Liberty Guard
  • Projects
  • About
  • Leadership
  • Podcast
  • Blog
    • From The Desk of Bob Barr
    • Liberty Updates
    • Media Appearances
    • All Articles
  • Videos
  • Contact
  • Join
DONATE
Friday, May 9, 2025
Liberty Guard
  • Projects
  • About
  • Leadership
  • Podcast
  • Blog
    • From The Desk of Bob Barr
    • Liberty Updates
    • Media Appearances
    • All Articles
  • Videos
  • Contact
  • Join
DONATE
Liberty Guard
Liberty Guard
  • Projects
  • About
  • Leadership
  • Podcast
  • Blog
    • From The Desk of Bob Barr
    • Liberty Updates
    • Media Appearances
    • All Articles
  • Videos
  • Contact
  • Join
Category:

Blog

BlogFrom the Desk of Bob Barr

Please . . . Not Another “No Fly” List

by lgadmin February 9, 2022
written by lgadmin

Townhall

by Bob Barr

I love Delta Airlines. It is my true hometown airline and I fly it regularly. If any passenger were to act in a way that endangers the flight, the crew, or other passengers, that person should be held accountable by Delta and by federal law if circumstances warrant. But, please, let’s not create another “No Fly” list.

Currently, the FBI maintains a classified “terror watchlist” containing the names and information for thousands of individuals the government believes pose a potential terror threat.

There is the TSA’s “No-Fly List” that determines who is allowed to board a commercial airplane. The agency also maintains a Secondary Security Screening Selection (SSSS) list that assigns certain passengers for additional screening.

It is no secret that the federal government already maintains a number of “lists” that serve to prevent individuals whose names appear thereon from engaging in what otherwise would be constitutionally guaranteed activities, such as purchasing a firearm or travelling interstate (yes, this has been held by the Supreme Court to be a protected right). We simply do not need another list.

Not that long ago, the private sector maintained a healthy suspicion of government power, and its potential for abuse. The 9/11 terror attacks changed this dynamic significantly, with the private sector cooperating increasingly (and occasionally, unlawfully) with federal officials to achieve the shared goal of keeping America safe.

Today, however, the mentality that the public and private sectors are “partners” is commonplace, and often has less to do with the original intent of preventing terror attacks, and more to do with enlisting Uncle Sam and his federal agents to help private companies do their job (and vice versa).

In fact, running to the feds seems increasingly the default position of private sector leaders faced with policing behavior they find objectionable. Last October, for example, the National School Boards Association begged the Department of Justice to help it control angry parents who were showing up at school board meetings and voicing their objections to policies that affected their children.

In the ongoing COVID pandemic, social media companies use the federal government’s “facts” as unquestionable justification for banning users of their platforms.

Commercial air carriers such as Delta are right to be concerned about the rise in unruly, and at times violent behavior in airplane cabins as well as at airports. The behaviors with which airlines are concerned are but one manifestation of a deeply disturbing trend throughout many sectors of contemporary society, from schools to retail businesses, where disruptive behavior has become a first response to any real or perceived disagreement or “disrespect.”

Commercial air travel is a highly regulated industry, and its leaders must answer to several federal agencies, including the Transportation Department, the Federal Aviation Administration, and the Department of Justice. It is, therefore, important that airlines, including Delta, maintain a close and cooperative relationship with the feds, and to refer cases for federal prosecution whenever facts and circumstances warrant.

Delta and other commercial airline companies have every right to take steps necessary to prevent passengers from using their services if they engage in unruly or unlawful behavior. Airlines can even ban passengers from further flights if they present a real and continuing threat to airline safety.

Airlines must continue to be permitted to exercise broad powers to police passenger behavior, but creating an industry-wide, government-maintained list of “bad” passengers is not necessary, and itself raises serious constitutional issues.

Although sharing “banned-passenger” information between airlines may be considered by the airlines to be acceptable, mandating that every carrier enforce every other carrier’s bans, adds another constitutional wrinkle to the equation, and might itself run afoul of existing federal laws such as those preventing industry collusion.

Moreover, if either the airlines or the administration believes that existing air travel laws need to be in some way strengthened, they have every opportunity to make their case to the Congress. In fact, if the industry truly believes such legislative action is necessary to make the skies safer, they have a responsibility to do ask the Congress to act.

But going down the road of creating another “No Fly List” is neither a good nor a necessary option. It is one that the American people, and particularly those millions who travel regularly by air, should vigorously oppose.

Bob Barr represented Georgia’s Seventh District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003. He served as the United States Attorney in Atlanta from 1986 to 1990 and was an official with the CIA in the 1970s. He now practices law in Atlanta, Georgia and serves as head of Liberty Guard.

February 9, 2022 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BlogFrom the Desk of Bob Barr

Biden On Guns – Platitudes, Money, Bureaucracy And Constitutional Gibberish

by lgadmin February 7, 2022
written by lgadmin

Daily Caller

by Bob Barr

President Joe Biden left the safe confines of the Oval Office last week to visit New York City, which is suffering under a massive rise in major crimes — two young police officers were murdered there just days before.

