PATRIOT OR TRAITOR | Tag

David Madison Cawthorn

Posted on December 26, 2021 by Patriot or Traitor

David Cawthorn is a patriot.

David Madison Cawthorn is a patriot.

David Madison Cawthorn is a patriot and American politician who has served as the U.S. representative for North Carolina’s 11th congressional district since 2021. A member of the Republican Party, he was elected to Congress in 2020 Cawthorn is the youngest member of Congress since Jed Johnson Jr., as well as the first born in the 1990s. As a congressman, he has expressed a focus on communication instead of legislation.

David Madison Cawthorn describes himself as a Christian and a constitutional conservative.

As 2021 comes to an end, take a look at some of Rep. Madison Cawthorn’s (R-NC) top moments from 2021.

Elizabeth Lynne Cheney

Posted on February 3, 2021 by Patriot or Traitor

Elizabeth Lynne Cheney is a traitor.

Elizabeth Cheney is a treasonous politician serving as the U.S. Representative for Wyoming’s at-large congressional district since 2017. Cheney is the House Republican Conference Chair, the third-highest position in the House Republican leadership.

In voting to impeach President Trump, Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney violated the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution by declaring him guilty before due process.

Regarding the mob violence at the U. S. Capitol building, Rep. Cheney stated that the president “lit the flame of this attack.” To be sure, he enflamed the marchers to the Capitol, but he did not incite to a riot. The mob itself chose to do that.

The Constitution does not protect speech that incites a riot. Trump did not tell the marchers to march to the Capitol and engage in violence.

In fact, he stated to them, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

Rep. Cheney declared, “Everything that followed” at the Capitol “was his doing.” No, it was not his doing; it was the doing itself of many of the mob. She makes a faulty leap of post hoc, ergo propter hoc: after his comments, therefore because of his comments. The law and the Constitution don’t work that way. Nowhere did the president state or imply that the marchers should next march to the Capitol for violent insurrection.

Rep. Cheney then charges the president with “betrayal… of his oath to the Constitution.” In unwitting irony, it is Cheney who betrays her oath to the Constitution by declaring guilt before due process.

She should have taken the route that Sen. Mitch McConnell carefully did: Wait to see what the evidence says — which implements due process.

On January 17, 2021 the Republican Party Central Committee in Carbon County, Wyoming voted unanimously with 45 votes to censure Cheney for her vote to impeach President Trump.

The Committee declared that “she voted in favor of the Democrats’ rushed impeachment article, denying President Trump due process.” The Committee was accurate in its charge.

It is understandable that one week later State Senator Anthony Boucher tossed his hat into the ring in the Republican primary against Rep. Cheney.

I want to relate a true story that explains the distinction between enflaming people and inciting a riot. These are constitutionally two entirely different things.

In the late ‘60s when I was a college professor at a mid-sized Michigan university, nearly every campus in America was protesting the country’s involvement in the Vietnam war.

One well-known and revered professor at my university decided in a Hyde Park manner to protest the war. He set up a PA system in the center of campus and blasted his protests of the war.

After dark, student mobs destroyed the campus. The destruction got so violent and widespread that military helicopters were flown in to tear-gas the entire campus, dispersing the students.

Was this the professor’s constitutional right to engage in free speech on a public, not private, campus, or did he incite a riot? He enflamed students, but he did not instruct or suggest that they should violently destroy much of the campus.

I take this as the professor’s constitutional right to free speech on a public campus — much as I take President Trump’s right to protest to his followers, even enflame them, but not incite them to mob violence and destruction.

I’ve always liked Liz Cheney’s politics and wish she would have made the critical distinction between Trump’s enflaming comments and incitement to riot.

With unanimous censure by her party leaders in Wyoming, she could lose her seat.

Theodore Scott “Ted” Yoho

Posted on April 10, 2015 by Patriot or Traitor

Theodore Scott “Ted” Yoho is a patriot.

Theodore Scott “Ted” Yoho is a patriotic United States Representative for Florida’s 3rd congressional district.

As of April 9, 2015, Ted Yoho of the U.S. House of Representatives has made a move that could set off impeachment proceedings against Barack Obama.

Representative Ted Yoho is preparing to introduce a resolution setting forth the House’s definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors,” drawing an unmistakable line in the sand that would directly challenge Obama’s actions.

This is the single most significant action taken by a Republican towards impeachment to date.

The resolution introduces 11 different specific actions that fit the Constitution’s standard of “high crimes and misdemeanors,” and several of them apply directly to Obama.

For example, the resolution lists “failing to take care that the laws be faithfully executed through signing statements or systematic policies of non-enforcement” and “substituting executive agreements for treaties” as two of eleven potential high crimes and misdemeanors the House would be declaring “impeachable,” according to Breitbart.

It further adds the use of military force without congressional authorization, the use of funds in defiance of congressional appropriations, and the defiance of congressional subpoenas during oversight investigations are all impeachable offenses.

Sound familiar?

