Andy Martin for President

Sunday, March 27, 2016

GOP Presidential Candidate and Contrarian Commentary columnist Andy Martin explains Europe in crisis : The Last Days of “Europe:” Part One: Brussels terrorism, Donald Trump and NATO

GOP presidential candidate and “Contrarian Commentary” columnist Andy Martin analyzes Donald Trump’s views on the future of NATO and Europe in light of the latest Brussels terrorist attack

News from:

ANDY MARTIN /2016

Republican candidate for

President of the

United States

“Make

America

Great Again”

www.AndyMartinforPresident.com

www.AndyMartin.com

www.FirstRespondersOnline.us

National headquarters:

P. O. Box 1851

New York, NY 10150-1851

New Hampshire Headquarters:

P.O. Box 742

Manchester, NH 03105

Tel. (866) 706-2639; Cell (917) 664-9329

Fax (866) 214-3210

E-mail:

Andy@AndyMartinforPresident.com

Blogs:

www.AndyforPresident.blogspot.com

www.AndyforPresident.wordpress.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

GOP presidential candidate and “Contrarian Commentary” columnist Andy Martin says “Donald Trump has identified a foreign policy challenge that needs a fresh approach”

Andy says “Europe,” i.e. the European Union, cannot survive in its current form

Andy says nations that want a national security blanket from the

United States

will have to invest more in their own defense

Andy says NATO has achieved its original objectives and, surprisingly, those objectives are still reasonable

To become a regular subscriber to our emails please send an email to andynewhampshire@aol.com and place “SUBSCRIBE” in the subject line

Please feel free to forward and/or post this email

Please sign up for our enhanced Twitter feed with enhanced, original coverage

BULLETIN: Due to an unplanned development Andy is still in his South Florida war room, able to observe the Trump campaign and celebrate Easter with family and friends

(Palm Beach, FL) (March 22, 2016)

Dear American:

This is my seventeenth letter to the American people from the 2016 campaign trail (# 14 is still in progress, coming in hours). Due to a fluke, my return was delayed so I am still in Florida.

The world shudders at the latest terrorist attack in Brussels earlier today. Civilians killed, lives disrupted, a society on the verge of dismemberment. And yet, our political leaders know precious little about “Europe,” or how the European Union came into being, or what the future looks like if the EU fails to adjust and adapt.

While I am going to gleefully support the Republican nominee, I still keep my finger in the presidential pie until there is one, and for a special reason. I am the only Republican presidential candidate with real foreign policy experience. I first went to Brussels over 50 years ago; I have edited several books on “Europe” and the European Union (“EU”); I speak French, and have also studied German, Spanish and Greek. So I am conversant with European culture and politics. No other candidate has that background and experience as a resource to draw on.

In today’s letter, Part One, I will explain how Donald Trump and his views are going to affect the future of “Europe.”

Why the quotation marks around “Europe?” Because Americans usually think about going to Europe as a trip or junior year of college abroad. We know little of the EU and its origins or workings, little of what President Barack Obama has done to reverse seventy years of post-World War II political stability. Europe will always be a delightful place to visit; the political future of the continent is less positive.

Two weeks ago a group of conservative foreign policy “experts” attacked Donald Trump and said he was unqualified to be president (please see link #1 below). Yesterday Trump questioned the value of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) and our involvement in Asia (please see link #2). Today ISIS struck again, in Brussels.

Trump’s frustrations are not new. For decades military leaders have fretted about the imbalance in financial commitments to national defense by the United States as compared with Europe or Asia. As Trump correctly claims, we spend to defend foreign nations. And we don’t always receive a “thank you.”

Where is NATO headquartered? Brussels. Where is the EU headquartered? Brussels. In a city and nation that is unable to defend itself, and unwilling to make the commitment to defend itself, serious questions are raised. The EU, moreover, is constantly at war with U. S. tech giants for violating EU “security” protocols. Unwittingly, the EU has created an environment that is favorable to terrorist organizations and operations. The attacks in Paris and Brussels prove my point.

Trump seems to embody the aphorism “it’s better to be lucky than be smart.” Every time he makes what appears to be an outrageous foreign policy claim, within days his unorthodox view is vindicated by events. He questioned NATO yesterday: today a terrorist attack on the doorstep of NATO. Timing is everything.

So does Europe have a future? Not in its current form. Today I discuss what Obama has done to weaken “Europe” (Obama actually favors the concept of “Europe,” as an excuse for American abdication); next, I will explain Trump’s impact on “Brexit,” the United Kingdom vote in June on whether to leave the EU. Finally I will offer my own unorthodox (“contrarian”) views on how the EU should deal with the nation of Turkey.

