Tag Archives: Kamala Harris

Sanctuary California: Illegal alien who killed 6-year-old was previously deported twice and arrested for DUI

Grace Aguilar killed by illegal

It’s not fair: Grace Aguilar taken from her parents.

The federal government ought to do its job and not blame California.

Tell me Jerry Brown, Nancy Pelosi, Kamala Harris and Libby Schaaf: Who is to blame now? The death of this little angel means nothing to you? NOTHING?

Apparently the last words of Kate Steinle meant nothing to you.

Why I’m so mad:

You politicians who support the sanctuary status in your state, and the voters who support you, make me sick.

Shame on the California politicians who shelter and protect illegals who kill American citizens. Shame on you!

From NBC Los Angeles: Angela Aguilar had just gone back inside her Fullerton home to cook. She thought her 6-year-old daughter, Grace, was also inside.

Grace Aguilar, though, was in the front yard, where she had gone to sit by her favorite tree. Angela Aguilar heard the crash, but she didn’t realize that an out-of-control driver had struck her daughter.

Grace Aguilar died in that Feb. 17 crash, which police say was caused by a drunk driver, and now her parents can only look back on a young life that had filled theirs with so much joy.

“For something so stupid to happen in a second, just to have (your child) taken away from you, it’s not fair,” Angela Aguilar said. “It’s not fair.”

Immigration officials say 50-year-old Maximino Delgado Lagunas, who is in the United States illegally, had a blood alcohol level nearly three times the legal limit when he was arrested. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has revealed to NBC4 that Lagunas, a Mexican national, had been deported twice, once in 2001 and again in 2008.

Court records show that in 2015 he was arrested for another DUI. Immigration officials say that back then Buena Park police did not detain Lagunas for the required 48 hours for pickup  by immigration officials, instead placing him on informal probation and releasing him to the streets.

Angela and Jesus Aguilar say it took them eight years to have a child. Now they can only mourn their daughter after Lagunas’ actions.

The girl’s parents say their daughter was friendly and mature. She loved people, nature and God. Her father remembers her hugs and her smiles. Her mother remembers the sound of her voice. “She had this beautiful laugh,” Angela Aguilar said. “I still hear it in my head every day.”

Lagunas could now face a possible murder charge.

“He’s taken away from me the best thing I had in life,” Jesus Aguilar said.



Kamala Harris: The Democratic message is “telling the American public we see them”

kamala harris

Kamala Harris: Womyn unshackled…

So inspirational!

From Yahoo: Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., said that Democrats have a message “much bigger” than opposing President Trump and that the party is focused on telling Americans “we see them.”

“The issues are not simple, so the message is not going not be simple,” Harris told Yahoo News in a small gaggle of reporters after she gave a speech at the “Women Unshackled” criminal justice conference Tuesday morning.

Harris said Democrats should not have a “monosyllabic” simple slogan, but instead focus on issues that matter to Americans, like jobs, the economy, health care, climate change and criminal justice reform.

“It’s going to be multitiered, but essentially it’s about telling the American public we see them,” Harris said of the Democrats’ message. “All Americans want to know that they are healthy, that their children and their parents are going to have access to health care and dignity. All Americans want to know they can get a job and keep a job. All Americans want to be able to retire with dignity.”

“These are truths, and when we see people for who they really are, and instead of some demographic based on what a pollster looks at, I think we’ll all be better for it,” she added.

Democrats have struggled to articulate a unified message since Trump won. And the issue of the party’s branding sparked up again after a top House Democrat, Joe Crowley, D-N.Y., recently told the Associated Press that the message is “being worked on.”

Harris is a buzzed-about potential candidate for president in 2020 and has already raised significant amounts of money for her Senate colleagues running in 2018. Harris has said she’s not giving “any consideration” to running for president, but Democratic donors are increasingly speculating about her as a top contender.

