Full speech by Ben Shapiro at UC Berkeley, Thursday, September 14th

Because, as everyone knows, Ben Shapiro is such an overbearing individual and cuts such an oppressive, racist, sexist, -ist and -obe swath seldom seen before, and should never have been allowed to speak at UC Berkeley this past Thursday. Yet he was.

As opposed to prior events where Berkeley PD and the UC Berkeley polices forces chose to stand down as ordered, however, the riots failed to cook off this time because officers were out in force and were clearly a presence. This time they countenanced no one, for example, wearing masks. That predominantly eliminates Antifa. Hold that thought. I’m coming back to it.

But first, Ben Shapiro’s entire speech including a Q and A session with audience members.

Coverage of the arrests outside the speech in Berkeley, by FoxNews.com:

Ben Shapiro speech at UC Berkeley results in arrests at protests

At least nine people were arrested Thursday night related to protests at the University of California, Berkeley, over an appearance by former Breitbart editor Ben Shapiro.

UC Berkeley spokesman Dan Mogulof said the security measures could cost $600,000. Mogulof called the speech “a successful event” and said the university was committed to hosting speakers like Shapiro in the future.

Stop. Question: just who cost the university $600,000? That’s correct. Its Leftist students. Seems like freedom really isn’t free, is it UC Berkeley? Not when you have rioters for students.

The evening did have its share of hiccups. Police said three arrests were weapons-related. Among them:

— Hannah Benjamin, 20, was arrested for battery on a police officer and carrying a banned weapon.

— Sarah Roark, 44, was taken into custody for carrying a banned weapon.

The arrests were announced on the police Twitter account.

The demonstrators, however, were largely peaceful. Some chanted against fascism, white supremacists and President Donald Trump. Others were holed up inside a student building, waving signs protesting the university’s decision to allow Shapiro on campus.

Inside the hall, Shapiro addressed a friendly crowd. He encouraged people to hold civil discussions with people who have different opinions, saying that’s what America is all about. He condemned white supremacists as “a very small select group of absolutely terrible people who believe absolutely terrible things.”

The campus and surrounding Berkeley streets were under tight security after a series of previous events turned violent.

City and campus officials anticipated protests against Shapiro, and prepared for possible violence with a variety of new strategies and tightened security. It was not immediately clear whether the people arrested Thursday were protesters.

Back to my reference to law enforcement. Four points.

First: Berkeley police agencies decided to utilize actual preparation this time in concert with some proactivity as well, to include the disallowance of persons wearing face covering as is customary with Antifa elements.

Second: Berkeley police agencies came out in force with barriers, gear, presence and plans in place.

Third: They did not stand back as they had in times past, instead making arrests, preventing injury to citizens and protecting property, which proves:

Fourth: When persons were injured seriously and property torched and damaged on prior occasions in Berkeley, it was quite now clearly due to law enforcement stepping back on orders from agency heads in concert with the BAMN/Antifa-supporting Mayor of Berkeley, Jesse Arreguin. How do we know this? Because of admissions from Berkeley Police Chief Andrew Greenwood and because of the results on Thursday.

This means that those people injured and those businesses and persons suffering property damage should individually and collectively sue the City of Berkeley, City of Berkeley Police Department, the Mayor of Berkeley and the UC Berkeley Police Department for negligence, as well as advocate prosecution under California penal code 182 PC for conspiracy, RICO, and federal code 42 USC § 1983, Civil action for Deprivation of Rights — as I delineated in this post.

Because up until last Thursday in Berkeley, what happened was this:

Americans were left to fight it out on the streets of the United States as law enforcement officers were either forced to or willingly allowed violence to occur directly in front of their eyes.

And that is absolutely unacceptable, unsustainable and anathema to actual keepers of oaths.

Oh please, let the suits commence.

Finally, as UC Berkeley itself pointed out: walls work.

BZ

 

BZ’s Berserk Bobcat Saloon Radio Show, “The Aftermath,” with Professor Michael Jones, Thursday, September 14th, 2017

Featuring Right thinking from a left brain, doing the job the American Media Maggots won’t, embracing ubiquitous, sagacious perspicacity and broadcasting behind enemy lines in Occupied Fornicalia from the veritable Belly of the Beast, the Bill Mill in Sacramento, Fornicalia, I continue to proffer my thanks to the SHR Media Network for allowing me to utilize their studio and hijack their air twice weekly, Tuesdays and Thursdays, thanks to my shameless contract, as well as appear on the Sack Heads Radio Show each Wednesday evening.

Thursday’s show featured the Underground Professor, Dr Michael Jones, and also a few stories which led up to one massive revelation — finally given verbalization by an individual I highly respect — that I term the DC Axiom, which answers most questions about the swamp. And why little gets done in Washington.

Tonight in the Saloon:

  • Jersey Joe wasn’t on tonight so YouTube decided not to hose me;
  • UK teachers scared to teach about 9/11, fearing Muslims will complain;
  • Dr Jones talks first about how Houston and Florida are no longer on the radar scopes of the American Media Maggots because Trump isn’t booting the issue;
  • Give Trump a break; keep cool and carry on regarding Trump, Schumer, Pelosi;
  • Schumer and Pelosi jumped first to create the narrative that Trump deflated;
  • Only a completely secular person can now hold a position in the federal gov’t?
  • Feinstein & Demorats grill a Catholic professor nominated for the 7th DCA;
  • California wants to secede? Straight ahead; you’ll all fail abjectly;
  • Can a state secede? Dr Jones thinks, after everything, yes, a state could;
  • We compare and contrast California vs Texas and their infrastructure;
  • Dr Jones differentiates the central government vs the federal government;
  • Texas has energy independence absolutely nailed;
  • Dr Jones: sanctuary cities are entirely unconstitutional;
  • What authority does a government have to not follow laws?
  • Picking and choosing what laws will be obeyed and disobeyed;
  • Is the FBI Constitutional? Dr Jones thinks, bottom line, it isn’t;
  • Happy Stories: “that sucker’s coming down!”
  • North Korea launches another missile over Japan;
  • Are we looking directly into the eyes of WW III?
  • We know: WW IV will be fought with rocks and sticks;
  • Susan Rice admits unmasking Trump team after strident denial; SHE LIED;
  • Diane Feinstein grills Professor Barrett because she isn’t a complete secularist;
  • Those grillings have a slight bit of consequence; it’s all about Trump, not her;
  • Nancy Pelosi is losing whatever marbles she once possessed;
  • Sessions’s DOJ will not investigate the IRS and Lois Lerner;
  • Three branches of government? No, there are 4, to include the Bureaucratic;
  • GOP senators say: Comey cleared Hillary Clinton before her interview;
  • Shame on the FBI for dropping Hillary’s email scandal;
  • James Comey has managed to drag the FBI into every terrible cesspool;
  • Comey conducted a FAKE investigation into Hillary Rodham Clinton;
  • The ultimate DC Axiom finally revealed.

If you care to listen to the show in Spreaker, please click on start.

Listen to “BZ’s Berserk Bobcat Saloon, “The Aftermath,” with The Underground Professor, Thursday, September 14th, 2017″ on Spreaker.

If you care to watch the show on YouTube, please click on start.

Next Tuesday’s show on September 19th will feature Dan Butcher of the High Plains Pundit media empire as he and I chat about time political and social events. Miss it at your own peril.

Please join me, the Bloviating Zeppelin (on Twitter @BZep and on Gab.ai @BZep), every Tuesday and Thursday night on the SHR Media Network from 11 PM to 1 AM Eastern and 8 PM to 10 PM Pacific, at the Berserk Bobcat Saloon — where the speech is free but the drinks are not.

As ever, thank you so kindly for listening, commenting, and interacting in the chat room or listening later via podcast.

Want to listen to all the Berserk Bobcat Saloon archives in podcast? Go here. Want to watch the past shows on YouTube? Please visit the SHR Media Network YouTube channel here.

BZ

 

Religious affiliation now a disqualifier for public service according to Democrats?

So say Leftists, to include Diane Feinstein.

From Breitbart.com:

Dianne Feinstein Interrogates Judicial Nominee’s Catholic Faith

by Joel B Pollak

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and other Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee questioned whether the Catholic faith of a judicial nominee would disqualify her from carrying out the duties of her intended office.

Stop. My first thought? President John F Kennedy. A Democrat. Back in 1961. Have we not progressed from there? Or have we regressed? Not A, but B.

Feinstein told Notre Dame Law School Professor Amy Coney Barrett, who has been nominated by President Donald Trump to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, that “the dogma lives loudly within you. And that’s of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for for years in this country.”

Let’s listen to Diane Feinstein.

Now let’s listen to Dick Durbin.