After America bailed out Europe and won the war against Nazi Germany in 1945, leaders were concerned that the United States would recede from a leadership role as it had previously done in 1918. In the words on one British diplomat, NATO was created to “keep the Americans in (Europe); to keep the Russians out (of Europe); and to keep the Germans down, so that Germany would never be able to launch a new continental war (please see link #3 below).

After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, no one believed a new Russian dictator such as Vladimir Putin could arise. No one believed that Russia would attack peaceful nations and attempt to redraw borders by force. And so Americans elected the African-American flower child, Barack Obama, to dismantle our commitment to Europe. Joseph Stalin is said to have contemptuously asked, “How many divisions does the pope have?” Well, today, we can ask, “How many divisions does NATO have?” The reality: close to none. NATO is a paper tiger and Putin is aware of that fact. Europeans have lost the will to defend themselves and Donald Trump questions whether we should shed American blood in place of a local commitment.

Obama has withdrawn armored divisions from Europe, closed facilities and pursued a foreign policy that is, ironically, almost a carbon copy of Trump’s (without any of the protests from the foreign policy “establishment” that criticize Trump).

The result: chaos. Russian continues to be a military threat. Radical Islam is attacking. And the EU is paralyzed. NATO? Don’t ask.

So is Trump right? Or wrong? Or, as I believe, right and wrong?

First, United States taxpayers are not going to continue to defend Europe while Europeans refuse to defend themselves. Trump is right. Solution: NATO must amend the Charter to mandate a common level of defense expenditures by all signatories. We should not promise to defend nations under Article 5 of the NATO (Washington) Treaty that will not spend equally on their own defense. We need to develop a financial formula that minimizes our financial outgo for European defense while still retaining a robust presence there (Poland is asking for more American forces).

Second, I do not believe a US withdrawal from Europe is in our national interest. Since our own troops are likely to fight overseas, and not at home in Ohio, positioning military resources overseas makes excellent sense and strategy. Trump is therefore wrong that withdrawing troops improves our own national security. Almost seventy years of safety and stability before Obama arrived on the scene contradict Trump. And Obama’s (i.e. Trump’s) policy of withdrawal has failed to meet our own national security needs. Obama is now forced to reinforce our garrisons in Europe, the same ones he emptied out years ago.

Third, Europe is going to have to take terrorism and collective national security much more seriously. Trump is right. Nations that refuse to defend themselves, and allow hostile Muslim populations to fester in their midst, are doomed. The solutions will not be easy, pleasant or cheap.

Finally, just as this is being written, Trump has created a new kerfuffle today over the identities of his “foreign policy” advisors. Surprise. Realistically, the media establishment and the foreign policy establishment are going to make every effort to create “issues” with anything and everything Trump says. Ironically, as an “outsider,” Trump’s “fresh start” and “clean sheet of paper” approach to national security and international security is essential and valuable.

While I generally support the seventy years of stability that my family shed blood to defend, we must always be open to new ideas, new approaches and new solutions. Trump is an unabashed nationalist. But, what have the “internationalists” given us, other than the messed up world created by Bill Clinton, George Bush and Barack Obama?

Europe cannot continue in its current form. Whether consciously or unconsciously, Trump has identified a problem that needs fresh thinking in Washington. Ironically, despite the relentless criticism directed at DT, he is the only one open to considering new approaches. Trump may not always be right, but he is equally not always wrong.

Until Easter you can reach me in, or read me from our war room in South Florida.

Sincerely yours,

Andy

-----

LINKS TO THIS STORY (cut and paste the entire link below and not just the underlined portion):

[1]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c25b73b8-e0bb-11e5-9217-6ae3733a2cd1.html#axzz43fHZXBTK

http://warontherocks.com/2016/03/open-letter-on-donald-trump-from-gop-national-security-leaders/

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/03/lt-col-michael-waltz-trump-not-ready-to-be-president

[2]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c25b73b8-e0bb-11e5-9217-6ae3733a2cd1.html#axzz43fHZXBTK

[3]

NATO

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Hastings_Ismay

New citations after emailing:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/brussels-shows-europes-shockingly-dysfunctional-approach-to-security/2016/03/22/24af5b58-f06e-11e5-85a6-2132cf446d0a_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

ANDY MARTIN - A BRIEF BIO:

Andy Martin is a legendary New Hampshire, New York and Chicago-based muckraker, author, Internet columnist, talk television pioneer, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. With forty-eight years of background in radio and television and with five decades of investigative and analytical experience in Washington, the

USA

and around the world, Andy provides insight on politics, foreign policy, intelligence and military matters. For a full bio, go to: www.AndyMartin.com; also see www.BoycottABC.com/executive_director.htm

Andy has also been a leading corruption fighter in American politics and courts for over forty-five years and is executive director of the National Anti-Corruption Policy Institute. See also www.FirstRespondersOnline.us; www.AmericaisReadyforReform.com.

