Serbia: eight killed in second mass shooting in days, with attacker on the run

 

At least eight people have been killed and 13 injured in Serbia in a series of shootings south of Belgrade, state-run media has reported, just one day after a school shooting also saw nine killed in the capital.

The shootings started late on Thursday near the town of Mladenovac when an attacker opened fire with an automatic weapon from a moving vehicle and then fled, state broadcaster RTS television reported. Seven of the injured are in a critical condition.  

Police searching for the suspect, believed to be a 21-year-old man, have surrounded an area where he is believed to be hiding, RTS reported. A heavy police presence in the area saw helicopters and drones flying overhead as officers searched amid difficult terrain.

Bratislav Gašić, the minister of internal affairs, called the attack “an act of terrorism”. The director of intelligence agency the BIA, Aleksandar Vulin, and minister of health Danica Grujičić are reported to have visited the injured in hospital.

The attacked fired shots in multiple villages around Mladenovac, broadcaster RTS reported, firstly in the village of Dubona, then Malo Orašje and then Šepšin.

Local reports suggested a police officer and his sister were among the dead in Malo Orašje. 

On Wednesday, a 13-year-old student shot dead eight fellow pupils and a security guard in a Belgrade primary school, an attack that shocked the Balkan country.

Police named Wednesday’s shooter as Kosta Kecmanović and said he had been a pupil at the school since 2019. They said he had used two of his father’s guns for the shooting and may have been plotting the attack for a month.

The head of Belgrade police, Veselin Milić, said the teenager also had two petrol bombs and “made a list of kids he planned to kill and their classes”. Milić identified the dead pupils as seven girls and a boy born between 2009 and 2011.

Kecmanović is too young to face criminal charges and will be placed in a psychiatric institution. His parents have also been arrested. 

The second shooting happened while Serbia is preparing for three days of mourning, beginning on Friday morning. On Thursday, thousands lined up to lay flowers, light candles and leave toys outside the school to commemorate the victims of Wednesday’s attack.

Tributes included heaps of flowers, small teddy bears, soccer balls. A grey and pink toy elephant was placed by the school fence along with messages of grief, and a girl’s ballet shoes hung from the fence.

The Balkan nation is struggling to come to terms with what has happened. Though awash with weapons left over from the wars of the 1990s, mass shootings are still extremely rare – it is the first school shooting in Serbia’s modern history. The previous mass shooting was in 2013 when a war veteran killed 13 people in the central Serbian village of Velika Ivanca. 

The tragedy also sparked a debate about the general state of the nation following decades of crises and conflicts whose aftermath have created a state of permanent insecurity and instability, along with deep political divisions.

Authorities on Thursday moved to boost gun control, as police urged citizens to lock up their guns and keep them safe, and away from children. “The Ministry of Interior is appealing to all gun owners to store their guns with care, locked up in safes or closets so they are out of reach of others, particularly children,” police said in a statement.

The shooting on Wednesday in Vladislav Ribnikar primary school also left seven people hospitalised – six children and a teacher. One girl who was shot in the head remains in a life-threatening condition, and a boy is in serious condition with spinal injuries, doctors said on Thursday morning.

To help people deal with the tragedy, authorities announced they were setting up a helpline. Hundreds answered a call to donate blood for the wounded victims. 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/05/serbia-eight-killed-in-second-mass-shooting-in-days-with-attacker-on-the-run?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1683250455   

‘A lot all at once’: Farmers oppose visa fee increase

 ALPINE TOWNSHIP, Mich. (WOOD) — The federal government is planning to raise agriculture visa fees for temporary farm workers and create a new fee, worrying West Michigan farmers who rely on migrant workers to bring in their crops.

Depending on the country the worker is from and other factors, some have to be named specifically on H2A temporary agricultural worker visa program applications and others are unnamed. The planned visa fee increase announced by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security would raise named worker fees from $460 to $1,090. Applications for unnamed workers would go up from $460 to $530. The change would also include a new $600 Asylum Program Fee for some applications.

Katie Vargas and her family have been apple growers for generations. Getting the apples ready for sale at Joe Rasch Orchards north of Walker requires a team of about 70 workers.

“We try and recruit as many qualified workers as we can here before we bring people up on visas. In the past five years, I think we’ve only had one person that we’ve been able to hire here domestically,” Vargas said.

The H2A program is designed to help fill the labor shortage in the industry.

