Connect with us

Politics

Exclusive: Mike Pence Says ‘Calls To Defund The FBI Just As Wrong As Calls To Defund The Police’ – TalkOfNews.com

Published

on

Mike Pence Says ‘Calls To Defund The FBI Just As Wrong As Calls To Defund The Police’

#Mike #Pence #Calls #Defund #FBI #Wrong #Calls #Defund #Police

Former Vice President Mike Pence took conservatives to task on Wednesday, urging them to stop attacking the FBI over the search of former President Donald Trump’s Florida home last week.

He also criticized conservatives who have called for the defunding of the FBI.

He stated that calls to defund the FBI are “just as wrong” for Democrats to call for defunding local police departments.

RELATED: Obama Chimes In, Reviving Biden’s ‘Big F***ing Deal’ Line To Celebrate Inflation Reduction Act

On The Campaign Trail?

Mike Pence’s calls for caution come as a result of claims of increasing threats against law enforcement since the raid at Mar-A-Lago last week, and conservative outrage over the practices of federal law enforcement and the Department of Justice. 

Pence was speaking at the “Politics & Eggs” event at St. Anselm college in New Hampshire. There is much speculation that Pence will jump into the 2024 presidential race.

During the event, Pence also said that he is “troubled” by what he sees as the “politicization” of the FBI. He added that U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland and the Department of Justice need to be “more forthcoming” about information that prompted the search.

But Pence was not letting the GOP off the hook. He stated:

“I also want to remind my fellow Republicans, we can hold the attorney general accountable for the decision he made without attacking the rank-and-file law enforcement personnel at the FBI. The Republican Party is the party of law and order. Our party stands with the men and women who stand on the thin blue line at the federal and state and local level, and these attacks on the FBI must stop. Calls to defund the FBI are just as wrong as calls to defund the police.”

RELATED: Grim Warnings Of Possible Nuclear Destruction Has Us Humming ‘It’s The End Of The World As We Know It’

Consider Testifying Before Jan. 6 Committee

Because he may be a possible 2024 White House contender, Mike Pence seems to be trying to distance himself from Donald Trump. He has stated in the past that, “Look, it’s fairly well known that President Trump and I have had our differences.”

But it’s what he also said at the New Hampshire event that could bring a whole lot of distance between himself and Trump. After his speech there was a question and answer period.

James Brett is the President and Chief Executive Officer of the New England Council. He asked Pence about the Jan. 6 Committee and any possible involvement he might have in it. He asked, “January 6, if they were to call you to come and testify, talk, would you be agreeable?”

Pence’s response, in part:

“Well, I would… If there was an invitation to participate, I would consider it. But you’ve heard me mention the Constitution a few times this morning. In the Constitution, we have three co-equal branches of government. And any invitation to be directed to me, I would have to reflect on the unique role that I was serving in as vice president. Um, it’d be unprecedented in history for a vice president to be summoned to testify on Capitol Hill. But as I said, I don’t want to prejudge. If there’s ever any formal invitation rendered to us, we’d give it due consideration.”

RELATED: Trump Celebrates Liz Cheney’s Brutal Defeat: ‘Now She Can Finally Disappear’

Visits To First In The Nation Primary States

Mike Pence may be answering the question of whether or not he is running in 2024 by the looks of his travel schedule. In addition to the stop in New Hampshire, he will swing through Iowa to help Sen. Chuck Grassley, who is up for reelection, a trip to the State Fair, and a fundraiser in Des Moines. Pence was in South Carolina in May.

The recent CPAC Texas straw poll had some 20 GOP candidates on the list, including Pence and other familiar names like Sen. Ted Cruz, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

While Donald Trump emerged the hands down winner, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis came in second. No other candidates, including Pence, scored above the two percent mark. While other candidates may be waiting to see what Trump does, Mike Pence says his decision to run will not hinge on the activities of his former boss. 