He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York (LaGuardia CC, Bronx CC).

He is the author of “Obama: The Man Behind The Mask” [www.OrangeStatePress.com] and produced the Internet film “Obama: The Hawaii’ Years” [www.BoycottHawaii.com]. Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of the “Internet Powerhouse,” blogging at www.contrariancommentary.wordpress.com and www.ContrarianCommentary.com.

Andy’s family immigrated to Manchester, New Hampshire 100 years ago; today his home overlooks the Merrimack River and he lives around the corner from where he played as a small boy. He is New Hampshire’s leading corruption fighter and Republican Party reformer.

UPDATES:

www.twitter.com/AndyMartinUSA
www.Facebook.com/AndyMartin

Andy’s columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com ContrarianCommentary.wordpress.com

[NOTE: We try to correct any typographical errors in our stories; find the latest version on our blogs.]

----------

GOP Presidential Candidate and Contrarian Commentary columnist Andy Martin explains why Donald Trump’s attacker in Ohio should be federally prosecuted

GOP presidential candidate and “Contrarian Commentary” columnist Andy Martin says that federal prosecutors should exercise exclusive jurisdiction over prosecuting attacks on presidential candidates.

News from:

ANDY MARTIN /2016

Republican candidate for

President of the

United States

“Make

America

Great Again”

www.AndyMartinforPresident.com

www.AndyMartin.com

www.FirstRespondersOnline.us

National headquarters:

P. O. Box 1851

New York, NY 10150-1851

New Hampshire Headquarters:

P.O. Box 742

Manchester, NH 03105

Tel. (866) 706-2639; Cell (917) 664-9329

Fax (866) 214-3210

E-mail:

Andy@AndyMartinforPresident.com

Blogs:

www.AndyforPresident.blogspot.com

www.AndyforPresident.wordpress.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

(Palm Beach, FL) (March 14, 2016) GOP presidential candidate and “Contrarian Commentary” columnist Andy Martin has asked federal prosecutors to federally prosecute a man who attacked the Secret Service and Donald Trump in Vandalia, Ohio.

To become a regular subscriber to our emails please send an email to andynewhampshire@aol.com and place “SUBSCRIBE” in the subject line

Please feel free to forward and/or post this email

Please sign up for our enhanced Twitter feed with enhanced, original coverage

Andy’s letter to federal prosecutors follows; (the address “header” has been removed from the letter):

March 14, 2015

Hon. Carter M. Stewart

United States Attorney

303 Marconi Blvd.

Columbus, OH 43215

with copy to:

Hon. Loretta Lynch

Attorney General

Department of Justice

Washington, DC 20530

Request for the Department of Justice to prosecute Vandalia, Ohio demonstrator Tommy DiMassimo

Dear Attorney Stewart and

General Lynch:

I am writing you to respectfully request that you impanel a grand jury to seek the indictment of so-called Vandalia, Ohio anti-Trump “disrupter” Tommy DiMassimo. If you fail to take action in the DiMassimo case you will only foment greater violence in Cleveland next summer, as well as creating additional potential threats to Secret Service agents and candidates.

1. My own role in the presidential campaign

I am a bona fide but “boutique” candidate for president in the Republican Party. I do not expect to receive the nomination but I campaign actively and am using my campaign as a public policy platform to influence Republican Party doctrine. Later this week I hope to unveil a major new campaign issue for the presidential campaign.

I was on the New Hampshire ballot and I am seeking ballot access in other states.

I first went to Capitol Hill in the 89th Congress and I have a long career as a corruption fighter, political reformer and activist, see www.AndyMartin.com. I am campaigning with the previously-announced promise to support the Republican Party’s nominee.

Nevertheless, my own activity and this letter are totally independent of any other campaign. As a candidate myself I have a right to seek action by your agency which protects all federal candidates.

2. The media failure regarding the incident in Chicago March 11th

A. What took place in Chicago

Moveon.org admits that it, local agitators and at least one congressman acted, combined and conspired to stage a takeover of a Donald Trump event to prevent Trump from speaking. That conspiracy constituted a federal criminal offense, which I will detail in a letter similar to this one to the U. S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois.

