-
Actually, we’re not surprised at all!
“Liberal, female and minority: America’s new gun owners aren’t who you’d think,” CNN reports.
-
Don’t they watch the Packers?
15-year-old locked and loaded
On Sunday afternoon 09-25-22, Madison police were dispatched to the 5700 block of Raymond Rd. for a report of a man being chased by another man with a firearm.
As officers began to flood the area, a suspect description was given by the 911 caller.
One officer indicated that the suspect may have been heading onto Russett Rd. Another officer, who was traveling on Russett Rd. from the opposite direction indicated that he saw a group of individuals, at least one of whom matched the suspect description from the gun call, who were running from the area.
The officers believed that these subjects were likely involved, due to the description and proximity, as well as the fact that the suspects immediately began to run upon seeing officers.
Immediately, two officers began pursuing one subject who they thought was likely the suspect. This foot chase lead through yards and courtyards of apartment complexes in the area, and ultimately was stopped when officers caught the suspect trying to hop a fence.
As officers took this suspect into custody, they located a loaded and chambered .40 caliber firearm on his person.
The subject was later revealed to be 15 years old, and the gun was determined to have been stolen previously in the City of Madison.
After investigation, it was learned that the 15 year old was not believed to be the original subject of the first weapons call, and that investigation is ongoing. The 15 year old was conveyed to the Juvenile Reception Center (JRC) on charges of Possession of a Dangerous Weapon by a Person Under 18, Possession of a Stolen Firearm, and Resisting Arrest.
City of Madison, Wisconsin Police Incident Reports- Weapons Violation October 2, 2022
- Traffic Incident October 1, 2022
- Robbery October 1, 2022
- Traffic incident/Road Rage September 30, 2022
- Robbery September 30, 2022
- Babylon Bee
- Trump Vows To Nominate Corn Kid As Secretary Of Agriculture After He's Reelected
- Woman Who Owns Air Fryer Goes Whole 7 Minutes Without Mentioning She Owns Air Fryer
- 9 Times Chick-fil-A Employees Saved A Customer's Life In The Drive-Thru
- Opinion: Joe Biden Wandering Away from the Podium Is A Powerful Statement On Quiet, Dignified Leadership
- Manhattan Institute
- MacIver Institute
- Wisconsin Politics
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
-
Education - School Information System
- “indoctrinated with the idea that academic standards and rigor needed to be swept away to achieve equity on campus”
- Civics: Hong Kong authorities reject Jimmy Lai request for UK lawyer
- ‘There’s only so far I can take them’ – why teachers give up on struggling students who don’t do their homework
- K-12 Marketing: PBS Edition
- “with little consideration for the staff or other customers, she said”
Blaska Policy Werkes 
Did The Democrats “Tank” The Second Trump Trial?
LikeLike
They knew it was a ridiculous charge. They knew the senate would not convict. They knew Justice Roberts refused to preside.
So yes. They only want to be able to say they impeached him twice.
A farce of a sham of a travesty. Just like the first one.
LikeLike
“Trump told us to come (January 6)”
“More and more insurrections are admitting they came at Trump’s direction.”
In my opinion these are literal false flag rationalizations. A false flag operation is an act committed with the intent of disguising the actual source of responsibility and pinning blame on a second party. A rationalization is the action of attempting to explain or justify behavior or an attitude with logical reasons, even if these are not appropriate. These kinds of false flag rationalizations are trying to state or imply blame on President Trump for the criminal actions of others. President Trump is an unethical jerk but he did not tell the others to engage in criminal activities like rioting, attacking police, vandalizing, storming the Capital building, threaten members of Congress and the Vice President, etc, etc. President Trump is not criminally liable for how extremists and/or anarchists choose to interpret and/or bastardize his words trying to immorally justify their own criminal actions.