Rather than use the visit to highlight real, workable solutions to rising crime rates in New York and other major American cities, the president spent the day calling for – no surprise here, folks – more gun control.

While in the Big Apple, Biden called for more taxpayer dollars and new bureaucracies to curb the one factor he apparently considers to be at the root of rising violent crime rates everywhere – too many guns. He asked the Congress to pass legislation establishing, among other liberal shibboleths, “universal background checks” and a ban on “assault weapons and high capacity magazines.”

Not once in his remarks did the president ask New York to do the one thing that has proven in the past to curb gun crimes – aggressive use of existing federal laws.

For example, were Biden interested in true, bipartisan solutions rather than simply playing to the liberal gun-control wing of his party, he could have announced a reaffirmation of “Project Exile,” a program first implemented in 1997 by a Republican Virginia Governor, George Allen, and the U.S. Department of Justice under a Democratic President, Bill Clinton.

Project Exile, which actually remains in operation in a limited number of cities even today, began as a highly-publicized initiative in early 1997 in Richmond, Virginia, which was experiencing a significant surge in firearms crimes. In response, federal and state prosecutors announced that serious firearms offenses in the city would be prosecuted not by local district attorneys, but by federal prosecutors using existing federal gun laws to “exile” those found guilty to federal prison under mandatory minimum sentences not available under state law. The project saw major success in reducing Richmond’s violent crime wave and was replicated in other cities (as of late 2019 the program still was in use in Rochester, New York, for example).

Instead of highlighting workable, cooperative programs such as Project Exile, Biden spent his time at the presidential bully pulpit calling for more gun control. Even in this regard, however, Biden exhibited the tone deafness that has become a hallmark of his first year in office; in this instance, calling for Congress to pass legislation mandating “universal background checks” for all gun sales but failing to connect the dots in his own speech. If he had done so, he would have realized that the criminal who just recently murdered two NYPD officers did so with a stolen handgun, which would not have been prevented by any “universal background check” system.

Money, of course, figured prominently in his speech. $300 million for “community policing,” another $200 million for “community violence intervention programs” (whatever those are), a bigger budget for ATF, a new “initiative” (read, “bureaucracy”) to go after “ghost guns” and the list went on.

Biden also announced the obvious – that ATF will “shut down rogue gun dealers,” which, if the president means taking steps to put firearms retailers out of business if they violate federal laws regulating gun sales, ATF has always had the authority to do.

Nonsensical statements were the bookends to Biden’s speech. First, he called the Glock handgun that was used to murder the two NYPD officers a “weapon of war.” No commercially available handgun, even with an extended capacity magazine, is reasonably considered to be a “weapon of war,” but using the term fits the narrative if not the facts.

Then, towards the end of his remarks, the president angrily declared that the Second Amendment “is not absolute,” as if he had just discovered a brand new constitutional principle.

The fact is that no court of record, including the United States Supreme Court, has ever held that absolutely no constraints could ever be placed on the exercise of the Second Amendment’s guarantee of the “right to keep and bear arms.”

Stating that the “Second Amendment is not absolute,” however, has become the latest liberal catchphrase to justify significant and almost always unconstitutional limitations on the exercise of this fundamental right. Beware of the phrase; we are going to hear it repeated frequently over the next three years.

Bob Barr represented Georgia’s Seventh District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003. He served as the United States Attorney in Atlanta from 1986 to 1990 and was an official with the CIA in the 1970s. He now practices law in Atlanta, Georgia and serves as head of Liberty Guard.

February 7, 2022 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BlogFrom the Desk of Bob Barr

Will the U.S. Avoid an “Avoidable War” in Ukraine?

by lgadmin February 2, 2022
written by lgadmin

Townhall

by Bob Barr

“Advantage Putin. No, advantage Biden. Clearly a stalemate.” The debate goes on and on in Washington, Moscow, Berlin, and elsewhere, in anticipation of an armed conflict between the former Soviet vassal state of Ukraine and its erstwhile mother state of Russia.

The “fog of war” is becoming denser with each passing day, even though no shot has yet been fired.

Assuredly, many people will die if there is in fact a war between Russia and Ukraine, although this “human factor” figures little in public policy debates. Of far greater interest to world leaders are the economic and geopolitical consequences of a potential war.

Ukraine occupies a position of some geographic and economic importance to Russia and to Europe (especially Germany). And, while not a member of NATO, Ukraine is a friend and ally to the organization and to its most important member – the United States.

Considering the stakes involved, it would be reasonable to presume that President Biden would be doing everything possible to avoid an armed conflict.

However, aside from Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s sincere and well-intentioned efforts to keep matters in that region on a diplomatic track, others in the Administration and on Capitol Hill, including Biden himself, appear hell-bent to push the situation towards a military resolution.

In recent days, Biden has pressed the issue directly in a phone call with his Ukrainian counterpart. Biden also has ordered U.S. troops in the region placed on high alert, and accelerated shipments of American military materiel to Ukraine.