The Chicago riot was not an innocent and spontaneous “demonstration” or “protest.” It was an organized and orchestrated effort to silence the speech of a presidential candidate, in a forum which his campaign had lawfully rented for the purpose of speaking. The conspiracy to deny speech constituted a crime under longstanding federal civil rights statutes.

The following day, March 12th a madman attacked Trump and the Secret service in the Southern District of Ohio.

B. How the media failed the American people

I was stunned to hear, among many other media personalities, Greta VanSusteren say on Fox News that the disrupters in Chicago had a “right to protest.” The disrupters did not assemble in Chicago to protest lawfully. By their own admission they assembled to prevent political speech. In fact, President Obama’s old neighbor, Bill Ayers, bragged that he had helped “shut down” the event, see generally https://twitter.com/WilliamAyers, https://twitter.com/ProgsToday.

The media persists in reporting that a “right to protest” implies a right to enter and disrupt a political meeting. That is simply not true. People have a right to protest outside an event, in carefully delineated spaces if necessary to maintain public safety. No one has a right to enter a political event with the intent to prevent speech from taking place. But that is what Bill Ayers and his cohort admittedly intended to do in Chicago.

The failure of the media to properly report constitutional law sends a very bad message to other disrupters, namely that they have a “right to disrupt,” when in fact citizens only have a right to protest in a lawful manner. The concept that a mob may enter a political event and storm the speaker or platform is alien to either American law or our political history.

I wish the DOJ would also take action concerning the riot in Chicago (in the ND Ill.) but I am skeptical you will do so. However, I am absolutely certain that if you do nothing, you are inviting anarchy and chaos in Cleveland next summer beyond any protests we have ever seen before. I returned to Chicago from Viet-Nam in 1968 on the first day of the Democratic National Convention. 2016 could end up making 1968 look like a picnic if you do nothing to stop the anarchic internet “organizing” of Mr. Ayers, moveon.org and their co-conspirators and they are not dissuaded from continuing their criminal activity.

3. Tommy DiMassimo’s actions in Vandalia

A person identified as Tommy DiMassimo was interviewed by CNN and essentially confessed to the commission of federal criminal acts against federal officers and a federal candidate, Donald Trump.

According to his CNN confession, DiMassimo planned his attack for months, was aware of a large Secret Service presence on March 12th, arrived early to obtain a strategic position, and attacked when he saw an opening to do so. Planning to assault, and assaulting a federal law enforcement officer is a serious federal offense. The fact that DiMassimo claims he was only trying to “seize the microphone” is not exculpatory.

4. The impact of the DiMassimo’s CNN “confession”

Mr. DiMassimo’s “confession” also reflected an irrational ideation. For example, he claimed to have been exercising his “heckler’s veto,” when in fact the meaning of the term “heckler’s veto” is the exact opposite of what DiMassimo believes. The law is clearly established that there is no “heckler’s veto.” On the contrary, DiMassimo confessed on TV to a planned, carefully orchestrated scheme to storm a candidate’s platform and to cause a situation that could have ended in tragedy. The fact that he was unsuccessful is no basis not to prosecute him.

Failure to prosecute him will only embolden copycats and imitators and other barely rational individuals. You can’t afford to take a chance that prosecutorial “inaction” will be sufficient in the face of contrary evidence.

5. The urgent need to take federal action

Mr. DiMassimo claims he did not want to injure Secret Service agents or Mr. Trump. But in any violent confrontation, participants lose control, and spectators are also endangered.

According to news reports local prosecutors have charged DiMassimo with two misdemeanors. That is a totally inadequate law enforcement response.

DiMassimo confessed on CNN that he planned his crime for months, carefully orchestrated his strategic presence on March 12th near the speaking platform and knowingly lunged at a platform protected by the Secret Service. He admittedly knew Secret Service agents were present and he intentionally and knowingly charged a position they were defending. That is the essence of a federal criminal act.

Protection of federal candidates for office is primarily a federal responsibility under the U. S. Code. Storming Secret Service agents, which DiMassimo admits he knew were present, is a very serious federal offense. You cannot allow the inadequate response of local prosecutors to be the last word on this matter.

If the Department of Justice does not take this matter seriously, as well as taking seriously the moveon.org episode in Chicago seriously, you can expect that madmen and political extremists will stage many more similar events, constantly endangering agents as well as the protectee. The DiMassimo crime is truly a case where prosecutorial action will “nip in the bud” any copycat attacks. Failure by federal prosecutors to treat DiMassimo’s criminal conduct seriously and immediately endangers everyone, the candidate, Secret Service agents and the public (please see links below).