Harris’ criminal justice speech Tuesday to a bipartisan group of lawmakers and activists was greeted with enthusiastic applause, and the senator was nearly mobbed afterward with fans wanting to take selfies with her. Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin, a Republican, and Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., are also speaking at the event, organized by the U.S. Justice Action Network.

In her speech, Harris criticized Attorney General Jeff Sessions for steering the country back toward another war on drugs, which she called an “abject failure” and “crazy.”

“We made a mistake when decades ago we decided to criminalize what is a public health matter,” Harris said, advocating for drug treatment instead of jail time for nonviolent offenders.

She also spoke of her recent visit to a women’s prison in Chowchilla, Calif., where she talked to incarcerated women who were making American flags. “I walked away thinking, ‘Isn’t it part of who we are as Americans that we believe in second chances?’” she said.

Harris, a former prosecutor elected just last November, has made criminal justice reform one of her top issues in her short time in the Senate. She has co-sponsored legislation with other Democratic lawmakers to ban the practice of shackling pregnant inmates, and she announced during her speech that she would also be introducing legislation to reform the bail process so that decisions about whether to release prisoners ahead of their trials is based more upon the security risk of doing so and not upon how much money the prisoner has.

The senator told reporters she’s “optimistic” that legislation could pass, even in a divided Washington. “I think this is something that should not be thought of as even bipartisan — this should be a nonpartisan issue,” Harris said.


Congressional Resolutions (HRes 257, SR 118) will sic law enforcement on you for ‘hating’ Muslims, Jews, or blacks

Thought Crime comes to America.

There are two bi-partisan resolutions in Congress, House Resolution 257 and Senate Resolution 118, which mean to trigger a law enforcement “investigation” if you are deemed to “hate” Muslims or Jews or blacks.

H.Res. 257 is called “Condemning hate crime and any other form of racism, religious or ethnic bias, discrimination, incitement to violence, or animus targeting a minority in the United States”.

H.Res. 257’s companion in the U.S. Senate is Senate Resolution 118, which was introduced by Democrat Kamala Harris (CA) on April 5, 2017, when it was unanimously approved by the Senate. SR 118’s four co-sponsors are:

  • 2 Republicans: Marco Rubio (FL), Susan Collins (ME)
  • 2 Democrats: Dianne Feinstein (CA), Tammy Duckworth (IL)

HRes. 257 is sponsored by Republican Rep. Barbara Comstock (VA), who introduced the resolution in the House on April 6, 2017. On April 21, HRes. 257 was referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.

HRes. 257 has 12 co-sponsors:

  • 2 Republicans: Scott Taylor (VA), Carlos Curbelo (FL).
  • 10 Democrats: Debbie Dingel (MI), Luis Gutierrez (IL), Mike Quigley (IL), Tulsi Gabbard (HI), Gregory Meeks (NY), Gwen Moore (MI), Bonnie Watson Colman (NJ), Ro Khanna (CA), Peter DeFazio (OR), Raja Krishnamoorthi (IL).

Below is the text of House Resolution 257 in its entirety. I supplied the bold red and pink emphasis.


Condemning hate crime and any other form of racism, religious or ethnic bias, discrimination, incitement to violence, or animus targeting a minority in the United States.

Whereas, in the past several years, violent crimes, threats of violence, and other incidents of hate-motivated targeting of religious, racial, and ethnic minorities have increased across the United States;

Whereas, in 2015, hate crimes targeting Muslims in the United States increased by 67 percent, reaching a level of violence targeting Muslim Americans that the United States had not experienced since the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, attacks, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation;

Whereas, in 2015, anti-Semitic incidents increased in the United States for the second straight year, according to the Anti-Defamation League’s 2015 Audit of Anti-Semitic Incidents, which describes trends such as the tripling of assaults targeting Jews since 2012 and the rise of online harassment and hate speech directed at Jewish journalists and individuals through social media;