What precisely is the vital national security interest that would justify direct or even heavy indirect U.S. military involvement in Ukraine, has never been clearly enunciated. Protecting the “freedom” of Ukrainian citizens and helping to ensure the survival of their “democracy,” while laudable goals, are hardly legitimate bases for U.S. military action, especially when confronting a major nuclear power and long-time adversary.

Brushing away all the dust on this Russia-Ukraine chessboard makes clear that the United States is faced with what retired U.S. Air Force Brig. Gen. Blaine D. Holt recently called, “an avoidable war.”

Putin may be a wily chess player, but his goals in the current Ukraine crisis are not particularly difficult to discern. Among other things, Putin seeks (as always) to prove his machismo (in this he is at least more open than other world leaders who pretend they are not doing the same thing).

Far more important, however, is Moscow’s tangible goals of preventing a NATO coalition member directly on Russia’s southwestern border. Equally important to Moscow is securing a “land bridge” from its territory north and east of Ukraine, through the largely pro-Russia “Donbas” region of Ukraine to Crimea and the Black Sea port of Sevastopol (which already is under Russian control).

U.S. foreign intelligence has a regrettable history, dating to Cold War era, of overestimating Russian military might, and we seem to be falling into the same trap today.

Despite his bluster and show of military force, Putin is playing with a relatively weak hand. Russia’s armed forces are good but not top-notch, although they far surpass Ukraine’s troop strength and armaments.

Important also is the fact that Russia’s economy is highly dependent on oil and natural gas exports, both of which would be severely disrupted by a war. Moreover, U.S.-led global financial sanctions would hit Russian oligarchs in their wallets, where it hurts; and this is the one group Putin must keep happy to remain in power.

America’s ignominious withdrawal from Afghanistan last summer has fueled the notion, undoubtedly shared by Putin, that the United States is weak. This perception, accurate or not, is dangerous, especially if Biden presses the “military button” as a way to prove otherwise, or as a means to shift attention away from his own corrupt dealings with Ukraine before he ascended to the presidency.

The bottom line is that Russia cannot really afford a war, especially one that likely would result in crippling economic sanctions, and likely lead to years of guerilla opposition from Ukrainian freedom fighters.

For the U.S. and Europe, there is little if any need to become involved militarily, considering there still are non-military moves to be played; options that allow Putin to save face, accomplish some of what he desires, and keep NATO whole (at least for now).

The ultimate loser if this “avoidable war” is not avoided, will be the unfortunate “fall guy” – Ukraine.

Bob Barr represented Georgia’s Seventh District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003. He served as the United States Attorney in Atlanta from 1986 to 1990 and was an official with the CIA in the 1970s. He now practices law in Atlanta, Georgia and serves as head of Liberty Guard.

February 2, 2022 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BlogFrom the Desk of Bob Barr

Buttigieg Goes All-In For Speed Cameras

by lgadmin February 1, 2022
written by lgadmin

Daily Caller

by Bob Barr

Any American driver who might occasionally like to put “pedal to the metal” on one of our nation’s many roadways had better take notice of provisions in the “infrastructure” bill signed into law recently by President Joe Biden.

In particular, freedom-loving motorists had best be aware of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg’s just unveiled Master Plan to pursue a target of “zero deaths” on America’s roadways. A key component of his plan is to blanket those roadways with speed cameras – technology controlled by government supposed to achieve a lofty, though unattainable goal.

The plan is, of course, based on the false premise that the Constitution provides the authority for the federal government to embark on a massive spending and control spree to eradicate all driving-related deaths on roadways across the nation, but who is going to nitpick constitutional principles when it comes to “saving lives?” Certainly not Buttigieg, or apparently anyone else in the Biden administration.

Another speed bump standing in Buttigieg’s way is that several states already outlaw speed cameras, and for good reason. In addition to their questionable safety benefits (some studies suggest they make roadways more rather than less dangerous), control and enforcement of such networks is often outsourced to non-government entities — companies that profit from each ticket sent out. These private companies do not have to worry directly about pesky due process, privacy and other constitutional rights that might stand in the way.

As for achieving traffic death “equity,” while Buttigieg argues speed cameras remove “racial profiling” from policing, he ignores studies that show speed cameras disproportionately hurt poor and minority citizens – a fact even Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot admitted.

It is unlikely that few, if any, of the 32 Republican members of Congress who voted for the massive, $1.2 trillion “infrastructure” bill bothered to read its myriad provisions or, making matters worse, considered the consequences of giving Uncle Sam money and power to do essentially whatever Washington desires to make U.S. roadways “safe.”

The obsession with “safety” and the fear of not falling in line appears to have blinded lawmakers to even basic, common sense concerns about what is constitutional or in the best interests of citizens.

Buttigieg’s just-released plan to federalize virtually all vehicle travel on U.S. roadways brought to my mind a visit I made to the United Kingdom in the late 1990s while a Member of Congress. When driving from London to Heathrow Airport, it was impossible to miss the endless string of automated speed cameras along the roadways. I distinctly recall commenting at the time to one of the other members traveling with me, “I’m glad we are living in the United States where a Constitution and a written Bill of Rights protect us against such abuse of power by the government.”