6. Conclusion

You may be assured of my complete cooperation, if needed. I am prepared to testify both as a candidate and based on my legal education and experience as an expert witness.

Respectfully submitted,

Andy Martin

AM:sp

-----

LINKS TO THIS STORY (cut and paste the entire link below and not just the underlined portion):

http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/13/man-who-rushed-stage-at-trump-rally-is-bernie-supporter-who-did-it-because-trumps-a-bully-video/

http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/the-chicago-anti-trump-protest-was-only-the-beginning#

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/stop-blaming-trump-supporters-for-campaign-violence/2016/03/14/33e45b7e-e9f1-11e5-b0fd-073d5930a7b7_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-d%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

ANDY MARTIN - A BRIEF BIO:

USA

He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York (LaGuardia CC, Bronx CC).

UPDATES:

www.twitter.com/AndyMartinUSA
www.Facebook.com/AndyMartin

Andy’s columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com ContrarianCommentary.wordpress.com

[NOTE: We try to correct any typographical errors in our stories; find the latest version on our blogs.]

----------

GOP Presidential Candidate and Contrarian Commentary columnist Andy Martin explains how, why and when Hillary Clinton really lost the 2016 presidential election

GOP presidential candidate and “Contrarian Commentary” columnist Andy Martin says Second Amendment supporters are helping Bernie sanders challenge Hillary Clinton. Clinton’s Second Amendment attacks on sanders are backfiring.

News from:

ANDY MARTIN /2016

Republican candidate for

President of the

United States

“Make

America

Great Again”

www.AndyMartinforPresident.com

www.AndyMartin.com

www.FirstRespondersOnline.us

National headquarters:

P. O. Box 1851

New York, NY 10150-1851

New Hampshire Headquarters:

P.O. Box 742

Manchester, NH 03105

Tel. (866) 706-2639; Cell (917) 664-9329

Fax (866) 214-3210

E-mail:

Andy@AndyMartinforPresident.com

Blogs:

www.AndyforPresident.blogspot.com

www.AndyforPresident.wordpress.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

GOP presidential candidate and “Contrarian Commentary” columnist Andy Martin explains why the Michigan primary results predict a Hillary Clinton defeat in November

Andy says the results of the Michigan primary confirm Andy’s prediction at the beginning of February before the Iowa caucuses

Andy says the “2016 presidential election was fumbled away by Hillary Clinton Sunday night (March 6th)”

Andy says the ultimate product of Clinton’s anti-gun diatribe is evisceration of the Second Amendment

To become a regular subscriber to our emails please send an email to andynewhampshire@aol.com and place “SUBSCRIBE” in the subject line

Please feel free to forward and/or post this email

Please sign up for our enhanced Twitter feed with enhanced, original coverage

(Manchester, NH) (March 9, 2016)

Dear American:

This will be my fifteenth letter to the American people from the 2016 campaign trail (# 14 is still in progress). First a quick apology, then a look back, then finally a “contrarian” analysis that the liberal media ignore but that common sense Americans readily understand.

I have been working on a critique of Donald Trump’s campaign approach. I congratulate him for a great Tuesday night victory but my comments are still valid and will appear in a few days. As I was preparing a first draft of the Trump story Sunday night I wanted to append a short paragraph at the end stating my prediction that Bernie Sanders would “overperform” Tuesday night (yesterday).

I have not finished the Trump story so the Sanders prediction did not go out, but trust me I had planned to make my very bold call on Michigan.

My little “boutique” presidential campaign is under-resourced and we are working on the rollout of a major campaign initiative next week. So I am a little backlogged in getting stories out.

As I write this letter the Michigan primary has just been called for Bernie, which is both a major political upset and also upsets the future course of the 2016 presidential election.

Amazingly, no one will tell you why Sanders won Michigan. I will.

Yes, Hillary is a lousy campaigner. And, yes, Bernie is against trade agreements, etc. But those issues were not the critical factor Tuesday.

The decisive issue that turned Michigan around could turn the entire Democratic Party primary campaign upside down as Sanders goes into Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Illinois and other Middle American states.

The issue is guns.

I watched the Sunday night debate when Clinton started exploiting the terrible shooting tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut several years ago. The killings were a horrible event. Unspeakably tragic. But why was Clinton tear-jerking? And why punish the gun manufacturers with frivolous lawsuits because of the actions of a crazed killer?