“If we didn’t have this program, we wouldn’t have a farm. We have a very, very time sensitive product. It can go from one day to the next of being something that we can sell and something that we can’t,” Vargas said.

Farmers say they are already dealing with an average wage increase of nearly 13% from last year. They say a major fee increase will make it harder to provide apples at a reasonable price.

“We’ve had (a) 76% increase in our costs over the past five years, which is incredible,” Vargas said.

The Michigan Farm Bureau is concerned about the proposed fee increase, John Kran with the national legislative counsel said.

“It’s a lot all at once,” Kran said. “In a lot of cases, it’s doubling, plus adding additional costs on that we haven’t had in the past.”

U.S. Rep. Bill Huizenga, R-Zeeland, and a bipartisan group of representatives from Michigan have signed a letter (PDF) calling on Homeland Security to change course.

“There’s one direction that this goes: Higher fees will equal higher prices,” Huizenga said.

Huizenga said the money generated will be used to deal with the massive influx of asylum seekers at the southern border.

“You’re once again seeing law-abiding, rule-abiding folks having to pay for and fund those that are not obeying the law,” Huizenga said.

https://www.woodtv.com/news/kent-county/a-lot-all-at-once-farmers-oppose-visa-fee-increase/?fbclid=IwAR3UmTmWh8LNSXBOEJTpBg5hwEpfqTIUCSszhiVMwSsgNZjN4e_FLMXUBZI

A Willingness to Win

Unlike the Republican gentlemen such as Mike Pence and the other GOP advocates of bipartisanship, Democrats are intent on increasing their power.

by Paul Gottfried for American Greatness

In an historical parallel that works, Pedro Gonzalez compares the relationship of the Democrats and Republicans to that of the hammer and anvil. This image is taken from an 18th-century Prussian commander who was describing the choice confronting his country and its Austrian adversaries during a war in 1740.  One side would strike decisively, while the other side would receive the blows delivered.

 Hostility erupted between the two states after Frederick the Great seized Silesia from the young Austrian Empress Maria Theresa following the succession of both of them to their respective thrones. Although Frederick had some distant genealogical claim to Silesia and supposedly invaded it to protect his fellow Protestants who were being persecuted, the young Prussian king grabbed the territory, as Gonzalez reminds us, for Machiavellian reasons. Frederick wanted Silesia to increase the size and wealth of his small, relatively impoverished German state. And after two wars, the last ending in 1763, the Prussian ruler managed to hold on to the land he grabbed so unceremoniously.

Gonzalez casts the Democrats in the role of Frederick and the Republicans in that of the Austrian empress, who was demonstrably offended by Frederick’s brazenness. Fredrick prevailed over Maria Theresa, who is supposed to remind us of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and former Vice President Mike Pence. The triumphant side in both cases is the one who most desires victory.  Like the Democrats going after their prize, Frederick pulled out every stop to hold on to Silesia. Morality be damned!

Allow me, as a diligent European historian, to point out the limits of Gonzalez’s comparison. Unlike Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), and Hakeem Jeffriess (D-N.Y.), Frederick the Great was a heroic figure who held his ground in the Seven Years’ War (1756-1763) against a large continental European alliance, even after his English allies abandoned him. Moreover, Frederick’s father was grossly deceived by Maria Theresa’s father, Charles VI, who promised the Prussian monarch German territory (for which he had a dynastic claim) in return for voting for Maria Theresa as Holy Roman Empress. Since, by law,  that title could only go to a male and, by custom, only to a Habsburg, Charles VI needed to persuade the imperial electors (of whom the Prussian king was one) to break precedent by voting for his daughter to succeed him. (Charles had no sons.)

 Of course, Gonzalez’s larger point is entirely correct. The Democrats, like Frederick, will do what it takes to gain victories, while their opponents appeal in vain to high principle. While the Democrats do have the support of our leading cultural and political institutions, they also enjoy another significant advantage: They fight relentlessly, and with a greater determination than their opponents. 

Unlike our Republican gentlemen (Mike Pence and the GOP advocates of bipartisanship come to mind), Democrats are intent on increasing their power. In their determination to win they exemplify what I have called “the thumos factor,” a quality of boldness that even adversaries must grudgingly admire. 