Whereas, in 2015, anti-Semitic incidents at institutions of higher education nearly doubled compared to the number of those incidents in 2014, and during the 2016–2017 school year there has been an increase in White supremacist activity on college campuses across the United States, according to the Anti-Defamation League;

Whereas, in 2015, among single-bias hate crime incidents in the United States, 59.2 percent of victims were targeted due to racial, ethnic, or ancestry bias, and among those victims, 52.2 percent were victims of crimes motivated by their offenders’ anti-Black or anti-African-American bias, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation;

Whereas, in 2017, there have been more than 100 reported bomb threats against Jewish community centers, Jewish day schools, and other Jewish organizations and institutions in more than 38 States;

Whereas, in 2017, Islamic centers and mosques have been burned in the States of Texas, Washington, and Florida, and Jewish cemeteries have been desecrated in the States of Missouri and Pennsylvania;

Whereas, in 2017, there has been harassment and hate-based violence against individuals who are perceived to be Muslim, including members of South Asian communities in the United States, and Hindu and Sikh Americans have been the target of hate-based violence targeting religious minorities; and

Whereas, on February 28, 2017, President Donald Trump, before a joint session of Congress, acknowledged threats targeting Jewish community centers and the vandalism of Jewish cemeteries, and stated that “we are a country that stands united in condemning hate and evil in all of its very ugly forms”: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, that the House of Representatives

(1) affirms that the United States stands united in condemning hate and evil in all forms;

(2) rejects hate-motivated crime as an attack on the fabric of the society of the United States and the ideals of pluralism and respect;

(3) condemns hate crime and any other form of racism, religious or ethnic bias, discrimination, incitement to violence, or animus targeting a minority in the United States;

(4) calls on Federal law enforcement officials, working with State and local officials

(A) to expeditiously investigate all credible reports of hate crimes and incidents and threats against minorities in the United States; and

(B) to hold the perpetrators of those crimes, incidents, or threats accountable and bring the perpetrators to justice;

(5) encourages the Department of Justice and other Federal agencies—

(A) to work to improve the reporting of hate crimes; and

(B) to emphasize the importance of the agencies’ collection and reporting of data pursuant to Federal law;

(6) encourages the development of an interagency task force led by the Attorney General and bringing together the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Education, the Department of State, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to collaborate on the development of effective strategies and efforts to detect and deter hate crime in order to protect minority communities; and

(7) calls on the executive branch—

(A) to offer Federal assistance that may be available for victims of hate crimes; and

(B) to enhance security measures and improve preparedness for religious institutions, places of worship, and other institutions that have been targeted because of the affiliation of the institutions with any particular religious, racial, or ethnic minority in the United States.

Note that:

(1) Although HRes 257 (and SR 118, which is already unanimously approved by the Senate) says “Condemning hate crime and any other form of racism, religious or ethnic bias, discrimination, incitement to violence, or animus targeting a minority in the United States,” only Muslims and Jews are mentioned as  “religious” targets, and blacks or African-Americans as the “racial” targets. No mention of Christians or whites as being even potential targets of religious or racial “bias, discrimination, incitement to violence, or animus”.

(2) The vagueness and ambiguity of important words, such as “hate crime”, “incitement to violence”, “bias”, “threats”, and especially “animus”. The Cambridge English Dictionary defines “animus” as “a feeling of hate or anger towards someone or something”. A feeling is an in-dwelling emotion, in contrast to “hate crime” and “incitement to violence”, which are outward behaviors of speech and/or action. That means HRes 257 and SR 118 seek to make feelings (of hate or anger toward Muslims, Jews, or blacks) into thought crimes.

Then there is the important matter of how “animus” — having a feeling of hate or anger — is detected and determined. Is simply criticizing Muslims, Jews, or blacks “animus”?

Contact your reps in the House of Representatives and tell them you oppose HRes 257, which, under no circumstances should be approved!

To find out who your representative is and how to contact him/her, click here.