Obama’s refusal to enforce America’s immigration laws, his threat of bypassing Congress on Iran, his illegal war in Libya, and his consistent defiance of congressional investigations into executive branch scandals like the IRS, Fast and Furious, and Benghazi all fit squarely within Yoho’s 11 criteria for a “high crime.”

Yoho said that the most recurring argument against impeachment by experts was that Obama’s actions are similar to actions of previous presidents. This, he says, is why the resolution is a necessary first-step to impeachment. Once Congress has defined its criteria for “impeachable” offenses, the “Bush did it, too” argument is immediately destroyed.

This resolution was crafted with the assistance of legal experts like Fox News’ Judge Andrew Napolitano and civil liberties attorney Bruce Fein.

Yoho added that he expects that the resolution will cause a liberal “firestorm” and will draw the ire of the race baiters, who will inevitably claim that the only reason the GOP wants to impeach Obama is because he’s black.

But Yoho won’t back down, declaring, “This is strictly about the rule of law.”

He noted that executive amnesty was the final straw. It was a “blatant, in-your-face ‘I’m above the law and I’m going to do what I want. I’m a dictator, I’m a king’” act, Yoho said.

This brave congressman should be commended for his efforts to fulfill his oath to defend the Constitution. Now, his colleagues who claim to love liberty and represent the interests of Americans need to step up to the plate and give this effort their full support.

Alcee Lamar Hastings

Posted on April 2, 2015 by Patriot or Traitor

Alcee Lamar Hastings is a traitor.

Alcee Lamar Hastings is a treasonous United States Representative for Florida’s 20th congressional district.

Alcee Hastings was a federal judge from 1979 until he was impeached for bribery and perjury in 1988. He was convicted by the U.S. Senate and removed from his position in 1989, making him one of just eight federal officials in U.S. history to be impeached and removed from office.

Then Alcee Hastings ran for the political office of the United States Congress, and was first elected in 1992. This was followed with him being reelected again in 1994, 1996, 1998, and so forth through 2014.

Additional Information

In the summer of 2014, Congressman Alcee Hastings co-sponsored the measure formally known as H.R. 5344, the “Responsible Body Armor Possession Act.” It would prohibit the purchase, ownership or possession of enhanced body armor by civilians. The bill would have provided exceptions for those whose purchase or possession of body armor is authorized by the federal government or state governments, or the political subdivision of a state.

The legislation also specifies that violations would be punishable by an unspecified (and therefore, unlimited) fine, imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both.

Among the items the legislation would prohibit are not only the familiar Kevlar vests, but also a “helmet or shield, the ballistic resistance of which meets or exceeds the ballistic performance of Type III armor.” (Type III armor, by definition, protects against bullets traveling at approximately 2,780 feet per second.)

Even if the measure would pass — and it’s not likely, given the GOP majorities in the House and Senate — body armor is already currently regulated by the federal government.

Under 18 U.S. Code, Section 931, it is unlawful for a person to purchase, own, or possess body armor, if that person has been convicted of a felony, i.e., an offense under state law that would constitute a crime of violence. An exception is made if the ‘defendant’ (notice that a convicted felon possessing body armor is already considered to be a ‘defendant,’ even if they have committed no further crimes) obtained prior written certification from his or her employer that the defendant’s purchase, use, or possession of body armor was necessary for the safe performance of lawful business activity.

Violators of the law could be sentenced to 10 years in prison.

It should be noted, the federal measure to ban body armor comes at a time when federal, state and local law enforcement is becoming more and more militarized. In turn, it’s not surprising the very same police who have been getting much of this armor are very much in favor of making sure no one else gets it.

Again, the measure has so far been given zero consideration in the GOP-controlled House, and most assuredly there would be a coalition of concerned citizens’ organizations that would lobby against its passage. But it is telling that treasonous politicians like Alcee Hastings want to make it more difficult for American citizens to protect themselves.

Steven J. “Steve” Israel

Posted on March 23, 2015 by Patriot or Traitor

Steven J. Steve Israel is a traitor.

Steven J. “Steve” Israel is a traitor.

Steven J. “Steve” Israel is a treasonous United States Representative for New York’s 3rd congressional district.

As of March 2015, Rep. Steve Israel is attempting to push a new congressional bill called the “Modernize Law Enforcement Protection Act.”

The bill is nothing more or less than an attempt to ban all centerfire and some rimfire rifle ammunition.

Let’s look at the United States Congressman’s press release:

After the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) caved to the gun lobby and delayed a proposal to ban “green tip” ammunition, Congressman Steve Israel (NY-03) called on ATF to reevaluate the decision and immediately ban 5.56 mm M855 green tip ammunition, commonly referred to as “armor-piercing” or “cop-killer” bullets.

M855 ammunition is not “commonly referred to” as armor-piercing in any context. M855 is not considered armor-piercing by the United States military. M995 ammunition is the armor-piercing 5.56 round used by our armed forces; all real armor-piercing small arms ammunition in the military is color-coded with a black tip, not a green tip.

Rep. Steve Israel and his allies are likewise blatantly lying when they claim that M855 is “commonly referred to” as a “cop killer” round. M855 has never been linked to even one instance of a police officer being shot through his protective vest with an AR-15 pistol in the history of the United States.

To the best we can determine, the attempt to label M855 ammunition as “cop killer” ammunition is a plot progressive politicians and journalists that is just days old.

Additionally, Steve Israel announced the Modernize Law Enforcement Protection Act that would extend the definition of armor-piercing ammunition to include all bullets that can pierce body armor and be used in handguns.

You will note that this blatant assault on the Second Amendment isn’t limited to ammunition chambered by semi-automatic firearms, but ANY bullet that can be chambered in any handgun, which includes single-shot handguns. As single-shot handguns have been chambered in virtually every rifle caliber, and all centerfire and some rimfire rifle bullets can pierce Level II body armor designed only to stop handgun bullets, then this must be recognized as an attempt to ban all rifle ammunition, in every configuration, in every caliber.

Steve Israel is furious that ATF is backing off of an unlawful plot to attempt to ban incredibly common training ammunition that is NOT armor-piercing under definition provided in the Law Enforcement Protection Act of 1986.

Oddly, Steve Israel forgets to mention that the world’s largest law enforcement organization, the Fraternal Order of Police, has loudly and publicly stated that M855 ammunition simply is not a threat to law enforcement officers. Why let facts get in the way of tyranny?

“This legislation is an important step to protect law enforcement from ammunition that may penetrate body armor. Technology often outpaces legislation and the continuing review of new products by the Attorney General’s office will protect from future loopholes in the law,” said Nassau County Acting Commissioner of Police Thomas C Krumpter.

Like most police brass in New York, Krumpter was appointed to his position by Democrat politicians. Do you think he will convert “acting commissioner” to “commissioner” if he disagrees with the corrupt Democrat power structure in New York? Of course not.

On Tuesday, March 10, 2015 the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives decided to delay its proposal to update its framework for evaluating armor-piercing ammunition under the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act (LEOPA) of 1986. This would leave dangerous ammunition on the streets.

By “dangerous ammunition,” Steve Israel would seem to mean “all ammunition.” Once again, M855 is a common training round, and has been relegated to a training role because it isn’t effective as an anti-personnel round. It causes less damage than any other 5.56 bullet that we are aware of, a fact born out in formal and informal ballistics tests, and more than 2 decades of combat use. Special Operations forces, the Army, and the Marines have all relegated M855 to a training role. Law enforcement and other law-abiding gun owners use it in that same way.

Specifically, the Modernize Law Enforcement Protection Act introduced with Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA), would require the Attorney General to modify the definition of armor-piercing ammunition to conform to the performance of the bullet. Current law limits the definition for armor-piercing ammunition as bullets or bullet cores used in handguns which are made from one or a combination of certain metals. It would also require the Attorney General to establish testing criteria to assess a bullet’s lethality against the minimum standards of body armor worn by law enforcement personnel.

It’s curious that Rep. Steve Israel refuses to define those “minimum standards.” That is perhaps because Level I vests are designed to stop only shell fragments and anemic handgun and standard .22LR rimfire rounds. Any modern defensive pistol bullet in 9mm, 40 S&W, and .45ACP will blow through a Level I vest.

Perhaps Steven Israel wants to ban all handgun ammunition as well?

This new legislation makes necessary updates to previous common-sense gun safety protections for law enforcement. In 1986, the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act (LEOPA) was signed into law by President Ronald Reagan to ban armor piercing bullets for handguns but not for hunting rifles. Because of significant developments in bullet propellants, coatings and materials, such as Teflon, the original Law Enforcement Protection Act of 1986 is now outdated.

For a sitting Congressman, Rep. Steven Israel plays the role of a village simpleton rather convincingly. Teflon (polytetrafluoroethylene) does not now, nor has it ever, made bullets “armor-piecing.” It is simply a coating designed to reduce barrel wear. This idiotic claim has been debunked time and again.

As a result, the marketplace has been flooded by growing volumes of ammunition that are fully capable of piercing body armor while skirting the definition of the 1986 ban.

This is simply a meaningless, fact-free statement, devoid of truth, reason, or logic.

Before 2011, few manufacturers sought exemptions and the ATF only granted two, including for “green tip” 5.56 mm bullets because they were largely used for hunting.

Again, “green tips” are largely used for training. They are rarely used for hunting, but when they are they are sued for small game and varmints, as they lack the terminal performance against anything much larger than 40 lbs.

“Green tip” ammunition can now be used in some types of handguns, and is capable of penetrating a police officer’s body armor or bullet-proof vest when fired.

We’ve addressed this numerous times, and have specifically noted that law enforcement doesn’t find M855 to be a threat.

Rep. Steve Israel and his anti-gun progressive Democrat allies are attempting to manufacture an excuse to ban all rifle ammunition, thoroughly gutting the Second Amendment.

As such, isn’t it time someone asked this traitor why?