How times have changed.

It seems clear that Buttigieg intends to use the power he has been gifted in the “infrastructure” law to direct billions in federal highway funds to pet projects and left-wing interest groups as a way to prove his chops for a presidential run down the road. He knows that once those dollars start flowing recipient companies, states and local governments will do whatever they can to keep the spigot open.

So, with the “infrastructure” law laying the groundwork for such intrusive measures as shutting down cars being driven in a manner deemed “unsafe” by a government-designed algorithm and an interlocked national network of speed surveillance cameras, what might come next? Perhaps muting a vehicle’s audio system should the driver be listening to broadcasts the government believes to be “unsafe” or that conveys “misinformation,” such as a Joe Rogan’s podcast?

Stay tuned.

Bob Barr represented Georgia’s Seventh District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003. He served as the United States Attorney in Atlanta from 1986 to 1990 and was an official with the CIA in the 1970s. He now practices law in Atlanta, Georgia and serves as head of Liberty Guard.

 

February 1, 2022 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BlogFrom the Desk of Bob Barr

Seriously Reform the Olympic Games, Or Shut Them Down Altogether

by lgadmin January 26, 2022
written by lgadmin

Townhall

by Bob Barr

The “modern” Olympic Games are no longer “Olympic.” They have, in recent decades, become as much about politics and money as about individual athletic excellence. It is time to either change them dramatically or just end them altogether.

The 1968 “Black Power” fists by two American athletes as they stood on the dais while our national anthem was played, opened to door to use of the Olympic venue for making controversial political statements. The door was thrown wide open a dozen years later when, in 1980, the United States led a 66-nation boycott of the Summer Games because the Carter Administration was upset with the Soviet Union’s military incursions in Afghanistan. (The predecessor 1976 games suffered a smaller, but still significant, boycott for other, unrelated political reasons.)

It’s been largely downhill since then.

Perhaps it should not be shocking that the Olympics have gone the way of sports generally. The same alliance of money and politics that has made U.S. professional sports increasingly difficult to watch, is endemic to the games and its governing body, the International Olympic Committee (IOC). Television revenue is the fuel for modern Olympics, just as steroid abuse appears to fuel the bodies of many of its athletes.

The few weeks of each summer or winter competition have become so jam-packed with events as to make it nearly impossible to focus on the traditional “Olympic” events on which the Games historically were based. Regularly adding events like skateboarding may bring in a few younger viewers, but at the cost of further diluting the lasting significance of the Games.

The packed schedule makes coverage of events akin to riding in bumper cars, lurching from one stage to the next before the viewer knows what is taking place in the actual arena.

There is barely an effort made by U.S. networks to cover teams from other countries, which used to be one of the more interesting aspects of tuning in to the coverage. Were the 1980 “Miracle on Ice” hockey match between the underdog Americans and the highly favored Soviet team played today, it would likely be shown only as highlights cut-in to live coverage of the snowboard “half pipe.”

Outside of the arena, it is far worse. Countries already struggling economically are routinely scammed into picking up the tab for hosting the Olympics, with promises of tourism and long-term financial return that rarely, if ever materialize. And, when the games predictably come to illiberal countries like Russia and China, the latter of which is hosting this year’s Winter Games, the Olympics serve primarily as an open mic for their state propaganda.

For the sake of the future of the Games and the athletes, it is time to take the “games” out of the Olympics with a complete overhaul.

A good start would be to make Greece and Switzerland the permanent homes for the Summer and Winter Games, respectively. All participating nations would cover the costs of maintaining permanent facilities, and thereby remove much of the financial burden nations now assume in building new facilities every two years. An added bonus is that removing the “selection” process from the Games will knock the IOC’s ego down a few pegs.

Were Greece and Switzerland to agree to such an endeavor, it would remove much of the political gamesmanship that now so deeply permeates the Games. Moreover, both countries are, in general, liberal societies without track records of human rights abuse, civil liberties violations, and anti-Western governments – factors that have become recurring excuses for athletes and participating nations to further politicize the Games.

Significantly paring-back the number of competitions to those involving true athletic ability as opposed to the latest “athletic” fad, and requiring that athletes be allowed to compete only with others of their same “birth sex,” needs also to be part of these reforms.

If the IOC and its top supporting nations do not soon take corrective action in saving the games from being swallowed up by the same forces that have poisoned professional sports generally, the Olympics risk becoming just another narcissistic, over-commercialized and over-politicized event easy to ignore, on par with the NFL or the Oscars.

January 26, 2022 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BlogFrom the Desk of Bob Barr

Dueling Crossroads – The GOP and Donald Trump

by lgadmin January 19, 2022
written by lgadmin

Townhall

by Bob Barr

The Grand Old Party is at a major crossroads as it nears its 168th birthday. Former President Donald Trump is at a similar juncture as he nears his 76th. How these two traverse their intersecting crossroads will go a long way to determine whether Republicans will win major victories in this year’s congressional contests and whether they will recapture the White House in 2024.