Republican cable TV pundits complain that the Democrats are all about power.  Although this may be viewed as a moral defect, it is also an advantage when fighting the less warlike. When was the last time a Republican president combatted the deep state by replacing, where possible, Democratic administrators? This should be normal procedure for Republicans, as it has been for Democrats. I also have no idea why so many Senate Republicans—please listen, Lindsey Graham and Mitch McConnell!—have voted for highly partisan nominees for federal judgeships and cabinet posts put up by Democratic presidents. Why don’t Republicans in Congress treat their adversaries’ nominees exactly as Democrats treat Republican ones?

Moreover, it is incomprehensible to me that Republicans have not totally defunded NPR, which is the obvious mouthpiece of the Democratic Party and the deep state. Does anyone in his right mind believe the Democrats would not long ago have taken such an action against a Republican-occupied radio station that reached millions of listeners each week? 

Nor should Republicans be shy about going after hostile public-sector unions, starting with Randi Weingarten’s United Federation of Teachers. Like Joe Biden’s handlers, Republicans should be punishing enemies as well as rewarding loyalists. Most definitely they should strip these enemies, as much as possible, of any influence over the government.  

Exemplifying the attitudinal difference between the two parties, a “conservative” columnist writes in a self-described “conservative magazine” about the need for moderation. Instead of planning for “another American revival” after the woke explosion on the Left, conservatives “could work for social improvement in less dramatic ways.” “In a fallen world” in which “those efforts will lead to unexpected and frequently unwelcome outcomes,” we should be cautious in our political responses.  

But we on the Right are not in a situation to plan for modest changes. The Left is playing for keeps; and as Gonzalez observes, victory will go to the more ruthless and more determined. In this case, survival itself may require a willingness to win.

X22, And we Know, and more- May 4

 

After having a really bad day, havng a great day the next day really helps boost the spirit.

The New Ugly Americans ~ VDH

How odd that those on the Left who in the past decried “American imperialism” are now proving the greatest imperialists of all.

by Victor Davis Hanson for American Greatness

The old cultural imperialism was supposedly greedy corporatism like Disneyland, McDonald’s, and Starbucks sprouting up worldwide to supplant local competitors. 

But these businesses spread because they appealed to free-will consumer demand abroad. They were not imposed top down. 

The U.S. presence in Afghanistan collapsed in August 2021 amid the greatest American military humiliation in modern history. A billion-dollar new embassy was abandoned. Hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of new infrastructure at the huge Bagram Airbase was dumped. 

We still do not know how many billions of dollars of sophisticated new weapons were left to the Taliban and now are making their way through global terrorists’ marts. 

Yet, in our skedaddle, the LGBTQ flag still flew high from our new Kabul embassy.

A George Floyd mural was prominent on city streets.

And gender studies programs—to the tune of $787 million in American subsidies—were showcased at Kabul University, in one of the most conservative Islamic countries in the world.

Rainbow flags and Black Lives Matter banners have hung from our embassy in South Korea. 

Such partisan cultural activism is a diplomatic first.

The woke Left has now weaponized the country’s diplomatic missions abroad to advance highly partisan and controversial agendas that can offend their hosts, and do not represent the majority of American voters at home.

American foreign policy toward other nations seems now to hinge on their positions on the transgendered, LGBTQ acceptance, abortion, climate change, and an array of woke issues from using multiple pronouns on passports to showcasing transgendered ambassadors. 

The Biden Administration in January 2022 stopped the EastMed pipeline. That joint effort of our allies Cyprus, Greece, and Israel sought to bring much needed clean-burning Mediterranean natural gas to southern Europe.

Apparently, our diplomats felt it violated our own New Green Deal orthodoxies. So we imperialists interfered to destroy a vital project of our closest allies.

The White House manifesto called the “National Strategy on Gender Equity and Equality” offers a blueprint for how to massage nations abroad to accept our values that are increasingly at odds with much of the world’s.

Do Americans really believe that embracing drag-queen shows at military bases, abortion to the moment of birth, transgendered men competing in women’s sports, and the promised effort to ban the internal combustion engine are effective ways to ensure good relations with the United States?

No wonder the Biden Administration’s new cultural imperialism is proving disastrous for a variety of reasons.

One, these imperialistic and chauvinistic agendas are pushed abroad at the very time the respect for the U.S. military is at an all-time low. It was humiliated in Afghanistan. It is now unable to recruit sufficient qualified soldiers. Its stocks of critical weapons are depleted.

The Pentagon leadership of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark Milley, along with Joe Biden, do not radiate competence. 