Clinton, of course, thought she was being cute by beating up on poor, old Bernie on gun control. But she was actually shooting herself in the foot, again. They say Clinton is “so smart.” I wonder.

The guns used by the crazed killer in Newtown were lawfully purchased by the killer’s mom. She left them in an open and unlocked gun cabinet. She knew her son was mentally ill (but did she actually admit it to herself?).

Why would a manufacturer of the Newtown guns be liable for damages because it produced a legal product, sold it to a legal buyer and the legal buyer then left the product sitting around for a criminal to misuse?

This is not the first time I have predicted Clinton’s abuse of the Second Amendment would boomerang in Bernie’s favor. I made that prediction before the Iowa caucuses, and I was both right (see link below) and slightly wrong. Surprisingly, Bernie almost won Iowa, though I predicted a win. And I underestimated the power of the African-American vote in later Southern primaries. But my underlying premise was 100% correct: by attacking Sanders in Iowa as “pro-gun,” Clinton had “shot herself in the foot” and handed Sanders an unexpected gift. Read my earlier story.

Sunday night she made matters even worse (see links below).

Clinton staked out the most radical anti-gun position in presidential campaign history. Clinton claims that if someone buys a legal product, a gun, but that firearm is later misused by a non-purchaser or even the lawful purchaser, the manufacturer should be liable for the injuries caused by the crime. Clinton also demands that only “safe guns” be sold. No gun is “safe” in the hands of a maniac or criminal.

Of course, this week the liberal term “dog whistle” really applies. Monday the NRA tweeted an endorsement of Sanders’ Sunday night point of view (see link below) which opposed Clinton’s radical proposal. One liberal (at Salon.com, see link below) said the NRA tweet would hurt Sanders. On the contrary, Sanders’ principled position just won Bernie an election. That explains how far the liberal (Salon.com) media are divorced from understanding everyday Americans.

Clinton’s “extreme” (even the word “extreme” does not go far enough) position on gun control dooms the Democrats in November.

Gun control has been a Democratic Party graveyard since 2000.

This year, Democrats thought they could revive gun control as a winning issue. Sanders’ victory in Michigan shows that belief is a pipe dream.

Surprise! Millions of Democrats own guns. Although Bernie is derided as a socialist dreamer, he is actually a practical politician. He wins elections in Vermont, a state that essentially has no local gun control laws (other than applicable federal statutes). So if Vermont has no gun control laws, why is the state not a dangerous shooting gallery? Because law-abiding Vermonters do not abuse or misuse guns. To be sure, Bernie is no pro-gun “nut.” He still gets a “D” from the NRA. But Bernie has courageously been defending common sense on guns during the Democratic primary debates, while Clinton has shamelessly demagogued the Second Amendment.

Where are rural and small town and suburban Democrats going to buy guns when all of the manufacturers are put out of business by the liberals’ trial lawyers’ lobby? Guns will eventually disappear if their manufacturers are forced to disappear. The Second Amendment would ultimately be eviscerated under Clinton.

People are not stupid. People in Michigan (yes, Democrats!!!) own guns. In Ohio. In Pennsylvania. In Wisconsin. Of course they do. We are pluralistic society where residents of small towns and rural areas can own guns and still hold liberal positions on social or economic issues.

What about “safe” guns? Well, safe guns are a question of money. I suppose we could manufacture a foolproof gun, but it could cost more, a lot more. And who would decide what was a safe gun and what was an unsafe one? Obviously, Washington bureaucrats would regulate the manufacturing of firearms. Under Clinton they would be in control.

To repeat, it is not inexpensive guns, or even simple guns, that cause crimes. It is criminals. Liberals seem unable to face that reality. That’s why we have a Second Amendment to protect gun ownership, and why the views of the new justice who replaces Justice Scalia on the U. S. Supreme Court are so critical.

Right now I can’t predict how the Republican “establishment” and Donald Trump will come to terms if he wins the nomination (but they will). My critical article on Trump is still in the works. And my major new campaign issue is still coming next week.

But I can predict with 100% certainty that Hillary Clinton just upended herself in upcoming Midwest primaries. Even if she wins her party’s nomination, her stand on gun manufacturer liability will doom her chances in November. You heard it first here.

Sincerely yours,

Andy

-----

LINKS TO THIS STORY (cut and paste the entire link below and not just the underlined portion):

https://andyforpresident.wordpress.com/2016/02/03/gop-presidential-candidate-and-contrarian-commentary-columnist-andy-martin-says-that-in-iowa-big-mamma-clinton-shot-herself-in-the-foot/

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/nra-calls-bernie-sanders-comments-gunmaker-liability-spot-n533616

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/03/07/3757234/sanders-clinton-guns-nra/

http://www.salon.com/2016/03/07/this_nra_tweet_doesnt_bode_well_for_bernie_sanders_at_all/

New citations after emailing:

WHAT OTHERS SAY ABOUT ANDY MARTIN:

One author has called Andy Martin the “big kahuna” of the anti-[Barack] Obama movement. Another said “Andy Martin is revolutionizing journalism… [Andy] brings to online journalism what Rush Limbaugh [brings] to radio or Michael Moore to film: sleek little stories that fit into larger political narratives…” Another says, “The only American journalists that are ‘standing UP’ [to Obama] are, Andy Martin…”

ANDY MARTIN - A BRIEF BIO:

USA

He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York (LaGuardia CC, Bronx CC).

UPDATES:

www.twitter.com/AndyMartinUSA
www.Facebook.com/AndyMartin

Andy’s columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com ContrarianCommentary.wordpress.com

[NOTE: We try to correct any typographical errors in our stories; find the latest version on our blogs.]

----------

Friday, March 11, 2016

“Barack Obama’s ‘children’” riot in Chicago; Sanders supporters join the anarchy

News from:

ANDY MARTIN /2016

Republican candidate for

President of the

United States

“Make

America

Great Again”

www.AndyMartinforPresident.com

www.AndyMartin.com

www.FirstRespondersOnline.us

National headquarters:

P. O. Box 1851

New York, NY 10150-1851

New Hampshire Headquarters:

P.O. Box 742

Manchester, NH 03105

Tel. (866) 706-2639; Cell (917) 664-9329

Fax (866) 214-3210

E-mail:

Andy@AndyMartinforPresident.com

Blogs:

www.AndyforPresident.blogspot.com

www.AndyforPresident.wordpress.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

GOP presidential candidate and “Contrarian Commentary” columnist Andy Martin says “President Barack Obama’s ‘Children’ rioted in Chicago Friday night; the American people must fight back”

Andy says Barack Obama has been encouraging a minority “grievance industry” for the past seven years

Andy says the Chicago Police failed to maintain public order, and the University of Illinois failed to control an event space that had been lawfully and properly rented to the Trump campaign

Andy says Bernie Sanders, not Donald Trump, owes the American people an explanation and an apology

To become a regular subscriber to our emails please send an email to andynewhampshire@aol.com and place “SUBSCRIBE” in the subject line

Please feel free to forward and/or post this email

Please sign up for our enhanced Twitter feed with enhanced, original coverage

BULLETIN: Beginning Saturday morning Andy will temporarily be in his South Florida war room to observe and comment on the Florida primary

(New York, NY) (March 12, 2016)

Dear American:

This will be my sixteenth letter to the American people from the 2016 campaign trail (# 14 is still in progress). Friday night I was in New York en route to our South Florida war room Saturday for the Florida primary on Tuesday. I turned on the TV and saw the anarchy in Chicago.

Make no mistake: the rioters in Chicago, and the liberal news media that are encouraging and enabling them, are “Obama’s children.” Loyal Americans must fight back against this anti-American “army.”

For the past seven years Democrats - Obama, Clinton and Sanders - have been energizing a grievance industry targeting African-Americans, Latinos and Muslims. They have falsely portrayed African-Americans and Latinos as victims of “mass incarceration” and other imaginary maladies. Friday night, African-Americans, Latinos and Muslims came together to riot in Chicago at the University of Illinois to prevent Donald Trump from holding a lawful political rally.

Chicago is now officially “ungoverned” and very possibly ungovernable territory. What a disgrace to a great city.

The latest anarchy is being energized by the liberal news media that is endlessly propagating lies and false legal doctrines.

Allow me clarify two legal doctrines for you:

First, the “right to protest” is not absolute. If someone rents an event space, such as a large hall or ballroom or even a stadium, that person or organization is entitled to use that space without “protesters” infiltrating the space and trying to disrupt the event. No one has a right to go into an event being conducted by someone - a campaign, business or other organization - and disrupt that group’s event. Such disruption is a criminal act. The so-called Black Lives Matter anarchists that are deliberately disrupting Trump events are committing criminal acts and they must now be prosecuted by local authorities. Why did the Chicago Police not make any arrests?

When the media falsely claim that “Black Lives Matter” terrorists have a “right” to go into as Trump event and protest, the media is totally wrong. No such right exists.