LikeLike
Steve, I understand your point. But since last summer, finding himself well behind in the polls, Trump has laid the groundwork for claiming a rigged election. Is he clairvoyant or just CYA. He brought scores of legal challenges, all repudiated. His A.G. found no evidence. So he schedules a rally for the very day Congress is scheduled to confirm the Electoral College vote? He demands that his vice president overturn the election and criticizes him when he won’t. Not in private but to the crowd. From what authority in the Constitution? And yes, the President IS responsible for how extremists interpret his words. Not criminally liable, but politically. He needed to say the election is over. It was not stolen. Even the joint chiefs of staff felt the need to state the military would take no part in a coup. What was the alternative to conceding? January 6 was the alternative.
LikeLike
Dave wrote, “Trump has laid the groundwork for claiming a rigged election.”
The election was rigged in that it was manipulated or controlled by deceptive or dishonest means. The Democrats and the media have been rigging the 2020 election since November 2016 and the unconstitutional and illegal things related to voting that were implemented due to COVID-19 are part of it.
Dave wrote, “He brought scores of legal challenges, all repudiated.”
That statement implies that all of the cases were rejected based on the merits of the case and that is simply not true. Nearly all of the cases never got into court they were rejected for other reasons that were not based on the merit of the cases.
Dave wrote, “His A.G. found no evidence.”
I’m pretty sure the A.G. said he found no evidence of “voter fraud” or “fraud” but the A.G. did not say that there weren’t illegal or unconstitutional things that happened in the states where suits were raised.
Dave wrote, “So he schedules a rally for the very day Congress is scheduled to confirm the Electoral College vote?”
So what?
Dave wrote, “He demands that his vice president overturn the election and criticizes him when he won’t. Not in private but to the crowd. From what authority in the Constitution?”
That’s NOT what President Trump asked Vice President Pence to do; we’ve already talked about this.
Dave wrote, “And yes, the President IS responsible for how extremists interpret his words. Not criminally liable, but politically.”
You’re skating down a really slippery slope with that “not criminally but politically” statement. If the President actually incited insurrection as the impeachment states, then he is CRIMINALLY liable in criminal court. The problem is that President Trump’s speech was constitutionally protected free political speech, the SCOTUS has already ruled on such things. President Trump did not incite therefore he is not liable, the politicians are lying to “We the People” and bastardizing the United States Constitution with another unconstitutional impeachment and a Senate trial of a private citizen which is clearly unconstitutional..
Dave wrote, “He needed to say the election is over.”
You’ll get no argument from me on that, I agree; however, making an irresponsible speech, even presenting lies in a speech, is still Constitutionally protected free speech.
Dave wrote, “It was not stolen.”
I never liked using the word “stolen” when describing what happened in the election, I much prefer the word rigged.
Dave wrote, “Even the joint chiefs of staff felt the need to state the military would take no part in a coup.”
There was no coup, there was a riot and there were some really bad people inciting that riot as it was happening and there were some really bad people in that riot that did and said some really terrible things. The rioters and inciters need to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The nearly endless montages of clips shown today by Trump’s lawyers, as Senator Johnson, absolutely legally eviscerated the case against Trump. Blew it out of the water, as RoJo said.
It’s time to end this ridiculous political charade and acquit.
LikeLike
An “irresponsible speech” is putting it mildly! Donald Trump, then the President, is not some street corner preacher. He is the commander in chief, sworn to protect and uphold the Constitution. The insurrectionists invoked his name in their assault on the Constitution. That the beer hall putsch (coup) failed does not mean it was not attempted.
LikeLike
You are dancing faster and faster, Squire.
Not helping your case.
LikeLike
Nikki Haley latest to desert Trump. I suppose another RINO and traitor but they are adding up. Not seeing Trump make any new converts, just losing previous allies. It might be his cause that needs help, not mine.
LikeLike
Don’t think Trump is losing allies. From just a few days ago.
“https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2021-02-09/70-of-republicans-would-consider-joining-new-party-formed-by-donald-trump-poll-finds”
LikeLike