At the moment, the disjointed and deteriorating relationship between Mr. Trump and some of the Party’s rising stars does not bode well for lasting GOP victories. This should not be the case.

Polling shows clearly that the American electorate is deeply frustrated and disappointed with the Biden presidency; to the extent even that voters are being pulled away from the Democrat Party and into the Republican orbit.

At the same time, a cadre of well-known and popular Republican governors are implementing positive public policies far more successfully than their Democrat counterparts.

In both houses of Congress, Republican leadership is successfully maintaining a united front in opposition to the socialist agendas being pressed by Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Schumer.

Republicans should be clamoring to highlight the tremendous accomplishments of governors like Florida’s Ron DeSantis, Maryland’s Larry Hogan, and others. These state leaders represent a clear and positive antidote to the damage being inflicted on our country by the Biden Administration and its congressional cohorts.

So, what exactly is the problem for the GOP? In a word, the immediate past president.

Unlike Republican former presidents before him, who, after leaving office supported the Party, its leaders, and its candidates so as to strengthen the Party moving forward, Trump has shown no desire to fill the role of GOP “elder statesman” — a post from which he could provide a strong and positive voice fueling GOP momentum heading into November 2022 and 2024.

Instead, Trump appears to have voluntarily anchored himself to a circular 2020 election loop; occasionally stopping only long enough to attack other Republicans who he feels “betrayed” him. In one instance – Georgia – he has opined publicly that far-left Democrat Stacey Abrams would make a better governor than conservative incumbent GOP Gov. Brian Kemp; an absurd and destructive notion no matter the context.

Then there is Trump’s fracas with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. Probably nobody except Trump has endured the level of abuse from the Mainstream Media as has DeSantis. Nevertheless, the Floridian’s steadfast leadership during COVID to keep Florida “open for business,” combined with his cool-as-a-cucumber demeanor in the face of media attacks, has made him an early — and deservedly credible — 2024 frontrunner.

Going after DeSantis now is akin to putting a stick in the spokes of one’s own bicycle. Although the latest kerfuffle comes from private comments leaked to the media, it is not the first shot Trump has taken at DeSantis in recent weeks. Such squabbles serve no end other than to possibly weaken DeSantis as a future presidential candidate, which in turn weakens the GOP.

If Trump’s true interests lie in helping the Republican Party and its future, a serious attitude adjustment is in order. To start, grievances Trump may harbor with other high profile GOP leaders should be sorted privately; public spats are especially harmful to Republicans this cycle, considering all that is on the line in the next three years.

Even better would be for Trump to stop fighting with the GOP’s crop of stars, and instead help guide them behind the scenes.

Trump should focus his public relations on all the good his administration accomplished — huge tax cuts, a booming economy, and a truly genius approach to finding a vaccine for COVID. Reminding the public of such wins would be immensely helpful for the GOP, which in turn can focus on its many and ongoing positive policy accomplishments — contrasted to the awful state of affairs wrought by the current administration.

Most importantly, the GOP must decide to openly support its governors and congressional leaders against baseless and errant attacks, regardless of who is making them, whether a Democrat or a former Republican president.

Failing to thus stand up for itself and for its own elected officials – the ones who now are actually implementing policies which the Grand Old Party historically has championed – is a weakness that will, in the end, hurt Republicans more than anything the Democrats might throw at it.

Bob Barr represented Georgia’s Seventh District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003. He served as the United States Attorney in Atlanta from 1986 to 1990 and was an official with the CIA in the 1970s. He now practices law in Atlanta, Georgia and serves as head of Liberty Guard.

January 19, 2022 0 comment
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BlogFrom the Desk of Bob Barr

Time For Congress To Take The ‘Next Step’ On Criminal Justice Reform

by lgadmin January 17, 2022
written by lgadmin

Daily Caller

by Bob Barr

In recent weeks, state governments across the country have begun prioritizing the issue of criminal justice reform, and at the federal level it is high time for Congress to return to this vital issue.

It has now been four years since Congress, on an overwhelmingly bipartisan basis, passed the First Step Act — the most significant criminal justice reform in decades. While the legislation arguably did more than any other to get low-risk, nonviolent offenders back on their feet, even President Donald Trump acknowledged that the federal government still has more work to do in this matter.

The 50 states have similarly acknowledged as much. That is why states such as New York and Pennsylvania have made passing the Clean Slate Act a priority. This bill will expunge the records of certain low-risk, nonviolent offenders who have already completed their sentences, allowing them to better qualify for work, education, and housing opportunities.

While it is commendable to see so many states take action to reform their own criminal justice codes, as a former U.S. Attorney I know all too well that the federal government needs to do the same with the federal criminal code.

The Kyle Rittenhouse case provided the American people a glimpse into why reform on the state and federal levels needs to become a top priority.

Although much of the country, including most legal analysts, recognized that Rittenhouse acted in self-defense, the politicized prosecutors in Wisconsin still invested heavily to see Rittenhouse put in jail.

Rittenhouse was lucky. Most defendants do not have the resources to fight prosecutorial abuse as aggressively as did Rittenhouse’s legal team. In most cases, especially at the federal level, prosecutors routinely pressure defendants with decades in prison if they do not accept offered plea deals.