H/t John Molloy


President Trump nixes Paris Climate Agreement; Hollyweird libtards’ & globalists’ heads explode


No word on whether or not they will give up using private jets. Don’t hold your breath.

(1) Hollyweirdos:

From Hollywood Reporter: On Thursday, President Donald Trump, as expected, announced his plans to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement. While reports since Wednesday had said Trump was planning to leave the deal, reached by former President Barack Obama in 2015, it wasn’t official until Thursday afternoon’s Rose Garden ceremony.

Many Hollywood stars, politicians and other notable figures had already weighed in on Trump’s expected move, criticizing the president for his anticipated action. When it was made official, though, more notables quickly took to Twitter to respond, as Democrats like Chuck Schumer, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris and Adam Schiff bashed the Trump’s decision.

Obama swiftly released a statement, reading in part: “A year and a half ago, the world came together in Paris around the first-ever global agreement to set the world on a low-carbon course and protect the world we leave to our children. … The nations that remain in the Paris Agreement will be the nations that reap the benefits in job and industries created. I believe the United States of America should be at the front of the pack. But even in the absence of American leadership; even as this Administration joins a small handful of nations that reject the future; I’m confident that our states, cities, and businesses will step up and do even more to lead the way, and help protect for future generations the one planet we got.”

Hollywood figures like Leonardo DiCaprio, George Takei, Chelsea Handler and Leslye Headland responded with jokes and harsh criticism of the president’s announcement.

“Trump is having the U.S. pull out of the Paris Climate Accord,” Takei wrote. “Too bad someone didn’t tell his father that he shoulda pulled out, too.”

The departure is a major blow to worldwide efforts to combat climate change and a significant break with U.S. allies abroad. Trump said the U.S. would try to negotiate re-entry on better terms.

Others tweeted the following:

  • Leonardo – I always fly private carriers – DiCaprio: Today, our planet suffered. It’s more important than ever to take action.
  • Chelsea Handler: I’m guessing that Donald Trump doesn’t see the irony in making his announcement to leave the Paris Agreement while standing in a garden.
  • Bette Midler: There has never in US history been such a destructive megalomaniac in the WH. Thank you to US press and other numbskulls who put him there.
  • John Legend: We have to stop this asshole. This is urgent. You have to vote in 2018.
  • Michael Moore: USA to Earth: FUCK YOU
  • Montel Williams: Trump is stone cold stupid. That’s right @realDonaldTrump is an intellectually impotent little man who needs to b impeached

Read about all the meltdowns here.

And if we are judged by the enemies we have, then Trump’s decision to pull the U.S. from the Paris agreement is a wise one, as the heads of non-Hollyweird globalists explode at the news:

(2) Pope Francis’ head explodes:

Pope Francis openly supports the Paris deal so much that he timed the release of his document on the environment, Laudato Si’, to influence the outcome.

Argentine Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, Chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, is quoted by the Italian newspaper La Repubblica that if Trump takes the United States out of the Paris deal, “it would be a disaster for everyone” and a “slap in the face for the Vatican.”

(3) EU heads explode:

In a speech in Berlin, Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the unelected European Commission, lectured Trump like he’s an idiot. Juncker said Trump doesn’t understand the treaty and that it would take “three to four years” to leave the agreement — “No, that’s not how it works! The Americans can’t just leave! So this notion, I am Trump, I am American, American first and I’m going to get out of it – that won’t happen.” (InfoWars)

In a joint statement yesterday, Italian Premier Paolo Gentiloni, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron threatened that the Paris Agreement is “irreversible and . . . cannot be renegotiated.”

Having anticipated the EU’s reaction, note that President Trump in his speech said that “we will see if we can [renegotiate] make a deal that’s fair. And if we can, that’s great. And if we can’t, that’s fine.”

