Red Herring Alert

There's something fishy going on!

The Illusion of Freedom

Protest policies under review at MN Capitol

State Patrol Captain Eric Roeske and Chris Guevin of the Dept. of Administration present on overview of current policies for rallies and protests at the Minnesota Capitol. Tim Pugmire | MPR NewsMinnesota lawmakers and other government officials are raising concerns about the growing intensity of protests at the state Capitol, including two recent events that led to arrests.

Members of an advisory panel on Capitol security met Monday to review current permitting policies for large rallies and protests. They also discussed whether any changes are needed.

Sen. Warren Limmer, R-Maple Grove, said he thinks protests during this year’s legislative session were louder and more emotional than he’s seen in the past. Limmer said he worries about a novice protester who might get swept up in that emotion.

“The protest is very close and it’s becoming very personal,” Limmer said. “If it continues, I think we’re just asking for it. Someone is going to be hurt by that lone individual who’s attracted to the organized event that’s going to do something on their own initiative.”

Limmer suggested the creation of a designated protest area outside of the Capitol building.

Rep. Jim Nash, R-Waconia, said he understands the apprehension of Limmer and others. But Nash said he wouldn’t want to restrict access or limit speech.

“This is ground zero for protesting, and all sorts of issues,” Nash said. “I don’t want to be the one that gets in the way of that.”

Seven people were arrested last month at the Capitol when participants in a march against Shariah law clashed with counter protesters. In March, a skirmish between supporters of President Trump and counter protesters also resulted in arrests. Lawmakers were not in the building for either of those weekend events.

Much of the concern among committee members was the result of an end-of-session protest over steps lawmakers took to prohibit unauthorized immigrants from getting drivers’ licenses. Those protesters staged a multi-day sit-in inside the governor’s office.

Sven Lindquist, the Minnesota Senate sergeant at arms, said he’s concerned about similar unpermitted events that are driven by social media.

“So, far so good, but we’re on the verge, we’re on the edge with some of these things,” Lindquist said.

Committee members offered no additional suggestions for policy changes.

State Patrol Captain Eric Roeske said part of the problem is that every protest situation is different.

“We do a very good job of making sure the last thing doesn’t repeat,” Roeske said. “But they always take a different path and we have to react in the midst of that situation.”

Protest policies are under review all over the nation because that’s the plan folks! The PROBLEM-REACTION-SOLUTION formula has been used in some form for thousands of years by various governments, groups, and individuals. In its basic form, it consists of using a fictional or real event, such a crisis, to bring about radical change. It is usually employed when the change to be brought about is controversial and/or disliked. It often includes a type of framing called a false flag operation, which has been used by governments and the civilian sector.  New World War

Terror-Tied Group CAIR Causing Chaos, Promoting Protests & Lawsuits as Trump Protects Nation

The orders are designed to keep Americans safer from terrorism by temporarily barring visitors from Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Syria, Yemen, Libya, and Sudan from entering the U.S. without “extreme vetting” and banning refugees from these countries for at least 30 days.

CAIR has been declared a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates and was named by federal prosecutors as an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas-funding operation.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations is also increasingly a part of America’s institutional left infrastructure and was one of the partners behind the recent Women’s March in Washington that drew hundreds of thousands, along with feminist groups like Planned Parenthood.

Continue Reading:


Excerpt from: Bill O’Reilly: How Black Lives Matter is killing Americans

The Black Lives Matter crew is promoting a false narrative that American police officers are actively hunting down and killing blacks. Here’s the truth. Police shot Whites at a rate of 50 percent in 2015. Police shot blacks at a rate of 26 percent. In addition, Black Lives Matter is now infringing on freedom of assembly and freedom of expression.


There is no question Black Lives Matter is affecting what we do here in the USA. A new book by Heather McDonald entitled the war on cops have a new attack on law and order makes everyone less safe leaves out the threat from the radical group which oftenly attacks come stat, a policy placing police officers where violent crime is taking place. Here is a quote from Miss McDonald.