Furthermore, Demorats ask: “can a Catholic be a judge?” A far cry from a Catholic president, is it not? Back in 1961? Back then: “a Catholic will ruin our nation.”

Perhaps we should next rightly ask: can a Muslim be a member of Congress? If not a Christian, then why a Muslim? Or a Buddhist? Or a Shinto priest? Keith Ellison and Andre Carson, go away. Right? Because they are “religious.”

Or is this a Constitutional issue the likes of which persons such as Diane Feinstein don’t comprehend as illustrated by her discourse with the late Antonin Scalia?

Gorsuch also happened to school Diane Feinstein during hearings.

Are you, like me, beginning to question the validity and veracity of Diane Feinstein with regard to overall competence? If not, you certainly should. We continue.

Feinstein was referring to abortion, though her question was based on a law review article written by Barrett in 1998 that argued that Catholic judges who object to the death penalty should recuse themselves from cases in which it is a possible sentence because “litigants and the general public are entitled to impartial justice.”

But wait. There’s more.

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution provides that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States,” yet Feinstein and other Democrats on the panel effectively imposed a religious test on Barrett. It was the second time in recent months that the opposition had attempted to do so: Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) asked Russell Vought, nominated for deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget, about his Christian belief that salvation comes only through Jesus, as if that would be disqualifying.

Bottom line — the one that the American Media Maggots fail to report?

Barrett stated, “I would stress that my personal church affiliation or my religious belief would not bear on my duties as a judge.”

There was a bit of pushback, from Politico.com:

Senators take fire over questions for Catholic judicial nominee

by Josh Gerstein

At least two prominent university presidents are accusing senators of religious bias for challenging a Catholic judicial nominee over her faith-driven views during a confirmation hearing last week.

University of Notre Dame President Rev. John Jenkins and Princeton University President Christopher Eisgruber both wrote letters objecting to lawmakers’ pointed questions on the topic to Notre Dame law professor Amy Barrett last week, whom President Donald Trump has nominated to the Chicago-based 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.

Jenkins wrote directly to the Senate Judiciary Committee’s ranking Democrat, Dianne Feinstein of California, taking issue with her statements that Barrett’s worldview seems strongly driven by “dogma.”

“Your concern, as you expressed it, is that ‘dogma lives loudly in [Professor Barrett], and that is a concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for years in this country,'” Jenkins wrote. “I am one in whose heart ‘dogma lives loudly,’ as it has for centuries in the lives of many Americans, some of whom have given their lives in service to this nation. Indeed, it lived loudly in the hearts of those who founded our nation as one where citizens could practice their faith freely and without apology.”

Look, this is truly nothing new in terms of today’s Demorats. Religion, with the exception of Islam, means nothing. Perhaps less than nothing, rolling over to subjugation and oppression.

If only Leftists would focus their critical eyes inwards.

Demorats fear the law. They only wish new interpretations and not decisions based but upon precedent.

BZ

 

The ultimate DC political truth finally revealed

This may be the most important post I’ll write the rest of the year.

And trust me, it is the Underlying Truth that essentially drives ALL of DC, no matter the issue, no matter the party.

I should note, however, that the GOP is particularly sensitive to this as they still want to be loved more than do the Demorats.

I found someone with the balls to state the Politically Obvious when I began researching the decision made by Jeff Sessions not to prosecute Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Let’s listen.

As Judge Andrew Napolitano stated,

“It’s an institutional culture in government. We don’t want to go after our predecessors because we don’t want our successors to come after us.”

And now you know the central theme in DC decision-making, at least predominantly on the side of the Republicans.

You may apply this to every situation in which you ask the question “so why was nothing done and why is no one accountable in DC for anything at any time?”

You can thank Judge Andrew Napolitano for providing the obvious answer.

Many of us intuited this; now there is no question.

“Drain the swamp”?

Now you know why that will never happen.

BZ

 

The obvious: Nancy Pelosi exhibits aberrant behavior — dementia?

No one will say it but I believe, given her displays the past year or so, that Demorat Nancy Pelosi is exhibiting symptoms of Alzheimers or an Alzheimers-like disease.

Please note the video.

Then please note this video.

And this.

And this as well.

We recall, of course, that the American Media Maggots excoriated President Reagan towards the end of his presidency, yet they are strangely silent when it concerns Nancy Pelosi’s bizarre behavior. We know the reason.

The question becomes this: is it why Demorats are now attempting to get Nancy Pelosi to move aside and “move on” from politics?

BZ