(4) Bilderberg Elite’s heads explode:

As reported by InfoWars‘ Paul Joseph Watson:

Sources close to the elitist Bilderberg Group conference [meeting this week] tell Infowars that globalists see their agenda as being in “deep trouble” and that Donald Trump poses a “dangerous” risk to the international order and must be brought to heel or turfed out of office….

The reason that three members of the Trump administration – HR McMaster, Wilbur Ross and Chris Liddell have been invited to attend this year’s meeting in Chantilly, Virginia is that Bilderberg thinks there is still a chance to put pressure on Trump to force him to back down on his America-first agenda.

With the U.S. about to pull out of the Paris climate agreement, Trump is “dangerously obsessed” with derailing the current world order, according to one Bilderberger, a fear that has intensified since Trump chided world leaders at the G7 summit last week.

Notable among this year’s Bilderberg U.S. attendees are Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton (R) — elected in 2015 and, at 40 years old, the Senate’s youngest member; South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham (RINO); longtime Bilderberger Henry Kissinger; Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe (D); ex-CIA Director David Petraeus; tech billionaire Peter Thiel; and IMF head Christine Lagarde. For the full list of 2017 Bilderberg attendants, click here.

G0, Trump!

For the four good reasons why President Trump pulled the U.S. out of this bad Paris climate agreement, go here.

DCG & Eowyn

California “snafu” releases personal information of nearly 4,000 gun safety instructors


From Fox News: The private information of thousands of California firearms instructors was accidentally released by the state late last year in response to a journalist’s Freedom of Information request.

The data request was made in August, when a reporter for Southern California Public Radio (KPCC), an NPR affiliate, sought all information on Firearms Safety Certifications available from the California Department of Justice.

The information was released in October, and a clerical error gave the reporter wide access to the personal information of 3,424 firearms instructors — whose dates of birth, driver’s license numbers and California identification numbers were handed over, according to NRA-ILA, the legislative arm of the National Rifle Association.

The error was caught two months later, and the California DOJ sent out a letter to all of the Golden State’s instructors letting them know their personal information had been compromised.

“The Department discovered the data breach on October 17, 2016, and notified the requestor of the error and asked that the information be destroyed and that no further dissemination of it occur,” said the letter, sent by the Office of the Attorney General Kamala Harris. Harris is now a U.S. senator.

The letter also recommended the firearm instructors place a fraud alert on their credit. Since driver’s license numbers are appealing to identity thieves, a fraud alert could prevent criminals from misusing someone’s personal data.

NRA officials blasted the California DOJ for its data breach and questioned why it took the department so long to alert the thousands who were affected. “This privacy breach is just another example of the California Department of Justice’s disregard for the rights of gun owners,” Jennifer Baker, director of public affairs for the NRA, said to FoxNews.com.  “There’s no reason why the private information of firearms instructors should have been released – the DOJ redacts information all the time.”

Baker also questioned the length of time it took the state to inform victims of the breach.  “It’s time the California government start awarding gun owners the same respect as it does non-gun owners.”

Some security experts said that while it wasn’t a significant data breach, there is still cause for concern. “The main concern, if any, would be identity theft, simply because it is so prevalent,” police consultant and retired Los Angeles Police Lt. Raymond Foster said to FoxNews.com. “I don’t think anyone would threaten these instructors, but one concern is that many of them are retired police officers and that could put them at an additional risk. Most of them when they are off-duty like to lie low and blend in. But I’d imagine that NPR would never publish this info and would likely just rip it up.”

The reporter, who the NRA-ILA identifies as Aaron Mendelson, acknowledged in his FOIA request that part of his request would be redacted. “…Please inform me of the redaction and the legal justification for it,” said the request, which was obtained by FoxNews.com.

Since receiving the data, it appears that none of the information has been published in any recent stories. In its letter to firearm instructors, the California DOJ said that it had asked the reporter to destroy the information he received and if he did not do so he would face legal action.

Neither Mendelson nor officials for Southern California Public Radio immediately returned calls for comment.