While such plea agreements may allow those charged to avoid prison, they still are left with criminal records that stay with them for the remainder of their lives; denying them jobs, housing, even education. These records drastically limit their economic and rehabilitative opportunities, thereby increasing their chances of recidivism.

For the more than 70 million Americans that have committed nonviolent criminal offenses — from the struggling single mom who shoplifted from the grocery store to the young adult arrested for possession of marijuana — their long-term prospects are dire. It is not, and should not be a question of allowing these low-risk, nonviolent offenders to escape punishment, but rather whether they really need a criminal record for the rest of their lives because of a low-risk, nonviolent mistake made years before.

Congress apparently does not think so, which is why a consortium of members, including Republican Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst and Republican Pennsylvania Rep. Guy Reschenthaler have introduced the Clean Slate Act at the federal level.

Akin to the many similar Clean Slate bills introduced in state legislatures, the federal version will expunge the records of certain low-risk, nonviolent offenders that have already served their time, allowing them to provide for their families, contribute to society and move on with their lives once again. Not every nonviolent offender will qualify, nor should they. Still, this legislation will allow millions of Americans who have paid for a past mistake to finally move on.

A bipartisan coalition of center-right and center-left groups, including Americans for Tax Reform, the Brennan Center for Justice, the Center for American Progress and the Faith and Freedom Coalition, have all endorsed this bill, and it is difficult to find anyone in vocal opposition to it.

When will congressional leaders, on either side of the aisle, call it up for a vote?

With 91% of Americans agreeing that the criminal justice system needs fixing, there is no reason for this issue to linger any longer. Pressure for these reforms needs to be pushed to the very top of the congressional food chain.

A weigh-in to leadership from some of Congress’ most notable criminal justice reform advocates — from John Cornyn, Chuck Grassley, Mike Lee and Rand Paul on the Republican side to Cory Booker and Dick Durbin on the Democratic side — could provide the necessary horsepower to expedite consideration of this important legislation, and help this and future generations of Americans get back on the right track.

It is a move long overdue.

Bob Barr represented Georgia’s Seventh District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003. He served as the United States Attorney in Atlanta from 1986 to 1990 and was an official with the CIA in the 1970s. He now practices law in Atlanta, Georgia and serves as head of Liberty Guard.

January 17, 2022 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BlogFrom the Desk of Bob Barr

Democrats Turning to Civil War Era Tools to Go After Trump

by lgadmin January 12, 2022
written by lgadmin

Townhall

by Bob Barr

Whether it is their fear of Donald Trump or their hatred of him, congressional Democrats will stop at nothing in their incessant drive to destroy him. Most recently, they have dredged up a post-Civil War era provision in the Constitution as a possible way to keep him from serving a second term as president in 2025.

Democrats’ latest anti-Trump gambit is Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. If you are not familiar with this provision, you are not alone; it was ratified in 1868 and was last used more than a century ago. The language was inserted into the otherwise important 14th Amendment, which secures our vital “privileges or immunities of citizen” along with “due process” and “equal protection of the laws.”

Section 3 of the Amendment, however, has nothing to do with those important guarantees. Its purpose was simply to prevent individuals who had taken up arms against the United States, or who had rendered “aid or comfort” to enemies of the United States, from later serving in the federal or state government.

Section 3 was last used in 1919 against a sitting United States Senator alleged to have given assistance to Germany in World War I. Even then, he was later reseated, and Section 3 has lain undisturbed for well over a century. Until now.

A year ago, Democrats were quick to label the January 6th demonstrations on Capitol Hill an “insurrection,” and their Google search of that word appears to have led them to Section 3 of the 14th Amendment because – you guessed it – the phrase “insurrection or rebellion” appears in it as an apt description, not of a demonstration but of a horrendous civil war the country had just gone through.

Undaunted by this inapposite historical rationale underlying Section 3, some Democrats appear to be seriously considering it as a way to stop Trump from ever again serving in any state or federal position including, of course, president.

The tortured reasoning (if it be called that) behind this latest ploy appears to be that Trump deliberately and intentionally encouraged those individuals who did unlawfully enter the Capitol on January 6th, and in so doing, incited and gave “aid and comfort” to those who thereby engaged in “insurrection or rebellion” against the United States. And, Voila! Donald Trump falls within the prohibitory language of Section 3 and can never again hold public office.

Except, of course, this analysis holds no legal, historic, factual, or common-sense water.

As explained by Gerard Magliocca at Lawfare, the only conceivable use of Section 3 for the January 6th riots would be to pursue state or federal officeholders who were present among the group of protestors when the Capitol was breeched (and, to even have an outside shot with a far-Left judge, they would need to have been among those doing more than just standing inside the Capitol building at the time). This is also assuming federal prosecutors could convince a judge or jury that an impromptu protest, in which a small group of individuals took things too far, constitutes a “rebellion” or “insurrection” on par with the Civil War or WWI.