But they do exude woke pieties.

While we offend Middle East oil exporters and Central Europeans, China allies with Russia and Iran. India and Turkey triangulate away from the United States. Sanctimonious hectoring while appearing weak is a bad combination.

Two, these warped standards are incoherent. Is an abortion-on-demand, totalitarian China therefore an ally? How can we damn supposedly non-woke Saudi Arabia as we beg it pump more of its non-green oil before the 2022 midterms?

Some of our most loyal allies are in Eastern Europe—Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Romania—have experienced traumatic histories on the front lines against Islamic Ottoman expansionism, czarist and Soviet aggression, and German Nazi bullying and invasion.

They are democratic and pro-American. Yet they are now targeted by our woke imperialists because they remain steadfast as the most religious and traditional of our European allies.

Yet these nations would be more likely to dispatch credible forces for NATO’s defense than many of our left-wing, woke, and militarily less capable Western European nations.

Three, most of the 7.9 billion people in the world are not woke. They are aspiring to obtain a modicum of the luxury and affluence taken for granted in America.

The rest of the planet worries whether it will have enough food, energy, security, and shelter to live one more day. For most, the incessant, woke virtue-signaling from affluent Americans comes across as the whiny bullying of pampered, self-righteous—and increasingly neurotic—imperialists.

Four, traditionally the party that controls the State Department does not politically weaponize its embassies with wedge issues that have not won majority support among Americans. 

Such abject politicalization rattles and alienates foreign nations. They do not want to be drawn into the American Left’s internal propaganda efforts that they know are bitterly controversial inside the United States.

How odd that those on the Left who in the past decried “American imperialism” are now proving the greatest imperialists of all.

Conservatives, We Don't Need to Go Scorched Earth On Everything

posted by Brandon Morse at RedStateVIP 

Hell hath no fury like a conservative scorned.

Case in point, Anheuser-Busch is currently watching as its very foundations are crumbling around it after it gave validation to the transgender activist movement, the same movement that has made it its business to make regular, God-fearing American patriots its number one enemy. These are the same God-fearing American patriots that Anheuser-Busch had hitherto been focusing on as their customer base.

But the boycott of Anheuser-Busch was more than personal for conservatives. It was an endorsement of something so destructive to the moral fabric of society, and moreover, it threatens their children the most. Some might say that about alcohol in general, but consuming alcohol responsibly and in moderation hurts next to no one. The embrace of gender fluidity and the transgender movement hurts not only the person who embraced it, but their friends and family as well.

Conservatives, joined by a good number of ideologically diverse Americans, went scorched Earth on Anheuser-Busch as both a statement and a corrective action. We should continue this bombardment of bad PR and refusal to buy their products until they apologize for what they did.

But sometimes, the scorched Earth approach isn’t the right approach at all. Sadly, it’s one that Conservatives take all too often.

The right can often suffer from a “pick up my toys and go home” mentality when it comes to many things. Entertainment is a very good example of this. Up until recently, conservatives would oftentimes give up anything that involved escapism as lost, proclaiming that it’s all made by leftists and no one should ever pay for a movie ticket or pay for a streaming service ever.

That’s bad tactics. While there certainly is a lot of garbage out there, the occasional piece of work will come out that truly deserves praise, attention, and most importantly, your money. Studios and corporations learn nothing if you’re not willing to show them when they actually did something right.

When training a dog, you don’t just punish them when they do something wrong. You have to also praise and reward them when they do something right. Without that praise, the dog has no idea what’s good, only what’s bad. You leave it up to the animal to live a life of playing a daily guessing game that will be more frustrating for you and highly uncomfortable for it. It needs direction.

Imagine if no one showed up for Top Gun: Maverick or no one watched The Terminal List. Studios would assume there’s no market for this kind of programming and never touch it again. The only ones communicating with them are the woke internet mobs and the coastal elitists, and so that’s the direction they go.

But this brings us to the crux of my reason for this post; Fox News. The question in the air is whether or not we go scorched Earth on them after what happened with Tucker Carlson.

When I woke up this morning, my answer was “yes.” In fact, I almost wrote a post about how Fox News’s collapse could ultimately pave the way for a collapse of the mainstream news media overall. But after thinking about it more, I think I’ve now landed on a more nuanced position.