“In terms of economic stimulus alone no other government program has come close to this successive come stat. In New York City, businesses that had previously shunned drug infested areas now set-up shops there. Offering residents a choice in shopping and creating a demand for workers. Children could ride their bikes on city sidewalks without their mothers worrying they could be shot. But the crime victories of the last two decades and the moral support on which law and order depends are now in jeopardy, thanks to the falsehoods of the Black Lives Matter movement.”

Related Article: The Real Agenda Behind Black Lives Matter


2 thoughts on “The Illusion of Freedom


    Could 2018 be another big year for constitutional amendments in Minnesota?

    Email logo Email Share logo Share Tweet logo Tweet Print logo Print
    By Briana Bierschbach | 07/12/17

    MinnPost photo by Corey Anderson
    Legislators of both parties have already teed up a handful of issues that could be on the ballot as constitutional amendments in 2018.
    It’s a simple formula: One-party controlled of the Minnesota Legislature + a governor of the opposing party = constitutional amendments on the ballot.

    That’s been the case over the last two decades in Minnesota, where gridlock between the legislative and executive branches has prompted lawmakers to take issues directly to voters time and time again — on everything from increasing taxes for arts and conservation to imposing more restrictive voter identification laws.

    As lawmakers look to the next election, all the ingredients are in place to see more of the same: Republicans in control the House and Senate have been butting heads all year with DFL Gov. Mark Dayton, and legislators of both parties have already teed up a handful of issues that could be on the ballot as constitutional amendments in 2018.

    “I would say that I’m always open to constitutional amendments,” Republican Senate Majority Leader Paul Gazelka said. “If you look back in state history, we’ve averaged about one or two a year.”

    Gazelka said he’s sensing momentum around one possible amendment in particular: To ask voters if they want to dedicate sales taxes collected from motor vehicle repairs and maintenance specifically to pay for road and bridge construction. “What we are trying to figure out is what we want to do, when we accomplished so much this year,” he said. “We did tax relief; we did transportation; we passed a budget. So we are trying to develop where we are going to go next. Constitutional amendments are a part of that.”

    From marijuana to data privacy
    The use of constitutional amendments is as old as Minnesota itself: In 1858, the Legislature put a measure on the ballot asking voters if they wanted to establish a state government. Since then, more than 200 proposed constitutional amendments have been voted on by the electorate, and more than 120 of them have been adopted.

    Those measures have run the gamut, from one that decided the current structure of state government to an amendment establishing how to amend the state’s Constitution. Some of the most pivotal moments in the nation’s history also played out in Minnesota through constitutional amendments, from black suffrage to Prohibition.

    Senate Majority Leader Paul Gazelka
    MinnPost photo by Briana Bierschbach
    Senate Majority Leader Paul Gazelka
    Lawmakers only need a simple majority of votes in the House and Senate to put an amendment on the ballot, and this year alone legislators introduced nine constitutional amendments in the House and 13 in the Senate.

    Many of those were introduced by Democrats in the minority, who know they face an uphill battle in getting approved by the Republican majority. Even so, DFL legislators have introduced amendments that, among other things, include gender equality in the state’s Constitution; create a unicameral legislature; and legalize marijuana for people over 21.

    Rep. Tina Liebling, DFL-Rochester, offered one of several amendments to legalize recreational marijuana in Minnesota, saying other states were able to do this through a popular referendum. Since Minnesota isn’t a referendum state, a constitutional amendment seems like the best way to give the voters a chance to weigh in on the issue, she said. But first, those voters need to contact their legislators to convince them to put it on the ballot.

    “Certainly, a lot of Democrats are interested in this and my feeling is a lot of people in the state are interested in this,” said Liebling, who is also running for governor. “It will be a matter of people putting pressure on their legislators and contacting them about it. You saw that with Sunday liquor sales this session. You have to get the ball rolling. People have to start going on record.”

    Rep. Eric Lucero, R-Dayton, said he wants to see a similar grassroots lobbying campaign behind his proposed ballot initiative, which would bolster protections of citizens’ electronic communications and data from “unreasonable searches and seizures.” With increasingly large amounts of personal information stored online instead of in physical records, Lucero said, such data needs to be clearly protected in the constitution.