Democrats have other conservatives within their obtuse Section 3 gunsights. Earlier this month, for example, a far-Left group of North Carolina voters announced it would appeal to the courts to disqualify GOP rising star Rep. Madison Cawthorn from office under Section 3. Cawthorn was not present among the small group that stormed the Capitol, and he offered no assistance at all to those that did. His only “offense” was a speech delivered at a rally echoing sentiments held by many Americans today. Yet, to the Left, this protected expression is tantamount to a full-scale rebellion against the United States.

Were Democrats not so obsessed with Trump, this Section 3 Plan would be laughable. But it is not funny. It is sick; just as are their other ploys to hang onto power no matter the cost to the country or the Constitution.

Whether it is resuscitating a Civil War-era provision intended to keep Confederate sympathizers from holding government office, proposing to pack the Supreme Court because they disagree with some of its decisions, or some other cockamamie scheme, Democrats and others who pursue such destructive courses have no business whatsoever serving in any position of trust in government.

January 12, 2022 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BlogFrom the Desk of Bob BarrLiberty Updates

Double the Size of the IRS – Democrats’ Dream, Taxpayers’ Nightmare

by lgadmin January 5, 2022
written by lgadmin

Townhall

by Bob Barr

As legislative red flags go, they don’t get much bigger than what the Biden Administration is attempting — $80 billion of additional funding for the Internal Revenue Service so the agency can more than double the number of employees it now has.

At the moment, Biden’s plan to hire 87,000 new IRS employees is stuck in senatorial limbo — part of his “Build Back Better” plan passed late last year by the House. While Senate Republicans are holding firm against passing “BBB,” there is a real danger Democrats could slip the IRS provision (or major pieces of it) into some other “must pass” legislation and “Presto!” the agency doubles in size and power.

Democrats appear perfectly comfortable buying the President’s absurd claim that not only will the massive BBB “cost nothing,” but that increasing the size and power of the IRS will turn a profit and will target only “the rich.”

Their IRS expansion plan is a massive lie, with major consequences not just for the wealthy but for all citizens; and its successful implementation could be aided thanks to the hubbub surrounding the one-year anniversary of the events of last January 6, which provides a perfect cover for Democrats to sneak these changes through under the radar.

As a threshold question, why would the IRS need to double in size and rake in $80 billion in additional funding if its agents are only going after the rich? After all, the agency already does this, as evidenced by the fact that audit rates for the wealthy are significantly higher than for those in lower income brackets. If the IRS was truly short-staffed, and the rich were really the choice target for recovering owed taxes on unreported income, then it could easily allocate resources to pursue these so-called high earners, whose tax returns are easy to identify. Instead, the IRS appears to be setting its sights on small businesses and independent contractors for companies like Uber and Instacart.

Actually, new reporting requirements coming from the IRS make clear its targets are not Elon Musk but rather Joe Six-Pack.

A new change in the tax law for 2022 increases reporting requirements for financial institutions serving customers with more than just $600 in pass-through income. Previously this figure was $20,000. This means that everyone from Uber drivers to kids mowing grass who earn more than $600 in gross income will be on the IRS’ compliance radar, since they have “self-reported income.”

The IRS coming after these income earners is like drawing blood from a stone. Nevertheless, it is what Democrats have been reduced to in trying to pay for their ultra-extravagant social programs. They have finally reached a point at which shaking down the rich is not enough, so they now are going after low-income workers .  .  . but without admitting it.

Democrat claims that all this is solely to ensure everyone pays their “fair share” ring hollow, but it does illustrate just how far the Party has diverged from its roots of protecting vulnerable individuals from abusive government practices.

One of President Donald Trump’s most notable, if rarely heralded accomplishments, was slashing the IRS budget and forcing it to be more discerning about who and what they pursued for audits. Importantly, even with the Trump Administration’s cuts to the IRS budget, the agency has been able to increase tax revenues by an estimated 22 percent since the 2017 tax cuts. It did, however, reduce IRS bullying of citizens – a trend Democrats now want to reverse.

Big Government Democrats like Sen. Elizabeth Warren love to send out Tweets lambasting billionaires. There is no political price to be paid by these “limousine liberals” for engaging in rhetorical class warfare, even as they consciously ignore the fact that high-income earners like Elon Musk are merely taking advantage of tax breaks that Congress itself enacted.

It would take a far greater degree of wisdom and honesty than Biden and his congressional allies possess, to explain why their Build Back Better plan puts working class citizens and small business owners in the crosshairs of the IRS.

Democrats aren’t building America back better. They’re busy building big bureaucracies bigger. And arrogantly lying to the voters as they do so.

Bob Barr represented Georgia’s Seventh District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003. He served as the United States Attorney in Atlanta from 1986 to 1990 and was an official with the CIA in the 1970s. He now practices law in Atlanta, Georgia and serves as head of Liberty Guard.

January 5, 2022 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BlogFrom the Desk of Bob BarrLiberty Updates

The Biden Administration’s Continued Obsession Over ‘Extremism’ In The Military

by lgadmin January 4, 2022
written by lgadmin

Daily Caller

by Bob Barr

As the Biden administration nears the end of its first year, the focus of its Department of Defense appears not to be on meeting our military’s ability to defeat real and potential foes. Instead, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin continues his high-priority campaign to chase “extremism” within the ranks.