For Fox News, we should criticize and lambast them where they do wrong, however, as of this writing, the channel is still a very valuable resource for the casual American. In a world where basic alphabet networks and cable news channels like CNN, and MSNBC lie through their teeth in an intentional attempt to mislead and brainwash, Fox News is still one of the few entities willing to tell the truth, at least for the most part.

That’s because there are still a lot of people working under the Fox News banner that are really great people and deserve none of the ire being thrown at the Fox News corporation at this time. Some shows and hosts are still worth watching. For instance, I’d hardly say “Gutfeld!” is worth abandoning.

Some might say that these good people need to quit Fox News if they have principles, but let’s face the facts. It’s not that easy. Some people have roofs to keep over the heads of the mouths they have to feed. Abandoning their paycheck in protest of something the network did that many a conservative doesn’t like sounds great, but that’s not realistic. Your anger about Tucker Carlson means nothing to a parent who needs to put clothes on their child and food in their bellies.

And before I’m accused of being a Fox News shill or a paid actor, I want to make it clear that I’m not saying we need to make it our responsibility to watch Fox News at some point, or even at all. By all means, hit Fox where it deserves it. I know I am.

But don’t burn the people who don’t deserve it. A nuanced approach is the best approach here.

Divide and Control: Central Bankers Blame the Victims

Divide and Control: 

Central Bankers Blame the Victims

Peter St. Onge for Mises.org

The Central bankers of the world, apparently losing confidence that they can fix the inflation they created, are turning to Plan B: blame the people. So we fight each other.

Last week the chief economist of the Bank of England, Huw Pill, said the quiet part out loud, that “British households and businesses need to accept they are poorer and stop seeking pay increases and pushing prices higher.”

Note inflation in the UK is currently running double-digits, with grocery prices up 19% year-on-year. So not getting a raise may mean cutting a meal.

Meanwhile, a poll from a major British insurer found 57% of small businesses in Britain are at risk of closure from rising prices.

So you plebes need to drop a meal and close your family business so we can keep stealing from you.

Central Bank Divide and Control

According to the Guardian, central bankers actually have a name for this scapegoating of the masses: “Greedflation.”

As in, double-digit inflation had nothing to do with central bankers printing up trillions and handing it to governments, bankers, and—surely by accident—to the rich at the fastest pace in 50 years.

To the point that, as of last year, one in 4 pounds in existence, and almost one in 3 dollars, had been printed in the previous 3 years.

Naturally, the bankers say: Ah, but that was all sheer coincidence. What’s really happening is the people, for some odd reason, suddenly got greedy. They weren't greedy before, you see, but now they are and it must stop.

The beauty of the “Greedflation” narrative is not only does it dodge blame for central banks' institutionalized pillaging, it sets the masses against one another while the elite used central banks to thieve away.

They're quite open about this: A couple of weeks ago the European Central Bank put out a tweet asking “What really drives inflation? Profits or wages?”

Get it, voter? Is it the greedy right-wing capitalists or is it the greedy left-wing unions?

They do this because *if* they can get half the country to blame the other half, the bankers and bureaucrats who actually caused the problem are off the hook. They can get back to siphoning away our life savings and future prospects while we fight.

It's enough to make you wonder if maybe Americans, or Britons, or Europeans aren't actually at each other's throats. That perhaps we actually agree the system is broken, but our elite does everything they can to set us against one another.

This divide between the masses has been going on for a long time, certainly since the founding of the Federal Reserve, indeed since Western governments took on an activist role that converted them from responsible custodians of the common good—fixing potholes, dredging ports, the "night watchman" state—and turned them into existential political footballs in service to the elite to be weaponized against the masses.

They ran this playbook perfectly last financial crisis, setting the right-populist Tea Party and left-populist Occupy Movement away from the bankers who'd just pillaged the country and turned them against each other. They will, no doubt, try again.

And your part in all this? Make do with less, take one for the team, and fight against your neighbor so the elite can go on robbing all of us, and all of our children, blind.

The Mother of All Greed: Government

So what is driving inflation? It’s greed alright: government greed. In the form of trillions printed up to buy votes and bribe voters into accepting authoritarian lockdowns.

Then, when the resulting inflation tore into the people, central bankers around the world responded by hiking rates to crush the private economy. Keeping the way open for historic deficits by clearing out the rest of us.

We lose our jobs so governments can go on spending, buying votes, and rewarding their friends and sponsors.