Gun instructors in California took the news of their information being released in stride. Dennis Santiago, an independent gun safety instructor in the Los Angeles area, who received the DOJ letter, told FoxNews.com he at first thought it was a hacking incident. “I was speaking with other instructors at a gun shop about it and they didn’t seem too concerned,” Santiago said. “They took it as being the cost of being in America.”


Court: People have no right to carry concealed weapons in public


second amendment3

From Q13Fox: A federal appeals court ruled on Thursday that there is no Second Amendment protection for concealed weapons — allowing states to prohibit or restrict the public from carrying concealed firearms.

The en banc opinion by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals could set up a new showdown on gun rights at the Supreme Court.

At issue was California’s law on concealed weapons, which requires citizens to prove they have “good cause” to carry concealed firearms to get a license. Plaintiffs challenged guidelines in San Diego and Yolo counties that did not consider general self-defense to be enough to obtain a license.

The 9th Circuit held 7-4 in the case, Peruta v. County of San Diego, that the restrictions on concealed carry are constitutional, ruling that the Second Amendment right to bear arms does not provide a right to carry concealed arms.

Judge William Fletcher

Judge William Fletcher

“The historical materials bearing on the adoption of the Second and Fourteenth Amendments are remarkably consistent,” wrote Judge William Fletcher, going back to 16th century English law to find instances of restrictions on concealed weapons. “We therefore conclude that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms does not include, in any degree, the right of a member of the general public to carry concealed firearms in public.”

Fletcher also cited the most recent Supreme Court cases on gun rights, District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago, which were major victories for gun rights activists, in making his case.

The Heller decision, authored by Justice Antonin Scalia, solidified a Second Amendment right of the public to keep guns, but it specifically noted the right was not absolute, and Fletcher pointed out that Scalia cited restrictions on concealed weapons as a historical example.

The court was careful to make the ruling narrow. The opinion does not say concealed weapons are unconstitutional, nor does it make any decisions about openly carrying weapons in public.

The case was a blow for gun rights advocates, and sets up the fight on gun rights for the Supreme Court to consider, says UCLA law professor and gun law expert Adam Winkler.

“This case raises the next great question for the Supreme Court: Does the Second Amendment guarantee a right to carry guns in public? And if so, what kind of licensing can states use to permit people to carry concealed weapons?” Winkler said.

The Supreme Court would not necessarily have to take up the case. The ruling does not create a substantive divide among different circuit courts in the U.S., one of the major factors the court considers in weighing which cases to take.

Judge Consuelo Callahan

Judge Consuelo Callahan

Four judges dissented from the ruling, with the main dissent by Judge Consuelo Callahan (appointed by Bush) arguing that California’s laws taken together amount to a substantial restriction on citizens’ right to bear arms for self defense, as protected by the Second Amendment.

Whether the court does or does not take the case, the early 2016 death of Scalia looms large over it. Scalia authored Heller, the most substantial gun ruling in modern history of the court. And Republicans in the Senate have refused to consider President Barack Obama’s nominee for replacing Scalia on the court, meaning the eight justice panel can split 4-4.

Without a ninth justice, Winkler said, it’s unlikely the court would take up the case, even with Scalia’s allies on the issue Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas still on the court.

Obama’s nominee to replace Scalia, Judge Merrick Garland, was chosen in large part for his moderate record. But one of the most substantial conservative arguments against Garland has been that his record on guns is too liberal, though his written record on the issue is limited.

The case was argued by Paul Clement, a former solicitor general under the George W. Bush administration and one of the top litigators for conservative causes at the Supreme Court in recent years.

Ever since the Supreme Court decided the Heller decision and a follow up case two years later, the Supreme Court has declined to take another major second amendment case, a frustration Clement cited in a 2013 filing with the court.

In the years since Heller had been decided many expected a “major consideration” or extant firearms laws, Clement wrote. “Instead, jurisdictions have engaged in massive resistance to the clear import of those landmark decisions, and the lower federal courts, long out of the habit of taking the Second Amendment seriously, have largely facilitated that resistance.”