    “It’s simply making sure that information, regardless of its form, has equal protection under the 4th Amendment,” said Lucero, who has worked in cyber security for the last 15 years. “What I have found is that issues of digital privacy are absolutely not partisan.”

    A ‘common sense’ amendment
    The amendment that’s gotten the most attention from the Legislature’s Republican leadership would dedicate sales taxes from auto part repairs and maintenance to roads and bridges.

    The idea came out of last session’s budget debate, which included a $300 million transportation bill that shifted those taxes from the state’s general fund into a fund for roads and bridges. Without having a dedicating funding source for transportation designated in the Constitution, future legislatures could simply shift the money around to pay for other priorities.

    A similar issue came up in 2006, when lawmakers asked voters if they wanted to dedicate the sales tax on purchasing a new car toward roads, bridges and public transit. Voters overwhelmingly approved the amendment.

    State Sen. Mary Kiffmeyer
    State Sen. Mary Kiffmeyer
    “When it’s a statute, a future legislature could decide to take that money and go somewhere else with it,” said Sen. Mary Kiffmeyer, chair of the Senate State Government Finance Committee, which would hear constitutional amendment bills. “If we do it in a constitutional amendment, it protects it and make sure it stays there.”

    Rep. Jeff Howe, R-Rockville, introduced the amendment in the House years ago, but he hasn’t seen in gain any traction until more recently. That’s despite some pushback from Dayton last session about moving general fund dollars away from things like education and healthcare to put them toward transportation.

    “There are some lawmakers that don’t want to dedicate [the tax money] because it moves it just to transportation,” Howe said. “This is, to me, the common sense source of revenue for transportation. It’s directly tied to it.”

    Amending amendments
    For some, memories are still fresh from the last time Republicans had complete control of the Legislature and put two controversial amendments on the ballot: One to require photo identification to vote, and another that would have enshrined a ban on gay marriage in Minnesota’s constitution.

    The two amendments were the most contentious in recent state history, and led to massive grassroots campaigns opposing the measures. They also drove millions of Minnesotans to the polls to cast votes on the amendments, both of which were ultimately defeated.

    Gazelka said he doesn’t anticipate any high-profile issues that don’t have broad bipartisan support to go on the ballot. That includes a right-to-work amendment similar to the ones passed in several southern states last fall. “I don’t think right to work will happen, unless it happens at the federal level,” said Gazelka, who was a co-sponsor of the gay marriage amendment in 2011.

    “We are not looking at that one.”

    State Rep. Clark Johnson
    State Rep. Clark Johnson
    But even the fear of more controversial constitutional amendments caused another one to crop up this session. Rep. Clark Johnson, DFL-North Mankato, introduced an amendment that would require the governor to approve a constitutional amendment before it could go on the ballot. His proposal would still give the Legislature the chance to override the governor’s veto, much like they can a regular gubernatorial veto.

    “I don’t like legislating via constitutional amendment in order to avoid a governor’s veto or not in dealing with the governor,” Johnson said. “It’s a checks and balances thing.”

    Currently, though the Legislature needs only a simple majority to put a question on the ballot, a proposed amendment needs to be approved by a majority of all people voting in the election — not just those who actually vote on the question itself — to pass.

    Johnson’s not the only one who’s tried to change the requirements for amending the Constitution over the years. In 1913 and 1915, legislators asked voters if they wanted to be able to petition for changes to the constitution themselves, which would have made Minnesota a referendum state. Voters rejected that idea both times. They also rejected the idea of creating a special constitutional commission to review amendments before they go on the ballot.

    Johnson knows his amendment will be a tough sell to legislators this year. “The problem with it is legislators would be electing to give up power from the legislative branch. I understand that,” Johnson said. “But for me, this is less about power and more about Minnesota.”


  2. Bloomberg Digest: Legal Procedure Needs a Dose of Common Sense

    A famous judge called courtroom rules antiquated (in language that might not be allowed in court). Maybe he’s on to something. Stephen Carter explains why judges really shouldn’t spend so much time tangled up in technicalities.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: