Cheeto's lies about the federal response to Hurricane Helene: does he believe the response was too little or too much?

From CNN -

Fact check: Six days of Trump lies about the Hurricane Helene response

Former President Donald Trump has delivered a barrage of lies and distortions about the federal response to Hurricane Helene.

While various misinformation about the response has spread widely without Trump’s involvement, the Republican presidential nominee has been one of the country’s leading deceivers on the subject. Over a span of six days, in public comments and social media posts, Trump has used his powerful megaphone to endorse or invent false or unsubstantiated claims.

[snip]

Monday: Trump falsely claims Biden hasn’t answered calls from Georgia’s governor

[snip]

Monday: Trump cites baseless ‘reports’ about anti-Republican bias in the North Carolina response

[snip]

Thursday: Trump falsely claims the Biden-Harris response had received ‘universally’ negative reviews

[snip]

Thursday: Trump falsely claims Harris spent ‘all her FEMA money’ on housing illegal migrants

[snip]

Friday: Trump falsely claims $1 billion was ‘stolen’ from FEMA for migrants and has gone ‘missing’

[snip]

Saturday: Trump falsely claims the federal government is only giving $750 to people who lost their homes

[snip]

Saturday: Trump falsely claims there are ‘no helicopters, no rescue’ in North Carolina 

To be fair to Cheeto,, he's got a history of believing that a minimal response to natural disasters is a good response.

From NBCNews, dated 10/8/2017 -

Trump Defends Throwing Paper Towels to Hurricane Survivors in Puerto Rico

President Donald Trump defended throwing paper towels into a crowd of Puerto Ricans at a relief center in the hurricane-ravaged territory earlier this week and lauded federal relief efforts.

“They had these beautiful, soft towels. Very good towels,” Trump told Mike Huckabee during an interview Saturday with Christian network Trinity Broadcasting.

[start sarcasm]

Cheeto would *never* criticize people who are less soulless than him, right?

[/end sarcasm}

Q: What do you call a lawmaker who's actually a scofflaw? A: Justine Wadsack

Hat tip to AZ PBS' Horizon for the head's up on this.

I don't normally cover stuff in Pima County here, mostly leaving that to the writers at Blog for Arizona.  They know the area and its players far better than I do.

However, this involves a sitting state legislator, which is kind of in my wheelhouse. :)

From the Tucson Sentinel, written by Dylan Smith -

Sen. Justine Wadsack claims 'political persecution' over Tucson 

criminal speeding ticket

Clocked driving twice the legal limit; Southern Az Republican's citation 

delayed by legislative immunity during session

Arizona Sen. Justine Wadsack, a Tucson-area Republican, is claiming "political persecution" over a criminal speeding ticket dating from a March incident 

that police allege saw her driving her Tesla down Speedway at more than 70 mph.

Wadsack was pulled over on Friday, March 15, just after 10 p.m., after being 

observed "traveling at a high rate of speed" heading east on Speedway near North Euclid Avenue by a Tucson police officer on DUI patrol, according to a TPD report.

According to Tucson police, Wadsack was clocked going more than twice 

the legal limit: 71 mph in a 35 mph zone.

[snip]

Wadsack was not cited at the time, as her immediate introduction of 

herself as "Senator Justine Wadsack" resulted in the officer contacting 

his superiors. 

I've got three pieces of advice for Sen. Wadsack:

1. Don't speed.

2. Pay the fine and take the points.  You earned 'em.

3. Quit whining.

The indicted Sen. Anthony Kern (R-Christian Taliban) isn't shy

Generally speaking, people who are under indictment don't publicly associate with convicted felons, but State Sen, Anthony Kern is "special."

From the AZ Republic via MSN, written by Laurie Roberts -

Arizona senator puts ignorance on display with stunning call to put Jesus in government

Surprising to see Sen. Anthony Kern coming out today for Donald Trump’s Town Hall in Phoenix.

Kern, as you may recall, is Arizona’s speaking-in-tongues state senator, the indicted fake elector who wants the Ten Commandments posted on classroom walls.

His Ten Commandments bill, SB1151, was vetoed by the governor.

He may like the Ten Commandments, but they include a rule against lying.  Which is interesting, since that was what he was indicted for.

Even though he considers lying to be wrong...under specific circumstances.  His SB1144, which added to those circumstances, passed the Senate but was never heard in the House. 

Of course, the reason he was on stage because of his very public fealty to Cheeto.  

His SB1475, proposed by him but never even considered in the Senate.  It specified that someone convicted under criminal law or found liable under civil law could still be a candidate for POTUS.

It seems prescient, almost as if he *knew* that Cheeto would become a convicted felon and someone who was found to be liable for sexual assault.

Is being utterly venal a prerequisite for being elected to the lege from N. Scottsdale/Fountain Hills?

That legislative district (LD3), like all LDs, elects three people to the state legislature, one state senator and two state representatives.

LD3 has sent Reps. Alexander Kolodin and Joe Chaplik and Sen. John Kavanagh to the state legislature.

Kolodin is an attorney, with an attorney's regard for the truth.

Kavanagh is a retired police officer with a PO's regard for the Constitution.

Chaplik was a rather unremarkable ideologue.  

Until this week.

Not he's catapulted right past Kolodin and into Kavanagh territory.  Kavanagh may still be the most craven member of the lege, but now part of his competition for that title is from his own LD.

From AZMirror, written by Jerod MacDonald-Evoy -

House Ethics Committee drops complaint against GOP Rep accused of signature fraud

An ethics complaint filed against Republican state Rep. Austin Smith, after he was accused of petition signature fraud, was dropped by the House Ethics Committee Friday. 

Smith dropped his reelection bid last month after he was accused of personally forging more than 100 petition signatures to get on the 2024 ballot. Now the lawmaker is facing a possible criminal investigation after state election officials forwarded his petition signatures to the Arizona Attorney General’s Office. 

Chaplik is the chair of the House Ethics Committee and while they have dropped consideration of the complaint against Smith for his (alleged) crime, he and they are continuing to look into the complaint lodged against Democratic State  Representatives Analise Ortiz and Oscar De Los Santos, who are accused of, wait for it, making Rs feel bad about themselves for their support of Arizona's pre-statehood near-total ban on abortion.

The House Ethics Committee is known for giving a free pass to Republican members, no matter how heinous their words or (alleged) crimes.

Note: The now-former member of the lege mentioned in the article, David Stringer, is running for County Attorney in Yavapai County.  Apparently, his campaign is utterly self-financed - 

It seems that Chaplik (and the other R members) feel that bringing disrepute to the body is acceptable...if the one behaving badly is a Republican.

He/they also believe that the bad behavior by a Republican shouldn't be criticized...if the one doing the criticizing is a Democrat.

AZ Republicans show their true colors

From The Guardian (UK) -

Arizona Republicans block abortion-ban repeal after denouncing court ruling

Republicans in Arizona halted an effort by Democrats on Wednesday to repeal an 1864 law banning almost all abortions, which the state supreme court this week ruled could go into effect.

The move came after Republican lawmakers in the state had denounced the court’s decision, including some who previously expressed support for the law. Donald Trump and other high-profile Republicans, such as the Senate candidate Kari Lake, had also declared their opposition to the ruling with Lake urging lawmakers to “come up with an immediate commonsense solution that Arizonans can support”.

[snip]

Some Republicans in the state had, surprisingly, come out against the court’s decision. “This decision cannot stand,” Matt Gress, a Republican state representative, said. “I categorically reject rolling back the clock to a time when slavery was still legal and we could lock up women and doctors because of an abortion.”

Gress had tried to bring forth a bill to repeal the ban but then voted with other Republicans to move to recess.

The move to adjourn was MIS005.

It passed by one vote

.

That vote -

I don't think that there was any real doubt that the adjournment motion was going to pass.  Nope, the only real question about this was whether the grifters lobbyists at the Center for Arizona Policy (CAP) were busy tugging on the leash that runs between them and the Rs in the AZ legislature or if they spent their time rubbing their hands together gleefully.

My guess is that it wasn't the leash, and I have two reasons for believing that:

1. The AZ legislature doesn't need any prompting to come to CAP's heel.

2. CAP does seem rather gleeful.

Dear Cheeto: People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones

I'm not a fan of the "open letter" format, but as I'm never going to meet Cheeto (at least, I hope not), so I'm going with it here.  Maybe someone in his circle will read it to him.