California state Attorney General Kamala Harris said the decision “is a victory for public safety and sensible gun safety laws. The ruling ensures that local law enforcement leaders have the tools they need to protect public safety by determining who can carry loaded, concealed weapons in our communities.”



Thought Crime: 17 Democratic attorney generals go after climate-change deniers


The idea was first floated by academics when 20 professors & scientists signed a letter asking Obama to prosecute climate change (or what used to be called “global warming”) skeptics. They signed the letter despite the fact that there isn’t even agreement within the scientific community that (a) the Earth’s climate indeed is warming; and (b) it is human actions that cause that alleged warming.

Then the action swiftly shifted to government because government has the coercive force and power. (A classical definition of government, as any first-year undergrad political science major can tell you, is the institution in society with a monopoly on power.)

On March 9, 2016, at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Obama’s attorney general Loretta Lynch admitted that the Department of Justice (DOJ) has discussed taking civil action, i.e., civil lawsuits, against climate-change deniers. (See “Thought crime comes to America: Obama admin is considering civil action against ‘climate change’ deniers“)

Now 17 state governments are doing what the federal government is considering.

On March 29, 2016, flanked by climate-change profiteer and hypocrite Al Gore — he who owns several luxury, energy-consum mansions and attended the Sept 2014 People’s Climate March in New York in a large carbon-burning Chevrolet Suburban SUV17 Democratic attorney generals (AGs) announced in a press conference that they will be targeting, with legal action and huge fines, any company that challenges or denies climate change.

Democrat AGs prosecute climate change deniers

Hans von Spakovsky reports for The Daily Signal that the coalition of 17 “AGs United for Clean Power” treated climate change as an absolute, unassailable fact, instead of what it is— a controversial and unproven scientific hypothesis.

Speaking at the press conference on March 29, New York AG Eric Schneiderman declared, “The bottom line is simple: Climate change is real.” He threatened that the AGs will pursue “to the fullest extent of the law” companies that commit fraud by “lying” about the dangers of climate change.

The coalition of 17 consists of:

  • The attorney generals of 15 states: California, Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Virginia, Vermont, and Washington;
  • AGs of the District of Columbia and the Virgin Islands.

16 of the 17 AGs are Democrats, while the AG for the Virgin Islands, Claude Walker, is an independent.

Schneiderman and Kamala Harris, representing New York and California respectively, have already launched investigations into ExxonMobil for allegedly funding research that questions climate change. Exxon emphatically denounced the accusations as false, pointing out that the investigation that “uncovered” this research was funded by advocacy foundations that publicly support climate change activism.

Standing next to Schneiderman throughout the press conference was the new inquisition’s Tomas de Torquemada — Clinton’s former VP Al Gore, who narrated a climate change propaganda film in 2006 entitled “An Inconvenient Truth” and deftly peddled the global-warming propaganda to amass a multi-million-dollar fortune. Gore praised what the coalition is doing as “exceptionally important,” never mind that what the AGs are doing is nothing less than prosecuting a thought crime.

When pressed on the effect that such investigations and prosecutions will have on free speech, Schneiderman said climate change dissenters are committing “fraud” and are not protected by the First Amendment.

At least for now, other state attorney generals still respect the First Amendment. Oklahoma AG Scott Pruitt and Alabama AG Luther Strange said they would not be joining this coalition:

“Reasonable minds can disagree about the science behind global warming, and disagree they do. This scientific and political debate is healthy and should be encouraged. It should not be silenced with threats of criminal prosecution by those who believe that their position is the only correct one and that all dissenting voices must therefore be intimidated and coerced into silence. It is inappropriate for State Attorneys General to use the power of their office to attempt to silence core political speech on one of the major policy debates of our time.”

H/t FOTM‘s maziel

See also: