Cops: Man on LSD Stole Car, Claims to Think He Was Playing ‘Grand Theft Auto’

23-year-old Anthony J. Clark of Oregon says he thought he was playing Grand Theft Auto while he was allegedly committing the game’s namesake crime while on LSD.

The Grants Pass, Oregon, man told police he had taken LSD and thought he was playing a real-life version of the iconic video game franchise. In the process, he led law enforcement officials on a 40-mile car chase across Jackson County after stealing a vehicle directly in front of patrol deputies, authorities report.

Clark drove on the wrong side of the road, ran over multiple spike strips meant to stop him, even crashing through chain link fences on his wild ride, police said. Eventually, police were able to use a Pursuit Intervention Technique (PIT) to spin Clark’s vehicle to a stop. He then reportedly leapt from the vehicle, ran into a nearby trailer park, and tried to steal another before he was arrested. Fortunately, no one was hurt. Clark freely admitted to his drug use and subsequent hallucinations, which apparently continued throughout the interview process.

He has been accused of a laundry list of offenses: Driving under the influence of intoxicants, second-degree criminal mischief, third-degree escape, unauthorized use of a motor vehicle, attempting to elude a police officer, possession of a stolen motor vehicle, unlawful entry into a motor vehicle, interfering with a police officer, reckless endangering, reckless driving, and offensive littering.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.breitbart.com

Husbands Use Scripture to Whip Wives in ‘Handmaid’s Tale’ Christian Society

The latest episode of Hulu’s The Handmaid’s Tale comes up with a new way to twist the words of the Bible into their own depraved interpretation. This time, they justify violence against women at their hands of their own husbands. It just goes to show, never trust Hollywood to quote Scripture.

The June 6 episode “Women’s Work” has handmaid June/Offred (Elizabeth Moss) and head of house Serena Joy (Yvonne Strahovski) working together to help an ailing baby. When doctors are unable to diagnose the baby’s illness, the two forge Serena’s husband, Commander Waterford’s (Joseph Fiennes), signature to request help from a woman who use to work as a doctor before being subjugated for her gender.

Despite their good intentions, Waterford ultimately punishes his wife for “disobeying” him, justifying himself with Ephesians 5:22.

 

 

Fred: Wives, submit yourselves onto your own husbands as unto the Lord and ye husbands dwell with them according to knowledge. Giving honor unto the wife as unto the weaker vessel.

Serena: Fred, please-

Fred: But if we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us. Serena. Forgive me, darling.

[Serena cries out in pain]

Fred: Offred. Stay.

[exclaims in pain]

So, new this season, we’ve learned not only does this Christian society marry off child brides, it apparently also condones marital abuse. I guess The Handmaid’s Tale is again mixing up their ideas of extreme religions. Strangely, I still doubt we’ll be hearing the characters praise Allah any time soon.

Funny how when liberals denounce the “wives submit to your husbands” verse as indicative of misogyny they come up short in finding a Bible verse that actually condones husbands harming their wives. They also conveniently forget the lines directly after. Ephesians 5:25-28 reads: “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her to sanctify her, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to Himself as a glorious church, without stain or wrinkle or any such blemish, but holy and blameless. In the same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.”

In my mind, love “as their own bodies” doesn’t translate to torture. Only someone truly contemptible can think that in any way excuses violence, but it just seems on par with this latest season. It truly has gone downhill.

via NewsBusters – Exposing Liberal Media Bias

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.newsbusters.org/

Republican congressman slams Paul Ryan for betraying Trump by defending the ‘deep state’

Rep. Matt Gaetz bashed House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) for saying that President Trump was incorrect in accusing the FBI of illegally infiltrating his campaign with informants for the sake of political gain.

Here’s what Gaetz said

Appearing on the Lou Dobbs show Wednesday, Gaetz offered a scathing critique of what he saw as Ryan’s betrayal of the president.

“There is no defense today for Paul Ryan siding with the FBI and Department of Justice over against those of us in the Congress who are working for transparency and accountability,” Gaetz said. “[Rep.] Devin Nunes [R-Calif.] for example, has been asking for a year for the documents that go to the very heart of this Trump Russia hoax. As we sit here today Lou, members of Congress have not seen the documents that show why this investigation even began.”

Gaetz went on to explain why he believed the foundations of the investigation into the Trump campaign were faulty.

“A defender of the deep state.”

“And there is no way any criminal prosecution could ever be brought against this president based on the bias and the mishandling of evidence,” Gaetz continued. “But instead of our speaker standing with us and putting the focus on the FBI’s refusal to turn over documents so that we can perform our oversight duties, instead, he was defending the FBI, and that is deeply frustrating to me, and we need the speaker to be an institutionalist for the Congress, not to be a defender of the deep state.”

“And he is that, and he is a defender of K Street and Wall Street and the Koch brothers,” Dobbs agreed. “The man has sold out, he’s been obviously sold out for years.”

Stop defending the FBI

“The silence from our very own speaker is deafening,” Gaetz responded. “Speaker Ryan needs to step up, he needs to join us in a call for a second special counsel, and for goodness sakes, stop defending the FBI’s collection of intelligence on the Trump campaign when they refuse to give us the documents to show whether or not they broke the law.”

Gaetz concluded saying that he was hearing for the first time from his colleagues in the Congress that they might need to replace Ryan as the House Speaker.

Here’s the segment with Gaetz and Lou Dobbs:

Watch the latest video at foxbusiness.com

via TheBlaze.com – Stories

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.theblaze.com

Ignoring the Samantha Power bombshell

One of the challenges of Spygate is that it’s such a sprawling, complicated tale, filled with competing narratives and motives open to interpretation.  We understand that this is a serious situation – possibly the biggest scandal in U.S. history.  But how can one get the message across to the average American without his eyes glazing over?


To cut through the complexity, it helps to focus on specific actions by individuals that we all can agree are suspect.  This brings us to Samantha Power.



Of all the political stories from 2017, surely the most curious is this: why is everyone ignoring the bombshell revelations from Samantha Power?


As you recall, Power was caught using her security clearance as a U.N. ambassador to review private conversations by U.S. citizens.  According to official records, she requested the unmasking of these private citizens over 260 times in 2016 (this was an election year).  She was brought before the House Intelligence Committee to explain her actions.  


Her defense?  It wasn’t me.  Someone else in the Obama White House did this, using her security clearance.


There are two possibilities: that she is telling the truth, in which case someone else in the Obama administration is lying.  Or she is lying herself.


Let’s consider the implications if she’s lying.  Power, a supposed human rights activist and darling of the left, came into her office every day – Monday through Friday, 52 weeks a year – and did some reading.  But instead of the New York Times, or her favorite blog, she was reading the transcripts of private conversations of her fellow Americans, wiretapped by federal agents.  And not only that, but she made a request each day on average to unmask a U.S. citizen in those transcripts.


Why are our supposed human rights activists not horrified?  Why is this not a daily banner headline in every major newspaper in the country?  I could see the MSM attempting to hide this damning evidence of Obama administration malfeasance, but why are the conservative news outlets not clamoring for answers?


Perhaps 2017 just saw too many revelations of government abuse?  But this one does not deserve to be forgotten.  And if we don’t act soon, it will go down the memory hole.


Here’s how Power’s Wiki page spins it: “On May 31, 2017, Power’s testimony and relevant records were subpoenaed by the House Intelligence Committee as part of its investigation into the unmasking of Americans whose conversations were inadvertently captured during intelligence surveillance.”


There is nothing “inadvertent” about a White House official making over 260 unmasking requests during an election year.  And lying about it.


No one, it seems, is asking even the most basic questions: who was this mysterious, nameless Obama administration official?  Why would he use Samantha Power’s security clearance to unmask U.S. citizens?  What did he have to hide?  And if he was researching something that was purely legal, why the necessity for such subterfuge and deceit?


The only answer that makes sense is that this official was using Power’s security clearance for reasons that would not stand up to legal scrutiny, most likely for political or possibly illegal ends – such as spying on the Trump campaign.


A final thought: Why is Samantha Power herself so seemingly unconcerned about this violation of public trust?  Wouldn’t you expect this brave journalist, the winner of the Pulitzer Prize, the champion of the people, to be at least a little bit curious as to exactly who it was in the Obama administration who stole her passwords and used her security clearance in such a blatantly undemocratic and unlawful manner?


And wouldn’t you expect her to speak up about it?


Jay Latimer is an international businessman, writer, and investor who has worked in investment banking for several multinational banks in New York, Hong Kong, and Beijing.  


Photo credit: Flickr.


One of the challenges of Spygate is that it’s such a sprawling, complicated tale, filled with competing narratives and motives open to interpretation.  We understand that this is a serious situation – possibly the biggest scandal in U.S. history.  But how can one get the message across to the average American without his eyes glazing over?


To cut through the complexity, it helps to focus on specific actions by individuals that we all can agree are suspect.  This brings us to Samantha Power.


Of all the political stories from 2017, surely the most curious is this: why is everyone ignoring the bombshell revelations from Samantha Power?


As you recall, Power was caught using her security clearance as a U.N. ambassador to review private conversations by U.S. citizens.  According to official records, she requested the unmasking of these private citizens over 260 times in 2016 (this was an election year).  She was brought before the House Intelligence Committee to explain her actions.  


Her defense?  It wasn’t me.  Someone else in the Obama White House did this, using her security clearance.


There are two possibilities: that she is telling the truth, in which case someone else in the Obama administration is lying.  Or she is lying herself.


Let’s consider the implications if she’s lying.  Power, a supposed human rights activist and darling of the left, came into her office every day – Monday through Friday, 52 weeks a year – and did some reading.  But instead of the New York Times, or her favorite blog, she was reading the transcripts of private conversations of her fellow Americans, wiretapped by federal agents.  And not only that, but she made a request each day on average to unmask a U.S. citizen in those transcripts.


Why are our supposed human rights activists not horrified?  Why is this not a daily banner headline in every major newspaper in the country?  I could see the MSM attempting to hide this damning evidence of Obama administration malfeasance, but why are the conservative news outlets not clamoring for answers?


Perhaps 2017 just saw too many revelations of government abuse?  But this one does not deserve to be forgotten.  And if we don’t act soon, it will go down the memory hole.


Here’s how Power’s Wiki page spins it: “On May 31, 2017, Power’s testimony and relevant records were subpoenaed by the House Intelligence Committee as part of its investigation into the unmasking of Americans whose conversations were inadvertently captured during intelligence surveillance.”


There is nothing “inadvertent” about a White House official making over 260 unmasking requests during an election year.  And lying about it.


No one, it seems, is asking even the most basic questions: who was this mysterious, nameless Obama administration official?  Why would he use Samantha Power’s security clearance to unmask U.S. citizens?  What did he have to hide?  And if he was researching something that was purely legal, why the necessity for such subterfuge and deceit?


The only answer that makes sense is that this official was using Power’s security clearance for reasons that would not stand up to legal scrutiny, most likely for political or possibly illegal ends – such as spying on the Trump campaign.


A final thought: Why is Samantha Power herself so seemingly unconcerned about this violation of public trust?  Wouldn’t you expect this brave journalist, the winner of the Pulitzer Prize, the champion of the people, to be at least a little bit curious as to exactly who it was in the Obama administration who stole her passwords and used her security clearance in such a blatantly undemocratic and unlawful manner?


And wouldn’t you expect her to speak up about it?


Jay Latimer is an international businessman, writer, and investor who has worked in investment banking for several multinational banks in New York, Hong Kong, and Beijing.  


Photo credit: Flickr.




via American Thinker Blog

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/

Obama Administration Skirted U.S. Sanctions to Grant Iran Billions in Cash

The Obama administration skirted key U.S. sanctions to grant Iran access to billions in hard currency despite public assurances the administration was engaged in no such action, according to a new congressional investigation.

The investigation, published Wednesday by the House Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, further discloses secret efforts by top Obama administration officials to assure European countries they would receive a pass from U.S. sanctions if they engaged in business with Iran.

The findings confirm earlier reports by the Washington Free Beacon surrounding efforts by the Obama administration to go above and beyond the terms of the landmark nuclear deal to appease Iran and grant it billions in hard currency, as well as access to the U.S financial system, despite multiple assurances to Congress this was not the case.

Congressional investigators have now confirmed that the Obama administration ordered the Treasury Department to issue a secret license granting Iran access to the U.S. financial system and American dollar, a process that played out at the same time these senior administration officials were testifying to Congress that they were not engaged in such activities.

The investigation confirms allegations by many in Congress that the Obama administration was engaged in covert diplomacy with senior Iranian officials beyond the nuclear agreement to help Tehran obtain billions in hard currency, cash that was later used by the Islamic Republic to fund its ballistic missile program and fighting forces operating in Syria and across the region.

"The Obama administration misled the American people and Congress because they were desperate to get a deal with Iran," said Sen. Rob Portman (R., Ohio), chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. "Despite claims both before and after the Iran deal was completed that the U.S. financial system would remain off limits, the Obama administration issued a specific license allowing Iran to convert billions of dollars in assets using the U.S. financial system."

Several days after the Obama administration announced the implementation of the nuclear agreement, U.S. officials were contacted by Bank Muscat in Oman, which was seeking to convert nearly six billion dollars on Iran’s behalf.

Bank Muscat petitioned the Obama administration to allow it to access the U.S. dollar in order to conduct the transition, which was to be carried out from Omani rials, into U.S. dollars, and then into Euros. That money would then be transferred into the Central Bank of Iran, or CBI, which was long designated for sanctions by the United States as a result of its efforts to fund Iran’s terror operations and nuclear program.

"The inability to convert the funds held at Bank Muscat through the U.S. financial system frustrated key Iranian officials," according to the congressional investigation. "On January 24, 2016, a lead Iranian negotiator, wrote to his U.S. State Department counterpart, complaining that Iran could not convert its assets as it requested."

While such transactions remained prohibited under the nuclear agreement, also known as the JCPOA, senior Obama administration officials in the State and Treasury Departments scrambled to find back-door methods to appease Iran.

In one email obtained by congressional investigators, a Treasury Department official says that the United States committed much more to Iran than was publicly disclosed at the time by the Obama administration.

"Yikes. It looks like we committed to a whole lot beyond just allowing the immobilized funds to settle out," the official wrote.

While the administration was not obligated to conduct any such transactions on Iran’s behalf, Obama administration officials decided to pressure the Treasury Department to issue a secret license permitting Iran to access the $5.7 billion from Oman’s Bank Muscat using the U.S. financial system, according to the investigation.

"Treasury Department officials began working on a specific license authorizing Bank Muscat’s transaction," the report finds. "A specific license allows specified transactions to occur that would otherwise violate U.S. sanctions."

The license did not have to be publicly disclosed and it was ultimately issued during a time when top Obama administration officials were testifying to Congress that they had no intention of permitting Iran access to the U.S. financial system.

"On February 24, 2016, the Treasury Department issued a specific license to Bank Muscat to authorize the conversion of Iran’s rials to euros through ‘any United States depository institution … involved as a correspondent bank … where such foreign exchange conversion provides an indirect benefit to persons subject to the jurisdiction of the Government of Iran,’" investigators found. "Iran was then free to use a U.S. bank to act as the intermediary (called a ‘correspondent ban’) to convert its assets at Bank Muscat (Omani rials) through the correspondent bank account in the United States (U.S. dollars) to a designated bank in Europe (euros)."

The U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control, or OFAC, subsequently lobbied two U.S. banks to convert the funds on Iran’s behalf.

"U.S. officials at OFAC contacted both of the banks to encourage them to convert the funds," according to the report. "Convincing a U.S. bank to convert the funds was crucial."

Obama administration officials then conducted a series of back-channel conversations aimed at getting top officials to pressure these banks to carry out the illicit transactions on Iran’s behalf.

"To further encourage the banks, one U.S. government official wrote, ‘I agree it would be a good idea to have [Secretary] Lew engage [the U.S. bank]," according to emails obtained by investigators. "If they refuse we can suggest [Secretary] Kerry will call, which will drive them nuts."

Both of the U.S. banks eventually declined to carry out the transaction due to concerns over U.S. sanctions laws.

However, the effort did not end there. Officials in the Treasury and State Departments held private conversations to find other avenues to help Iran receive the billions.

"Treasury and State Department officials sought other ways to move the funds. Discussions involved coordinating with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the Bank for International Settlements, and the Central Bank of Germany," according to the report.

These efforts also were unsuccessful and the administration never ultimately found a way to enable Iran access to the $5.7 billion, which was later converted by Bank Muscat and Iran outside the U.S. financial system.

Iranian officials expressed outrage at the United States over the failed bid, which prompted another series of discussions with these Iranian official about ways the Obama administration was going beyond the terms of the nuclear agreement to help Iran obtain hard currency.

The United States "exceeded our JCPOA commitments by OFAC’s issuing a license to enable Bank Muscat to work with any U.S. financial institution to facilitate the conversation of assets in the banks from rials to other non-dollar currencies," one State Department official wrote to the Iranians in 2016.

This shadow diplomacy played out far from the public spotlight and occurred while Obama administration officials were publicly telling Congress a different story.

Sources familiar with the issue told the Free Beacon similar measures must have been taken to facilitate other transactions that the Obama admin hid from reporters, including the taxpayer purchase of Iranian nuclear material that Tehran produced in violation of the deal.

"As the Treasury and State Department worked behind the scenes to help Iran access the dollar, the message to Congress remained the same: The JCPOA did not allow Iran to access the U.S. financial system," the report notes.

The report further discloses efforts by top Obama administration officials to lobby European countries to reengage in business with Iran, despite U.S. sanctions laws.

In one secret meeting, U.S. officials "signaled that it would not aggressively enforce violations of the new sanctions regime," investigators found. "For example, during a [pro-Iran] roadshow in London in March 2015 with representatives from 10 major global financial institutions, the head of the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Asset Compliance [OFAC] assured attendees that ’95 percent of the time OFAC sees an apparent violation it results in a simple warning letter or no enforcement action,’" according to minutes of these meetings. "He explained OFAC would only take action in egregious situations."

The post Obama Administration Skirted U.S. Sanctions to Grant Iran Billions in Cash appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

via Washington Free Beacon

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://freebeacon.com

‘Fight for 15’ gets results: McDonald’s to use self-service kiosks in all American stores by 2020

McDonald’s announced this week that it plans to replace cashiers with self-service kiosks in all its American restaurants by 2020, a likely response to the “Fight for 15” movement and new technology.

What are the details?

CEO Steve Easterbrook told CNBC this week his restaurant chain will roll out the self-order kiosks in 1,000 new stores each quarter.

He estimated that half of the 14,000 U.S.-based stores would have the kiosks by the end of 2018 and every location would utilize the technology by 2020. He said about 3,500 restaurants already use the automated machines, or about one-quarter of the McDonald’s U.S. portfolio.

Easterbrook added that McDonald’s locations in Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia are already “fully integrated” with the technology, while a majority of locations in France and Germany use it.

The reason behind the kiosks? According to Easterbook, McDonald’s has discovered customers “dwell” at the self-ordering stations, meaning they also buy more.

“What we’re finding is when people dwell more, they select more. There’s a little bit of an average check boost,” he said on CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street” on Monday.

McDonald’s spokesperson Terri Hickey explained to BuzzFeed News that redesigned restaurants will still have cashiers, but “kiosks provide another option for customers to order and pay. We’re finding with kiosks, customers tend to feel less rushed, take their time, browse the menu, and often order more.”

In addition to self-order stations, McDonald’s is exploring more food delivery methods, including ordering through a mobile app and delivering food on Uber Eats.

What about rising labor costs?

McDonald’s is one of the biggest targets of the “Fight for 15” movement, whose goal is to raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour nationwide, even in unskilled labor like entry-level positions at McDonald’s.

Many states cities and states, especially progressive localities on the West Coast, have answered the call, passing laws mandating a $15 per hour minimum wage, through gradual hikes. The rising labor costs associated with increased minimum wages have undoubtedly forced McDonald’s and other fast food chains to utilize self-service stations.

More from BuzzFeed:

In the first quarter of the year, McDonald’s payroll and employee benefits were 30.2% of sales, up from 27.8% during the same period in 2017.

So, what will McDonald’s do with workers displaced by kiosks?

Hickey told BuzzFeed only some of the jobs will be replaced with new positions.

“[With] the addition of self-order kiosks, restaurants are transitioning some roles to more customer engaging positions like Guest Experience Leaders and table service,” she explained.

via TheBlaze.com – Stories

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.theblaze.com

Michigan State University Health Physicist Charged with Bestiality

Michigan State University health physicist Joseph Hattey has been charged with bestiality with a dog, according to the Michigan attorney general’s office.

Adding to a string of sex crimes at Michigan State University, 51-year-old health physicist Joseph Hattey was charged this week with two counts of committing a crime against nature (bestiality). This comes in the aftermath of sexual misconduct investigations into two major Michigan State staff members. Dr. Larry Nassar, who sexually abused over 200 young female gymnasts, was sentenced to 4o to 125 years in prison. In April, former Michigan State University Dean William Strampel was arrested on sexual assault charges.

A local Fox affiliate reported that Hattey is accused of sexual acts with a Bassett hound including penetration with his genitals and hand. According to the report, the acts were unrelated to Michigan State University and did not take place on campus. The dog is currently in being held by the local animal control office.

In a statement, a Michigan State University spokesperson clarified Hattey’s role at the university and announced that he has been placed on administrative suspension.

Michigan State University was informed by the MSU Police Department on April 17 of a criminal investigation against Joseph Hattey, a health physicist with the Environmental Health and Safety Unit (note this position does not work with students, patients or animals). Hattey was immediately put on administrative suspension, pending the investigation. The university has been and will continue to cooperate with law enforcement officials on this matter. MSUPD is providing digital forensic support in the investigation.

Hattey faces up to 15 years in prison if he is convicted of the charges.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.breitbart.com

Teacher Charged for Allegedly Feeding Puppy to Snapping Turtle in Front of Students

A teacher in Preston, Idaho allegedly fed a small puppy to a large snapping turtle — right outside of the school, and in front of students.

Robert Crosland has been charged with one misdemeanor count of animal cruelty, filed in Franklin County Court by a special prosecutor appointed by Attorney General Lawrence Wasden following an investigation into the alleged strange and horrific events of March 7. Crosland was allegedly involved in what the school administration called “a regrettable circumstance involving some of the biological specimens.”

One student has vocally disputed the story that has garnered international attention. “If anyone has a right to be upset, it is me,” Farahlyn Hansen told the East Idaho News. She claims that the puppy was already dying and this was a better fate than its slow and painful demise. “I am not upset. I felt like it was the more humane thing for Robert to do than to just leave it (the puppy) to die. … The puppy was dying,” she claimed.

A Facebook post calling for violence against the Preston School District put law enforcement officers on temporarily heightened alert, though it was not considered a “credible threat” to public safety.

While Crosland may face a $5,000 penalty and up to six months in jail, he has done considerably better than the turtle. It was captured and “humanely euthanized” for its meal, as it is considered a member of an invasive species.

While some 3,700 people are making their support of the teacher known, 192,000 people have already signed a petition asking the school to fire Crosland. PETA called Crosland “a bully who should not be allowed near impressionable young people.”

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.breitbart.com

New California Law Limits How Much Water People Can Use – Including Monitoring Toilet Flushes, Showers

New California Law Limits How Much Water People Can Use – Including Monitoring Toilet Flushes, Showers

California Governor Jerry Brown signed a new law that would severely restrict the amount of water people can use inside of their homes.

The government of California will now be monitoring people’s toilet flushes, showers and laundry use.

Under the new water use limits, each person will barely have enough ‘water allowance’ to do one load of laundry and take an 8 minute shower. 

This also covers outdoor use so no watering your lawns or gardens, peasants. 

CBS Sacramento reported:

There will soon be more focus on flushes and scrutiny over showers with a new law signed in by the governor.

California is now the first state in the nation to enact tough new water-efficiency standards. The controversial rules limit how many gallons a person can use inside their home per day.

“So that everyone in California is at least integrating efficiency into our preparations for climate change,” said Felicia Marcus, Chair of the State Water Resources Control Board.

So, what are the new rules?

In 2022, the new indoor water standard will be 55 gallons per person, per day. by 2030, it will fall to 50 gallons.

Just how many gallons do household chores take?

An 8-minute shower uses about 17 gallons of water, a load of laundry up to 40, and a bathtub can hold 80 to 100 gallons of water.

Greg Bundesen with the Sacramento Suburban Water District says they already assist customers.

“We offer toilet rebates, we offer complementary showerheads, we offer complementary faucets,” he said.

The new laws also require water districts to perform stress tests of their water supply and curb loss due to leaks.

“Some people may not be aware that you’re going to use a lot more water in a bath and you wouldn’t shower and it’s our job to make sure they’re informed,” Bundesen said.

Water districts who don’t comply face fines up to $10,000 a day.

The ultimate goal is to make conservation a way of life in California. Outdoor water use is also covered by the new laws.

California is sliding into the abyss of totalitarian rule.

bill proposed in California would make the distribution of plastic straws illegal unless requested by a patron, with up to a $1,000 fine and jail time.

Now they’re monitoring toilet flushes and showers.

What’s next? Only allowing people to use one square of toilet paper per use just as Sheryl Crow used to push?

Back in 2007, far left singer Sheryl Crow wanted to control how much toilet paper people use. “One square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where two to three could be required,” said Sheryl Crow.

The left wants to bring us back to the dark ages. They will bring greater human misery to the masses claiming it is helping the environment.

Jerry Brown is more interested in monitoring how many times the people of California flush their toilets than he is monitoring the US-Mexico border where MS-13 gang members, drug cartels and illegals are spilling over into his state. Let that sink in.

Comments

As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to edit or remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. The same applies to trolling, the use of multiple aliases, or just generally being a jerk. Enforcement of this policy is at the sole discretion of the site administrators and repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without warning. Guest posting is disabled for security reasons.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com

Catholic League: SCOTUS Cakeshop Ruling Big Loss for ‘Gay Bullies’

Catholic League president Bill Donohue said Monday that the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case was a “smashing victory for religious liberty” and a bruising defeat for “gay bullies.”

On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that Colorado baker Jack Phillips could not be coerced into making a cake to celebrate the wedding of a same-sex couple, which runs against his Christian beliefs on the nature of marriage.

The court ruled that Mr. Phillips had been the victim of religious hostility made manifest by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, one of whose members had called Phillips’ Christian beliefs on marriage “despicable.”

“The commission’s hostility was inconsistent with the First Amendment’s guarantee that our laws be applied in a manner that is neutral toward religion,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote.

The Court opted not to rule on the broader issue of whether the government can force people of faith to participate in same-sex weddings when the government does not show open hostility to their religious beliefs.

The Masterpiece case goes back to an incident in 2012 when Phillips refused to create a wedding cake to celebrate the marriage of two men in Massachusetts.

“I do not create custom designs that conflict with my conscience,” Phillips said, adding that, for the same reason, he does not make Halloween cakes.

Despite the ruling not going as far as it could have, Mr. Donahue said it represents an important milestone for religious freedom in America.

“Had the ruling gone the other way, black bakers would have to custom design cakes for Klansmen, Jewish bakers would have to inscribe cakes for Nazis, and gay bakers would have to make personalized cakes for gay bashers,” he said.

“This is a landmark victory for both religious liberty and freedom of speech. The bullies lost a big one,” Donahue added. “Those who lecture on bullying should discuss this case in their presentations, but we all know that the ‘tolerant’ ones who run these workshops will not.”

The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights is the largest Catholic civil rights organization in the United States and aims “to safeguard both the religious freedom rights and the free speech rights of Catholics whenever and wherever they are threatened.”

Follow Thomas D. Williams on Twitter .

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.breitbart.com