Dear Cheeto,

First from AP -

Donald Trump assails judge and his daughter after gag order in New York hush-money criminal case

Donald Trump lashed out Wednesday at the New York judge who put him under a gag order ahead of his April 15 hush-money criminal trial, making a fallacious claim about his daughter and urging him to step aside from the case.

In a social media post, the former president suggested without evidence that Judge Juan M. Merchan was kowtowing to his daughter’s interests as a Democratic political consultant. He also made a claim — later repudiated by court officials — that she had posted a social media photo showing Trump behind bars.

Ummm...two points here -

1. Don't involve family.  Even if the target of your bile  treats you fairly (and I expect that this one will), it'll tick off a lot of other people. .Even some of folks who support you might lower their opinions of you (OK - probably not.  They're thoroughly besotted.  But some undecided voters...)

2. If you're going to criticize someone else's children, yours better be better.  They're not.  Not even close.

Me

Legislative schedule - week starting 2/25/2024 Part 2

Because I was caught up in doing something else this week, this post will be done in two parts.  Part one covers Monday and Tuesday while part two (this one) covers Wednesday and Thursday. 

Note: HHR refers to a hearing room in the House building; SHR refers to one in the Senate building.

Note2: Generally, I'll only specify bills that look to spread propaganda.  Other bills may be more conventionally bad (think: corrupt or other misuses of public monies and/or authority).  My recommendation is that if an agenda covers an area of interest to you, read the entire agenda.

Note3: Each chamber's respective Rules Committee meets on Monday, the House's in HHR4 at 1 p.m. and the Senate's in Senate Caucus Room 1, also at 1 p.m.  Both committees serve as rubber stamps for bills leadership wants to be advanced and gatekeepers for measures that leadership wants stopped.

Note4: Meeting start times may be listed, but are flexible.  Before journeying to the Capitol or viewing the meeting online, verify the start time.

Note5: Watch for strikers, or strike everything amendments.  Those involve inserting language that replaces the entirety of a bill.  Those can be introduced at any time and can make a previously harmless bill into a very bad one.

On Wednesday, 2/28 

-

House Judiciary meets at 9 a.m. in HHR4.  On the agenda: nine bills, including SB1007, making it a class 5 felony for an employee or contractor of a public school or library to refer a minor to any material considered to be sexually explicit or to facilitate access to the same.  There are some other very bad bills on this agenda, too.

Senate Government meets at 9 or 9:30 a.m.(there's some discrepancy) in SHR1.  On the agenda: six bills.

House Government meets at 10 a.m.in HHR3.  On the agenda: four bills, at least three of which are pure propaganda.

House Ways & Means meets at 10 a.m. in HHR1.  On the agenda: five bills, including some that reduce revenues.

House Appropriations meets at 2 p.m. in HHR1.  On the agenda: two bills including SCR1020, a proposed amendment to the state's constitution to would continue the previous year's general appropriations bill (budget bill) if no new budget bill has been enacted by the start of the new fiscal year.  If this passes at the ballot box, we should then delete the section of the state constitution creating the legislature;  a budget is the only real reason for the lege to exist.

House Municipal Oversight & Elections meets at 2 p.m. in HHR4.  On the agenda: five bills, four of which are propaganda from the school of  "Republicans have lost the last couple of elections and boy, are we PISSED."

Senate Education meets at 2 p.m. in SHR1.  On the agenda: six bills, including HB2178, a proposal to have university students decide to bar their tuition and fees from going to support organizations of which they don't approve.

House Government is scheduled to meet again upon the adjournment of the previous House Government.  The picture says "5 p.m." but I expect the meeting to take place far earlier that.  On the agenda: one bill.

On Thursday, 2/29 

-

Senate Judiciary meets at 2:30 p.m.in SHR1 (originally scheduled for 9 a.m., it's been moved a couple of times and serves as a reminder to keep an eye on meeting times.)  On the agenda: appointments to a couple of different judicial commissions and one bill.

Senate Natural Resources, Energy and Water meets at 1 p.m.in SHR2.  On the agenda:  a presentation and 13 bills.  The bills read as if they were written by an industry lobbyist.

