism. Many have fallen in line saying why not just call this terrorism. Well, what does it matter you might ask as the murderer is already dead and will not be facing prosecution.

Remember the Patriot Act, it made terrorism a federal crime. If we were to call every crime where more than one person is killed an act of terrorism, it would greatly expand the role of the federal government in prosecuting crimes that are usually the prevue of the state government. It would greatly expand the role of the Patriot Act. Terrorism involves crimes intended to attack government, not citizens except as a byproduct. Every crazy person who goes out and kills people is not a terrorist or the word has no meaning.

Just to be clear, I am not against regulating weapons. I am not against heavily regulating machine guns. I am against outlawing handguns, shotguns and rifles used for home protection and hunting. The second amendment was based on our earlier constitution (The Articles of Confederation) and continued to use the words "well regulated militia" for a reason. I have written about that before and want to make it clear that I am pointing out the propaganda we are being fed today, not advocating unlimited access to weapons. You are being lied to and manipulated by the media so that you will give up more rights and I want make sure you understand why.

UPDATE:

The Hill - Dem blasts moments of silence after mass shootings as 'grisly House ritual'.

As the article points out, the law that was to voted on within the next week or so sought to reduce restrictions on buying suppressors. "House Republicans had been trying to push a bill titled the Sportsmen Heritage and Recreational Enhancement (SHARE) Act, which would broaden public access to federal lands for hunting and fishing. It includes a provision authored by Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) that would make it easier to buy gun silencers, which currently requires registration and a background check. Duncan's proposal would require people buying gun silencers, also known as suppressors, to undergo a less extensive instant background check." Yeah, the statements by Hillary and others had NOTHING to do with what happened in Vegas and everything to do with using the tragedy to manipulate the public. The "thoughts and prayers" complaints and the refusal by Democrats to even acknowledge what happened in a non-partisan moment of silence, nothing more than talking points to. As I said before in this post and have written about on this blog in the past, I am in favor of limiting the weapons someone can own; but, I am not in favor of lying to the public to manipulate them.

While many of my readers may be against any form of gun control (and I will address this again in the future after some time has passed), know that I will not attempt to lie to you to get you to agree with me and will always attempt to show the objective facts, unlike the mainstream corporate media and it's corporate whores like Stephen Colbert, John Oliver and Seth Meyers. By lying about the facts, they feed into keeping you ignorant.