Austin relentlessly pursues this boogeyman notwithstanding that the most recent Defense Department report on “extremism,” published just last month, conceded that over the course of its nearly year-long study, it could find “less than 100” incidents of such behavior among active duty and reserve personnel (which totals some 2,145,900 men and women across all military branches).

The current administration’s apparent obsession with ferreting out “extremism” among active duty and reserve personnel, including civilian military contract personnel and the many more millions of veterans, comes even as recent evaluations of America’s military readiness shows serious deficiencies. Despite this, non-governmental groups to which Austin’s Defense Department continues to turn for data and approval – including the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) – lament that even more is not being done to ensure a fully “woke” military.

The term “woke” is not used in either the December 2021 Defense Department report, or in a lengthy investigative analysis of “extremism” in the military published by The Associated Press just last week. “Wokeness,” however, is the clear goal of this crusade to identify and rid the armed forces of those with views disfavored by the like of both the SPLC and the Biden administration.

The new definition of “Extremist Activities” now to govern backgrounds and activities of military personnel as well as those civilians working with the armed forces, includes espousing “unlawful discrimination” based not only on traditionally understood — and already against military law — categories such as “race, color, national origin, religion, [and] sex” but now, “pregnancy.”

Given the administration’s strident support for abortion (a procedure that is, after all, terminating a “pregnancy”), it is not unreasonable to foresee the administration using this as a pretext to punish a service member or recruit who is or in the past has been pro-life, insofar as such advocacy could be considered discriminatory against “pregnancy.” Viewed in this light, the truly insidious nature of the new rules becomes clear.

The Defense Department’s new regulations do not stop there. They now subject a service member to discipline or discharge if he or she displays – “whether on or off a military installation” — any form of “paraphernalia” that might be considered supportive of a group or organization engaged in the aforementioned and wide-ranging “extremist activities.” These verboten displays includes not only “bumper stickers,” but “words, symbols, .  .  .  clothing” and even “tattoos.”

How the military ultimately determines whether one of its own (or a prospective recruit) gave a “symbol” in support of an “extremist” group, or at some point in their life “knowingly displayed” a tattoo with such intent, is murky; but the new regulations allow that lists and databases maintained by the FBI and other government agencies may be accessed for such purpose.

Austin’s directives are designed explicitly to encourage snitches, not only from within the active military, but from veterans as well. Moreover, veterans who engage in prohibited “extremist activities” may see their veterans benefits denied or cut off under the terms of these new draconian policies.

The fact of the matter is, the truly and demonstrably violent extremist behavior by those in the military is already illegal and incidents of such have in the past been successfully prosecuted. From this perspective, and viewed most charitably, these new regulations could be considered designing a new baseball bat to swat a fly.

The results of Austin’s first-year jeremiad – and further studies already in the works — are in fact much more than simply a new way of attacking a problem that already has been addressed.

Austin, reflecting the leftist views of his boss, has designed a blueprint to ensure wokeness will prevail throughout current and coming generations of our military. It appears that to him, this is more important than addressing clear evidence that the readiness of our armed forces — as articulated just this past year by both non-governmental studies and the Government Accountability Office itself – is seriously deficient.

Bob Barr represented Georgia’s Seventh District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003. He served as the United States Attorney in Atlanta from 1986 to 1990 and was an official with the CIA in the 1970s. He now practices law in Atlanta, Georgia and serves as head of Liberty Guard.

 

January 4, 2022 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts

Keep in touch

Facebook Twitter Instagram Youtube Telegram

Search Archives

Recent Posts

  • Bob joins NTD News

    March 27, 2025
  • Government Over-Regulation Is Handing China The Energy Future

    March 19, 2025
  • The Climate Control Movement In Europe Is Alive and Still Kicking

    March 6, 2025
  • The Regulatory State Continues to Target Fantasy Sports

    February 27, 2025
  • Trump Pivots 180 Degrees From Biden In Support of the Second Amendment

    February 13, 2025

About Us

  • Liberty Guard
    3330 Cumberland Blvd.
    Suite 500
    Atlanta, Georgia 30339
  • Email: [email protected]

From The Desk of Bob Barr

Government Over-Regulation Is Handing China The Energy Future
The Climate Control Movement In Europe Is Alive and Still Kicking
The Regulatory State Continues to Target Fantasy Sports

Latest Videos

Not My Fingerprints
Idiots In Full View
Biden Administration Champions Stupid Idea

Get Liberty Guard Email Updates




©2024 Liberty Guard, Inc. All rights reserved.

Designed and Developed by Media Bridge LLC

Facebook Twitter Instagram Youtube Telegram
  • Refund and Data Policies
  • State Disclosures
  • Join
Liberty Guard
  • Projects
  • About
  • Leadership
  • Podcast
  • Blog
    • From The Desk of Bob Barr
    • Liberty Updates
    • Media Appearances
    • All Articles
  • Videos
  • Contact
  • Join