The Maricopa County Attorney says that any prosecutors who charge Cheeto are "soft on crime"

I say people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

From AP -

Republican prosecutor in Arizona takes swipe at New York district attorney prosecuting Trump

The Republican prosecutor of Arizona’s most populous county took a thinly veiled swipe at a Democratic counterpart in the East on Wednesday, saying she would not agree to extradition of a suspect in the death of a woman who was fatally bludgeoned in a New York City hotel room, and that he should be tried first in Arizona for stabbing two women here.

Raad Almansoori, 26, is being held without bond while Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell’s office decides how to charge him in connection with the stabbing of two women in the county in recent days, Mitchell said at a news conference. Those two women survived.

“Having observed the treatment of violent criminals in the New York area by Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg, I think it’s safer to keep him here and keep him in custody,” said Mitchell, referring to the prosecutor who brought the high-profile case against former President Donald Trump alleging that hush money was paid during his 2016 campaign to cover up an affair.

In Maricopa County Superior Court, Almansoori's case number is CR2024-108082-001.  This is not his first encounter with the justice system.

Mitchell absolutely *hates* violent criminals...unless they're well-connected.

From KJZZ, written by Matthew Casey, dated 2/9 -

Maricopa County attorney didn't charge former prisons director with aggravated assault. Here's why

After an armed standoff with police at his Tempe home, the former director of the state Department of Corrections was not charged with aggravated assault.

The Maricopa County attorney has kept a promise to explain that decision.

Tempe police said Charles Ryan pointed a gun at officers during a standoff at his home in 2022.

[snip]

Mitchell decided, based on a trove of body camera footage, Ryan’s medical records, and talks with Tempe police leaders, that prosecutors could not prove Ryan intended to make officers fear for their lives.

Ryan pleaded no contest to a gun charge, which prosecutors wanted labeled a felony.

In Maricopa County Superior Court, Ryan's case number was CR2022-001491-001.

Mitchell has a history of carrying Cheeto's water.

From PBS, dated 10/1/2018 -

Prosecutor Rachel Mitchell says she wouldn’t charge Kavanaugh

The sex crimes prosecutor who questioned a California women accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault is explaining why she would not bring criminal charges against the Supreme Court nominee.

Rachel Mitchell writes in a new memo sent to Senate Republicans that she does not believe a “reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee.”

Mitchell is a Phoenix-based sex crimes prosecutor Republicans hired to question Christine Blasey Ford about her claims against Kavanaugh during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing last week. Mitchell argues that that there are inconsistencies in Ford’s narrative and says no one has corroborated her account.

So...do they teach shameless hypocrisy in law school or was that already part of Mitchell's personality before her training?

AZGOP chair Dewit tries to get candidate Lake to go away, gets caught, resigns

Evidently, DeWit is the one going away.

From KNXV (emphasis added by me)- 

Arizona GOP head Jeff DeWit stepping down after leaked audio tapes

DeWit accuses Kari Lake of orchestrating the tapes to take control over the state party

The head of the Arizona GOP is stepping down after audio tapes with U.S. Senate candidate Kari Lake were released, where he reportedly offered Lake money to stay out of this year's senate race to focus on running for governor.

Chairman Jeff DeWit released a statement Wednesday where he adamantly denied Lake's accusation, but he also announced his resignation in the statement.

Trying to have it both ways?

That's *so* Republican.

As a Democrat, I have two things to say about this -

1. I don't want Kari Lake to go away; I think that she's a drag on their entire ticket.

2. I absolutely love the shitshow that the AZGOP has become; it's popcorn-riffic.

Hypocrisy is bad, but violence is worse, so *no*, Brigitte Ziegler shouldn't resign her position

She's part of a school board there, and yes, she's a hypocrite, but, IMO, that's not enough.

That may be the idealist part of me speaking.

On the other hand, her husband, Christian Ziegler, (allegedly) committed rape.  He shouldn't resign as head of the Florida GOP, but that's just the partisan hack part of me speaking.

From Business Insider -

How Moms for Liberty co-founder Bridget Ziegler, a supporter of 'parental rights' in schools, got caught in a sex scandal that may push her to resign from a school board

Hypocrisy will do it every time.

Bridget Ziegler, a co-founder of the rightwing Moms for Liberty group, knows that better than most.

She and her husband, Christian, are embroiled in a sex scandal that is costing them their positions in local Florida politics, as well as their moral high ground with the religious right, Business Insider previously reported.

Do I think that she's a hypocrite?  Yes.

On the other hand, I firmly believe that what happens between freely consenting adults in their business and only their business, but one shouldn't be privately something that one gets their hate on for publicly.

Got some advice for her -

1. Don't resign.  Unless you were involved in the violence.

2. Divorce the schmuck.  Best case scenario: he cheated.  Worst case scenario:  he's violent.  Either way: easy case for even a moderately competent divorce attorney.

3. Don't be a hypocrite.  This is a big one.

4. Don't ever run for any office again.  Ever.  You will get hammered on this.

Got some advice for him, too -

1. Hire a good defense lawyer.  This doesn't seem to be a best case scenario for the victim, your wife, or you.

Kari Lake may be saying good things trying to make nice with the folks she trashed last year. Her actions suggest that she hasn't really changed.

First up: The federal committee update.

It's official - failed AG candidate Abe Hamadeh is in the CD8 R primary.  He's formed a committee with the FEC.

Next: Kari Lake may be saying the right things, but she seems to be proving that when someone's words tell one story and their actions tell a different story.

The actions?

Working with another election denier.

From the FEC (emphasis added by me) -

Cynic that I am, I'm not sure that being seen as anti-democracy hurts her with the R base.

On the other hand, being seen as a liar may not help her.

The MAGA crowd has a new dance-the hypocritical two step: Cheeto wants to overturn the Constitution while claiming it protects him

Pointed at this by Taegan Goddard's Political Wire.

From PBS -

Trump argues First Amendment protects him from ‘insurrection’ cases aimed at keeping him off 2024 ballots

Attorneys for former President Donald Trump argue that an attempt to bar him from the 2024 ballot under a rarely used “insurrection” clause of the Constitution should be dismissed as a violation of his freedom of speech.

The lawyers made the argument in a filing posted Monday by a Colorado court in the most significant of a series of challenges to Trump’s candidacy under the Civil War-era clause in the 14th Amendment. The challenges rest on Trump’s attempts to overturn his 2020 loss to Democrat Joe Biden and his role leading up to the violent Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Hmmmmm............

Certain things may not be related, but they reek of being related.  Of course, with trumpkin Rs involved, "reek" might be the right word.

From AP -

In rowdy scene, House censures Rep. Adam Schiff over Trump-Russia investigations

    The House voted Wednesday to censure California Rep. Adam Schiff for 

comments he made several years ago about investigations into Donald Trump’s 

ties to Russia, rebuking the Democrat and frequent critic of the former president 

along party lines.

    Schiff becomes the 25th House lawmaker to be censured. He was defiant ahead 

of the vote, saying he will wear the formal disapproval as a “badge of honor” and 

charging his GOP colleagues of doing the former president’s bidding.

“I will not yield,” Schiff, who is running for the Senate in his home state, said 

during debate over the measure. “Not one inch.”

Yet the censure by the Rs in the House came on the same day as this.

From The Daily Beast -

Adam Schiff Gets John Durham to Admit Russia Helped Trump

When Republicans brought Special Counsel John Durham to the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, they thought it’d be an opportunity to score points on Democrats—particularly Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), who spent years hyping up Donald Trump’s connections to Russia.

What they got instead was a viral moment when Schiff got Durham—the man tasked with concluding whether the FBI’s investigation of Russia’s connections to the 2016 Trump campaign was appropriate—took Durham to task.

Schiff, a former impeachment manager against Trump, questioned Durham about whether President Trump flaunted information that was released by Russian hackers during the 2016 election. Durham repeatedly insisted he had no knowledge of the matter. But in the midst of the exchange, Durham clearly stated he doesn’t doubt the validity of evidence showing Russia was trying to help Trump—something many Republicans have vehemently denied.

It really looks as if Schiff's real offense was to publicly criticize their Dear Leader.

Tender sensibilities and hypocrisy: a primer on the behavior of the legislative majority

First, the Rs in the House tried to expel Rep. Stephanie Stahl-Hamilton, a Democrat and an ordained minister and, failing at that, censured her instead.  Her offense, something that so ruffled the feathers of the Rs?

She hid some Bibles.

From KJZZ, written by Ben Giles [clarification/correction added by me] -

AZ Republicans try to and fail to expel Democratic lawmaker over Bible prank

Arizona House Republicans tried, but failed, to expel a Democratic lawmaker who admitted to a Bible-hiding prank caught on hidden camera.

Instead, GOP representatives could only muster a 30-28 vote to censure Rep. Stephanie Stahl Hamilton on Tuesday.

Stahl Hamilton, a Tucson Democrat and ordained Presbyterian minister, has never disputed the facts of the matter — on three separate occasions, swiping Bibles from end tables in the Arizona House members’ lounge and hiding them under cushions, and in one instance, a nearby refrigerator. She has described her actions as a playful commentary on the separation of church and state and a protest against the weaponization of religion in politics.

But many Republicans were outraged by what they called the “desecration” of scripture — some commented that they may have unknowingly sat on the Bible when it was hidden under seat cushions.

“To do so is flagrantly offensive, and something the House needs to take seriously,” said Rep. Justin Heap, one of three Republicans who filed an ethics complaint against Stahl Hamilton over the incidents.

Heap, who voted for expulsion, said the matter “really comes down to a simple question: What do we as a body value more? The reputations of Arizona politicians or the reputation of God in the world?” 

The vote for MIS013, the motion to expel -

The vote for MIS014, the motion to censure -

Turns out that there is an explanation for the hurt feelings of Heap and the others.  

From the AZ Mirror, written by Jerod MacDonald-Evoy [emphasis added by me] -

Flag flown by extremists posted on AZ Senate security desk

A flag flown by extremists and Christian Nationalists that was quietly removed from a Senate security desk last session has been put back on display on a security desk out of public view, the Arizona Mirror has learned. 

The white flag with a pine tree on it and the phrase “An Appeal to Heaven” was originally used by George Washington and the Continental Army. It was later adopted by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts as its naval and maritime flag from 1776 until 1971, when it was replaced by a similar flag that did not include the phrase “An Appeal to Heaven.” 

.

.

.The Secular Coalition of Arizona sees the flag as a violation of the constitutional doctrine requiring a separation of church and state. 

“Though this was originally a revolutionary war flag, it’s been co-opted by white Christian nationalists, and was prevalent in DC on January 6th, 2021 To deny this is willful ignorance,” Secular Arizona Executive Director Jeanne Casteen said in a statement to the Mirror. “One’s governance should not be based on biblical principles or any other religious principles. The Constitution should guide one’s governance, and this flag is a signal that notifies people that any elected official who displays it will push evangelical extremism and the will of the few over what’s needed for the Common Good.”

.

.

.

The flag was seen carried by a number of individuals during the violent events of Jan. 6, 2021. The flag has also been heavily adopted by hate groups and other extremist groups. The flag is mainly popular with Christian Nationalists and Christian Dominionists. 

So does the R caucus in the Arizona Legislature qualify as a "hate group" or an "extremist group"?  Or both?

Either way, if someone were to send them copies of the Koran and Torah (and other books considered to be holy in faiths of Islam and Judaism), the Rs would just consider them to be fuel sources for their book burning party.

Shameless hypocrisy: Yet another thing to despise about the NRA

From NBC -

Marijuana users still barred from buying guns even in states where pot is legal, ATF warns

Users of marijuana remain barred from purchasing and possessing guns under a decades-old federal law, even as more and more states move to legalize recreational use of the drug, federal authorities warned this week.

Unless marijuana is legalized on a federal level, users of cannabis will continue to be prohibited from shipping, transporting, receiving or possessing firearms and ammunition, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, or ATF, said in a notice.

Yet...

From that bastion of progressive thought (OK, that's sarcasm.  If this magazine were any more conservative it would be owned by Rupert Murdoch) Reason Magazine, dated 4/2023 (emphasis added by me) -

The Drug Exception to the Second Amendment

.

.

.

...in light of the NRA's longstanding support for the federal bans on gun possession by illegal drug users and people convicted of drug-related felonies. The organization's enthusiasm for enforcing those restrictions illustrates a blind spot shared by many right-leaning critics of gun control, whose concerns about overcriminalization, law enforcement abuses, and violations of civil liberties usually do not extend to the war on drugs

Violent toward others?

The NRA will seek to protect you.

Light one up?

Not so much.