Second, there is a broad constitutional right to protest peacefully OUTSIDE an event, within carefully delineated areas established to maintain public safety. People can line up outside, make noise, and act obnoxious; they have an absolute constitutional right to act in that manner OUTSIDE the event.

Society, i.e. law enforcement, has a constitutional obligation to protect free speech. That duty is called the duty to prevent a “heckler’s veto:” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler%27s_veto

While the Chicago Police did not officially cancel the Trump event, authorities obviously warned Trump representatives that the event space had become corrupted with thousands of violent protesters and that the police were unable to control the crowd. Trump was essentially forced to cancel his rally because the Chicago Police lost control of the situation.

Obama has been energizing minorities for seven years; he has led them to believe they are victims and have a laundry list of grievances. Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have picked up where Obama is leaving off. Many of the rioters Friday evening were chanting support for Sanders.

What does the Chicago riot mean:

1. Seemingly senile commentators such as David Gergen on CNN that are anti-Trump are trying to blame Trump for Obama’s rioters. Gergen has the matter backwards.

2. The Democratic Party realizes they can't stop Republicans in 2016, so they are trying to violently shut down the Republican Party’s campaign. Trump is a symbol, not a cause, of the rioters’ agenda. Expect massive Democratic Party-sponsored anarchy at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland.

3. Hillary Clinton and Obama are practitioners of “rules for radicals” authored by Saul Alinsky in Chicago. Clinton (and Sanders) are trying to radicalize the Democratic Party politic to prevent Republicans from peacefully assembling, and trying to intimidate Republicans from speaking their minds on crucial issues facing the nation. Sanders admits he is a “revolutionary.” “Peaceful revolutions” usually morph into violent ones. Friday night was a down payment on the Sanders agenda. Now we know who Bernie’s real supporters are.

4. Donald Trump does not owe anyone an apology. Inside his own events, Trump is entitled to engage in colorful speech, hyperbole, boisterousness and exaggeration. That is the essence of political speech. Outside protesters cannot intentionally infiltrate Trump events and then try to make Trump self-censor himself under the threat of disruption. The gentleman who hit a protester who was being evicted, however, was absolutely wrong. Trump has no obligation to warn his supporters to be peaceful. They are peacefully assembling to hear him. The outside agitators are causing the disruption. They are the ones who should be condemned. They are knowingly and intentionally committing criminal acts.

5. Although the media have tried to link Trump with Hitler, Friday night we saw where the real neo-Nazis, and brown shirted storm troopers are centered: smack in the middle of the Democratic Party’s supporters.

6. I did not hear any chants for Hillary at the riot, but there were loud chants for Bernie. If anyone owes the American people an apology, it is not Donald Trump. Rather, Bernie Sanders owes Americans and Trump an apology because his supporters engaged in neo-Nazi tactics trying to censor a political speech.

7. I landed in Chicago from Viet-Nam on the day that the 1968 Democratic National Convention began. I witnessed all of the chaos that was to follow. Ultimately, unlike David Gergen’s nonsense that real Americans are going to become afraid of Trump because of the Black Lives Matter demonstrators, history clearly teaches that real Americans are going to be afraid of anarchy in the streets and what a Clinton or Sanders administration could mean. Americans will join Trump, not the Democratic Party’s demonstrators.

8. In 1968, the riots in Chicago backfired on the Democrats. I can predict without fear of contradiction that the Obama-Clinton-Sanders riots in Chicago Friday night are going to backfire and boomerang on the Democrats. The Democrats need to call off their brown shirts and storm troopers if they want to have a chance of winning in November.

9. Donald Trump and the Republican Party do not owe anyone in Chicago, or anywhere else where their political meetings are being intentionally disrupted by “outside agitators,” any apology. The assemblage of “Black Lives Matter” thugs, Sanders supporters and Democratic Party hooligans are on the verge of becoming an organized interstate criminal enterprise that must be crushed by federal and state law enforcement to ensure the integrity of the 2016 presidential election.

Saturday you can reach me in, or read me from our war room in South Florida.

Sincerely yours,

Andy

-----

LINKS TO THIS STORY (cut and paste the entire link below and not just the underlined portion):

New citations after emailing:

WHAT OTHERS SAY ABOUT ANDY MARTIN:

ANDY MARTIN - A BRIEF BIO:

USA

He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York (LaGuardia CC, Bronx CC).

UPDATES:

www.twitter.com/AndyMartinUSA
www.Facebook.com/AndyMartin

Andy’s columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com ContrarianCommentary.wordpress.com

[NOTE: We try to correct any typographical errors in our stories; find the latest version on our blogs.]

----------