The solution is easy. In fact, so easy it will never happen: shrink the government. Cut deficits to zero, and use the savings to fire the bureaucrats and regulators who are holding down job creation, innovation, and the small businesses that are increasingly an endangered species.

Central banks could accomplish this literally tomorrow. By simply standing up and telling their governments: “No More.” No more central bank financing of trillion-dollar deficits, no more central bank making ends meet by crushing the people.

Of course, there’s no chance of this happening. Not until voters actually demand it, either because they’re angry or because they’re desperate.

One might hope voters do get angry. Before they have nothing left to lose.

[Originally published at stonge.substack.com. 

Charging Decision in Hunter Biden Case Reportedly Imminent, Major Concerns Arise Amidst News

Bonchie reporting for RedState 

Could there finally be light at the end of the tunnel regarding the federal criminal investigation into Hunter Biden? According to a new report from The Washington Post, citing numerous sources, a charging decision is now imminent and the investigation itself is essentially complete.

That news comes after four years of rumors and speculation surrounding the probe, including lots of questions about why it has taken this long to near its culmination.

Prosecutors are nearing a decision on whether to charge President Biden’s son Hunter with tax– and gun-related violations, according to people familiar with the matter, the culmination of a four-year investigation that Republicans have sought to portray as evidence the Biden family is corrupt.

Biden’s attorneys met at Justice Department headquarters in downtown Washington last week to discuss the case with U.S. Attorney David Weiss of Delaware, according to the people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing criminal investigation. Typically, that sort of meeting — in which defense lawyers urge prosecutors not to seek an indictment of their client, or to seek reduced charges —comes toward the end of an investigation.

According to the same sources, law enforcement officials have been frustrated by the painfully slow pace of the investigation. Taking four years to prepare a case involving tax fraud and a cut-and-dry gun crime charge against a single person is not typical, and it’s led many to rightfully speculate that politics has played a role in how the situation has been handled.

A previously reported meeting between David Weiss, the U.S. Attorney handling the case, and Hunter Biden’s lawyers was also confirmed to have occurred by the sources. That would have been the last chance for the younger Biden’s team to lobby the DOJ to not press charges or to lessen those being considered. Those charges include two counts of failure to file taxes, a single count of tax evasion, and the count of falsifying a gun purchase form.

The Post notes that some Hunter Biden allies are suggesting that because he paid the back taxes, he should be let off the hook.

In December 2020, federal agents sought to interview the younger Biden, leading him to publicly acknowledge that he was under investigation. “I take this matter very seriously but I am confident that a professional and objective review of these matters will demonstrate that I handled my affairs legally and appropriately, including with the benefit of professional tax advisors,” Hunter Biden said in a statement at that time.

His allies point out that he has paid any owed taxes, in part by using some $2 million provided by Kevin Morris, a Hollywood lawyer and novelist who befriended Hunter Biden in 2019.

To not press charges because the money was eventually paid back by a wealthy Hollywood lawyer would be the ultimate slap in the face to normal Americans subjected to what is obviously a two-tiered justice system. Further, everyone, including the DOJ, should be asking why Kevin Morris is so interested in giving the president’s son so much money. Morris has also been paying Hunter Biden’s legal fees and even bought him a car.

That entire arrangement is cause for major concern. It makes no sense, and one would suspect that Morris has been promised (or is actively receiving) something in return. Wealthy people don’t normally dump millions of dollars into degenerate drug addicts for no reason.

So will the DOJ do the right thing and charge Hunter Biden as they would any non-member of Democrat royalty? The cynic in me says Weiss is trying to run out the clock, and that even though the time for a decision has arrived, he’ll still continue to drag his feet. I hope that’s not the case, but what part of the DOJ’s actions in the last decade would cause people to trust otherwise?

Anti-Gunner Tyrants Boosting Firearm Sales in the US

posted by Jeff Charles at RedStateVIP 

I am about as pro-gun rights as it gets. If you follow my work, you have seen that I have nothing but contempt for the anti-gunner lobby which seeks to infringe on our right to keep and bear arms. Going after them is one of my favorite things to do when I’m writing or yapping about politics.

But sometimes, I have to admit, I am grateful for these anti-gunner tyrants in office who keep pushing legislation designed to restrict firearms.

Yes, I know that might seem a bit counterintuitive. But folks in the gun community know that in many ways, high-profile members of the anti-gunner lobby have been, in some instances, better salespeople for firearms than those who actually believe in gun rights.

A recent report shows that the trend of Democrats exploiting mass shootings to push stricter gun laws is prompting more Americans to purchase firearms. Apparently, not everyone is on board with sacrificing one of the most foundational of natural rights.

A report compiled by National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) revealed that sales of firearms in the US, particularly of AR-15-style rifles, have surged in April, seemingly driven by efforts in some states to impose gun bans. According to industry officials analyzing the latest FBI background check data, states planning gun bans or making changes to the rules governing firearms purchases saw massive spikes in sales.

For example, in Washington State, where a ban on the sale or transfer of AR-style rifles was recently signed, background checks for April sales surged 43.6 percent to 71,272. Similarly, background checks increased by 11.7 percent in Illinois, where the National Shooting Sports Foundation recently won a federal court decision to block a ban on modern sporting rifles.

Even states that moved to change the rules to buy guns saw a significant increase in sales before any new regulations had taken effect. In North Carolina, where the legislature overrode the governor’s veto of a bill that repealed the state’s Jim Crow-era permit-to-purchase a handgun scheme, sales of firearms increased 238.4 percent in April compared to the previous year.

Industry officials noted that while concerns about safety had driven previous sales highs, the difference in April was the perceived threat from the government to take away gun rights, according to NSSF spokesman Mark Oliva suggesting that the sales figures demonstrate that law-abiding citizens will exercise their right to purchase firearms when barriers to lawful ownership are removed.

Oliva explained:

April’s uptick of 1,369,296 FBI National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) verifications shows that there continues to be a steady appetite for lawful firearm ownership even as certain state governors and legislators are taking radical measures to infringe on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens to possess firearms, especially the Modern Sporting Rifle (MSR).

The spokesman continued:

These figures show that when Americans are concerned that government authorities will deny them the full spectrum of their Second Amendment rights, they will respond by exercising those rights. It also shows that when barriers to lawful firearm ownership are torn down, law-abiding citizens will exercise their right to lawfully purchase firearms.

When anti-gunner politicians signal that they plan to crack down on gun rights, it is only natural that people will try to obtain firearms to ensure that their right to defend themselves is not infringed. When people hear about proposed gun control laws, they may feel that their Second Amendment rights are under threat and that they need to act quickly to protect themselves. This fear may be particularly acute in states where Democrats have recently won elections and are now pushing for new gun control measures.

This is especially true for people who live in high-crime areas and who are acutely aware of the reality that these laws will not apply to criminals who don’t pay attention to them. Owning firearms is an important form of self-defense. Some gun owners understand that firearms provide a sense of security, particularly in areas where crime rates are high or where they live in isolated or rural areas. These gun owners may believe that owning firearms is the only way to protect themselves and their families.

But this story will probably get even better. Not only are more people becoming gun owners as a result of the push to restrict firearms, many of the laws being passed will likely be struck down after they are challenged in court. The Supreme Court’s decision in the Bruen case made it much easier for the gun rights crowd to successfully remove many of these restrictions, meaning that they probably won’t be able to restrict guns as they wish.

With Sales Crushed, Anheuser Bush Tells Wholesalers to Give Bud Light Away Free to Employees Before Expiration Date

Sundance reporting for Conservative Treehouse 

Here we go.  Hard data is now starting to surface showing the devastating impact of the Anheuser-Busch decision to rebrand Budweiser products as the beer for the transgender community.   The #1 and #2 best selling beers in the United States are now fully rebranded to consumers and destroyed.  Now we see the ramifications.

The irony of Budweiser creating the “born on” date and freshness date system in the beer industry is just too damned funny, here’s why.

Across the United States, wholesalers are on the hook for inventories of Bud Light and Budweiser products that no one is buying.  These products have an expiration date, thanks in part to the previously mentioned freshness campaign long ago created.  The wholesalers have to swap out the close-dated products that are not being sold in retailers and restaurants.  The wholesalers are then stuck with out-of-date product, and turn back to the corporate office for help.

From reporting in the Wall Street Journal, Anheuser-Busch (A/B) is telling the wholesalers to give the product free to their employees rather than dump it.  By law, they cannot give it away to consumers, and they cannot cross promote the beer by “bundling” alcohol with another CPG product (ie, buy chips, get free beer).

The story is being promoted as A/B being magnanimous in giving the beer to the employees; however, in reality as the product hits its expiration or sell-by date, A/B only has that option, other than to dump it in the garbage and recycle the containers.  There is so much unsold inventory, data below, they are now giving it away (lol).

DATA – “In the week ended April 22, Bud Light’s U.S. retail-store sales fell 21.4% compared with the year-earlier period, according to an analysis of Nielsen data by Bump Williams Consulting. Meanwhile, sales of rival brands Coors Light and Miller Lite each grew about 21%.”  It’s not just Bud Light collapsing, it’s the faceplate brands for all Budweiser products. “Sales of other Anheuser-Busch brands declined, too, including Budweiser, Busch Light and Michelob Ultra, according to Bump Williams.”

At a cursory glance you might think a 21.4% sales drop is not as significant as you would think or hope.  However, that doesn’t fully tell the entire story.

Keep in mind, this data is only the initial evaluation of year-over-year sales impact, and this data is national. Regionally, where the beer drinking is heaviest, the amount of sales loss is much higher.

Bud Light and Bud are the #1 and #2 products across the entire beer industry.  Within the A/B wholesaler’s sales book, those two brands likely represent well over half of all their retail beer sales combined (‘well over’, and I’m being generously low in the estimate).

It depends on the region and wholesaler product mix, but Bud and Bud Light easily make up more than half of the specific portfolio of distributor gross product sales.

When the #1 and #2 products that consist of more than half your gross revenue drop by 20 to 25%, essentially the value of your company has just dropped by the same percentage.   A $50 million beer distributorship, now worth $40 million and falling fast.

Additionally, and worse still for the parent company, the sales of the competitor products have increased by the same amount as the collapse in the targeted brand.  Coors Light and Miller Lite have picked up all the customers.   This is what’s known as a “hard brand switch;” meaning it’s likely to be very difficult – if not impossible – to regain brand position.

A/B just gave Coors and Miller brands their biggest sales increase in history, and that increase is likely permanent as beer drinkers solidify brand use.  This is why you are starting to see such urgent action in response by the U.S. parent company AB Inbev.    However, Bud and Bud Light have created a no-win position, as they are now being targeted by the transgender community activists for failing to support their Tranny Beer rebranding effort strongly enough.

[Washington, The Hill] “In a letter sent this week to Anheuser-Busch’s head of human resources, Jay Brown, a senior vice president at the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, slammed the company’s response to the controversy as insufficient and cowardly.  “In this moment, it is absolutely critical for Anheuser-Busch to stand in solidarity with Dylan and the trans community,” reads the April 26 letter obtained by The Hill.

“However, when faced with anti-LGBTQ+ and transphobic criticism, Anheuser-Busch’s actions demonstrate a profound lack of fortitude in upholding its values of diversity, equity, and inclusion to employees, customers, shareholders and the LGBTQ+ community.”  […] According to the HRC letter, the group is preparing to lower Anheuser-Busch’s long-standing 100 percent Corporate Equality Index score, a national benchmarking tool on corporate policies, practices and benefits relevant to LGBTQ employees. (read more)

As noted in the Wall Street Journal, “They didn’t need to take this risk,” one distributor said, adding that he was worried the brand might now swing back in the other direction. “I lost my cowboy bars and now I could lose my gay bars, too.”  – Sorry, but this is just too darned funny.

Bud and Bud Light beer inventories are piling up.  The product is now going out of date due to lack of sales.  Beer drinkers do not want to be viewed with weird side-eye looks if they pick up a Budweiser product in a bar.  Retail consumers are walking past the product.   Regional wholesalers, seeing their distributorships being destroyed, are calling the home office looking for help.

Meanwhile, the alphabet activists are stomping their feet and riding their bicycles in slow circles at the bottom of the Anheuser Bush corporate offices, glaring in the windows while telling Budweiser they need to worry about their feelings.   {{{I cannot stop laughing}}}

[…] Anheuser-Busch has declined several meeting requests from [Human Rights Council] in the wake of right-wing pushback over its partnership with Mulvaney, according to an individual with knowledge of the situation. Anheuser-Busch did not immediately respond to The Hill’s request for comment.

The letter also recommends that Anheuser-Busch meet with its LGBTQ employees to discuss and “understand their concerns” and conduct workplace transgender inclusion training for company executives.” (link)

Anheuser Bush’s solution?

Screw it… we’re f**ked, just give it away!

[Wall Street Journal]