Advertisement

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”


Politics

Exclusive: Today in Supreme Court History: January 26, 1832 – TalkOfNews.com

Published

on

By

Today in Supreme Court History: January 26, 1832

#Today #Supreme #Court #History #January

1/26/1832: Justice George Shiras Jr.’s birthday.

Justice George Shiras Jr.

The post Today in Supreme Court History: January 26, 1832 appeared first on Reason.com.

Continue Reading

Politics

Exclusive: Liberals Are Mad That McCarthy Named MAGA Republicans to Subcommittees on COVID and Government Weaponization – Good – TalkOfNews.com

Published

on

By

Liberals Are Mad That McCarthy Named MAGA Republicans to Subcommittees on COVID and Government Weaponization – Good

#Liberals #Mad #McCarthy #Named #MAGA #Republicans #Subcommittees #COVID #Government #Weaponization #Good

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy announced members named to two select subcommittees – one investigating the origins of COVID and another looking into the weaponization of the federal government – and Democrats are livid over the addition of certain MAGA lawmakers.

“The government has a responsibility to serve the American people, not go after them,” McCarthy said in a statement.

“The Members selected to serve on these subcommittees will work to stop the weaponization of the federal government and will also finally get answers to the Covid origins and the federal government’s gain of function research that contributed to the pandemic,” he added.

McCarthy notes that the weaponization subcommittee is necessary because congressional Democrats and the Biden administration engaged in a “dangerous pattern of the government being used to target political opponents while they neglected their most basic responsibilities.”

RELATED: Conservative Victory: Dan Crenshaw Loses Race To Chair Homeland Security Committee to Freedom Caucus Member Green

MAGA Members Named to House Select Subcommittees

A couple of names that showed up on the House select subcommittees raised the ire of Democrats, particularly those associated with the MAGA movement.

Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) continued reaping the fruits of a kinship with McCarthy that would make Frank Luntz blush, being named to the COVID-19 subcommittee.

Greene celebrated the appointment, stating her intention to investigate the role of gain-of-function research, the Democrat “authoritarian” lockdowns, the ineffective vaccines forced on the American people, and Dr. Anthony Fauci’s role.

Greene will also be sitting on the House Homeland Security and Oversight Committees.

Also named to the COVID subcommittee is former White House physician Ronny Jackson (R-TX), who has consistently challenged President Biden to undergo a mental fitness evaluation.

Jim Jordan (R-OH) will chair the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government after being rejected by former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to serve on the January 6th panel.

RELATED: White House Terrified of MAGA Republicans Being Named to Committees Investigating Biden Administration

Liberals Aren’t Happy

Liberals on social media responded with outrage over MAGA Republicans representing their constituents on the select subcommittees.

Because see, it would be better to have completely partisan sham committees like the January 6th debacle.

Advertisement

Democratic Congressman Don Beyer dismissed both panels as “devoted to conspiracy theories.”

This is fine by us, since these days “conspiracy theories” mostly just means “the media hasn’t admitted it yet.”

House Judiciary Democrats lambasted McCarthy for having “sold out our democracy to empower MAGA extremists.”

Richard Stengel, a former Obama administration official, also took the dismissive ‘conspiracy theory’ path.

The ‘Weaponization’ subcommittee, Stengel claims, is “a body that creates rather than investigates conspiracy theories and which will eventually undermine itself.”

We literally just watched the January 6th sham create highly directed and produced filmography rather than evidence, doctored actual evidence, created conspiracy theories, and admitted they wanted to tell people what they should believe.

If Democrats are mad about MAGA Republicans serving on committees to provide a counterpoint to Democrat and media lies, then McCarthy is most definitely doing the right thing.

Advertisement

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”


Continue Reading

Politics

Exclusive: Why older mass shooters like the California gunmen are so rare – TalkOfNews.com

Published

on

By

Why older mass shooters like the California gunmen are so rare

#older #mass #shooters #California #gunmen #rare

The gunmen in both of the recent shootings in Monterey Park and Half Moon Bay, California, had an unusual profile compared to most perpetrators of violent crime: They were both senior citizens.

The Monterey Park gunman, who killed 11 and injured nine before fatally shooting himself, was 72. The Half Moon Bay gunman, who killed seven people before he was arrested in what police have characterized as an act of workplace violence, is 66.

Mass shooters of that age are rare, especially those with no prior criminal record, as was the case with the Half Moon Bay gunman. (The Monterey Park gunman had one arrest in 1990 for illegal possession of a firearm.) According to data from the National Institute of Justice, mass shooters between 1966 and 2021 were on average 34 years old, and those over the age of 60 accounted for a little over 3 percent of all mass shootings, which are defined as shootings in which four or more people are killed.

The notion that people “age out of crime” is one of the most well-documented phenomena in the field of criminology. The California shootings should be seen as exceptions to that principle, not as nullifying examples, according to Ashley Nellis, co-director of research for the Sentencing Project, which advocates for criminal justice reform.

“The predictability of age is probably the most reliable point of data that we have about people who commit violent crime. Young people are just substantially more likely, and by extension, older people are substantially unlikely, to commit crime,” Nellis said. “It’s certainly a cautionary note to anybody who would be jumping to make policy based on these two events.”

Research has repeatedly shown that criminal activity increases throughout teen years, reaches its highest point at age 17, the oldest that someone can be charged with a juvenile crime, and subsides thereafter throughout life. Property crime peaks at a slightly younger age than violent crime. But even chronic offenders would be statistically likely to stop committing crime by around the age of 40, Nellis said.

There are a lot of theories as to why that might be. Typical milestones associated with getting older, like graduating or getting married, may put people on a trajectory that veers away from criminality. Brain development isn’t complete until the mid-20s, hindering decision-making that might lead to crime and risky behavior. Young people have less financial security, and people in poverty are more likely to commit crimes. Some crimes might be physically demanding, and older people just might not have the strength to carry them out.

But both gunmen in the California shootings buck the archetype of a violent criminal, and their motives still aren’t entirely clear. Investigators have said that the Monterey Park shooter frequented the dance studio where he killed his victims and that the Half Moon Bay gunman, who lived and worked as a forklift driver at a mushroom farm, was angry at the coworkers he shot. Previously, there have been mass shooters as old as 70, including a gunman who opened fire at a church in Vestavia Hills, Alabama, and killed three people last June.

Though age can sometimes factor into the decision to impose a less harsh sentence on young offenders, the Half Moon Bay shooter’s advanced age won’t have any bearing on the length of his sentence, as is standard practice in the US.

Advertisement

He will be charged with seven counts of murder and one count of attempted murder, with a special circumstance allegation of multiple murder and sentencing enhancements for each count because of his use of a firearm, the San Mateo County district attorney announced Wednesday. If convicted on those charges, he could be facing up to life in prison without the possibility of parole. (He won’t face the death penalty, given that California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, placed a moratorium on executions in the state in 2019.)

Life sentences without parole have become increasingly common in the US over the last few decades. But Nellis argues the age of older offenders like the Half Moon Bay shooter should be considered a mitigating factor when making sentencing decisions — especially given that the use of executive clemency to release them early has become nonexistent, as she writes in a 2022 report.

“Regardless of age, somebody who does commit an act of violence like this is likely to be rehabilitated, be reformed, be ready to return to society within 10 years,” she said.

Recidivism is unlikely among older people, according to data from the US Sentencing Commission, and keeping them in prison comes at a high taxpayer cost, which includes health care bills that balloon at the end of life. It’s difficult to say how much those who’ll decide the fate of the Half Moon Bay suspect will take that data into account; his initial arraignment is Wednesday.

Continue Reading

Exclusive

Copyright © 2022 Talk Of News.