This story is interesting because the alleged gunman Quintez Brown previously expressed his desire to defund the police, and ban guns for law-abiding people. I guess he wanted all the guns for himself, so he could shoot at Jewish men. And then he wanted the police to not arrest him for it.

Here’s the story from Breitbart:

Attempted murder suspect Quintez Brown took part in a March for Our Lives gun control rally in 2018, where he told MSNBC’s Joy Reid that Congress needed to pass “commonsense gun reform.”

Breitbart News reported that 21-year-old Brown allegedly entered Louisville mayoral candidate Craig Greenberg’s campaign headquarters Monday and fired multiple rounds from a 9mm handgun. Greenberg was not hit by any of the bullets but his clothing was grazed.

WDRB noted that Brown “has been active with Black Lives Matter Louisville and the University of Louisville’s Youth Violence Prevention Research Center.”

[…]A video tweeted by Andy Ngo shows Brown at a 2018 March for Our Lives rally, telling MSNBC’s Joy Reid that Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) was going to be voted out of office if he refused to support gun control.

He supports banning guns, but only for law-abiding people (his potential victims). You can’t ban the guns of criminals – they don’t care about the law already, so they don’t care about gun bans. Gun bans only affect the victims of criminals.

The shooter was “honored” by Obama:

Like most BLM activists, the shooter also wants to defund the police. All the better for he and his BLM buddies to escape the consequences of breaking the law.

Here are the details from Breitbart:

Brown was arrested on Monday less than half a mile from Greenberg’s office at 10:25 a.m., according to the Louisville Metro Police Department’s citation.

Ten minutes before, police said they were called to the 1200 block of Story Avenue, where Greenberg’s campaign office is located, over “reports of an active aggressor.”

Greenberg told media on Monday that he was at his office that morning, in a meeting with four of his staffers, when a man with a gun walked in, aimed directly at him and opened fire. Greenberg said a member of his staff was able to slam the door shut. Staff then barricaded the doorway. Greenberg and his staff present in the office were uninjured, but Greenberg said a bullet hit his sweater and shirt.

When police arrested Brown, they say they found a drawstring bag with a 9mm handgun, a handgun case and 9mm magazines, in addition to a loaded magazine in his pants pocket.

[…]Brown is charged with attempted murder and four charges of wanton endangerment in the first degree.

And he’s been bailed out by Black Lives Matter, thanks to their generous donors:

The Louisville Community Bail Fund has posted bond for Quintez Brown, the prominent Louisville activist charged in the attempted shooting of Democratic mayoral candidate Craig Greenberg.

The Louisville Community Bail Fund is managed by Black Lives Matter Louisville.

Since the victim was a Democrat politician, the mainstream news media was united in wanting to blame Republicans for the crime.

Here’s an example from the far-left Las Vegas Sun:

The alleged shooter, a 21-year-old political activist, was arrested near the scene and later charged with attempted murder along with four counts of wanton endangerment.

While there’s been no indication yet that the activist had ties to any right-wing organizations, the shooting comes amid a rise in threats against politicians fueled by increasingly violent rhetoric coming from extremist Republicans.

That’s what the mainstream news media said about a literal BLM activist. That’s why I recommend that you get your news from places like The Federalist, Breitbart and Daily Signal. If you’re relying on the secular left to tell you the truth, you’ll be waiting a long time.

Pro-family conservatives are very passionate about making sure that children grow up with a mother and a father. Most say that both men and women need to do better to stop fatherlessness. But in practice, pro-family people direct their criticism towards men only, giving women a free pass. Let me explain why this approach is not likely to solve the problem of fatherlessness.

Pro-family conservatives typically target the man who had the recreational sex, and try to urge him to commit to the women after the woman gets pregnant. Why won’t this work? Well, it won’t work because the man who was selected by the woman clearly wanted sex more than he wanted commitment. That’s why he had sex first, instead of committing first. He was selected for sex without having to show any ability or desire to commit whatsoever. So, you can’t really go back to him and say “now you have to commit”. The time to get him to commit would be BEFORE he got what he wanted, and the only person in a position to make that happen was the woman.

So what about the woman? What did she want? She is probably hoping that the man she is choosing to have sex with will commit to her, because she has given him her body. The baby is there to make him more attached to her, since the baby has his genes. Unfortunately, this is not how men who value premarital sex actually work. Wanting premarital sex is a sign of wanting pleasure – not of wanting commitment. The reason why we need to talk to the woman is to tell her that she will not get what she wants by giving a man with no interest in commitment premarital sex. It doesn’t work. If you want a man to commit to you, then you have to choose a man who wants to commit, and then let him commit.

So, that’s why I recommend we approach the woman first. We don’t approach men, because they want sex, not commitment. We approach women, because they want commitment, and they don’t get it.

Now, how do pro-family conservatives respond to this? Well, they think that women should not be challenged to do anything differently at all. If you tell women to make wise choices, then you are shaming them, judging them, blaming them, etc.

But just think of some parallel cases, and see if you can see why it is not wrong to ask women to make better choices:

1. If you invest your money instead of spending it on alcohol and cigarettes, then you can retire earlier.
2. If you go to the gym 3 times a week, and eat healthier, you’ll live longer and be slimmer.
3. If you study computer science instead of English, then you’ll be able to find a higher paying job more easily.

The goal in telling a woman these things is not to shame her, but to help her to get a good outcome by making better decisions. The world is the way the world is, and she won’t be able to get a good outcome from a bad decision.

Now here is another one:

If you make a marriage-ready man commit to you before you give him sex, then your children are more likely to have a father in the home.

Now look at that statement. It’s not shaming women at all. Everyone agrees that men who have recreational premarital sex should be avoided. We’re not blaming women – we’re trying to get a good outcome for them by telling them the truth so they can make a better decision.

All we are saying to women is this: 1) focus on marriage early, so you can use your youth and beauty to lock down the best man possible. 2) And make commitment your top priority when choosing a man. This is good advice for her, and for her children.

When we are giving good advice, it’s not our concern that people feel shamed, or that they don’t like us. Our goal is not to make them feel good, or to make us feel good. Our goal is to make the children have a father in the home. I am fine with being hated for now, so long as I get a good result in the end.

Women these days often complain that they want to get married but can’t find a good man. But what I have found is that these same women deliberately choose to spend their late teens and 20s pursuing relationships with good-looking, tall men who have no interest in marriage or family. What I would like is for pro-family people to tell women to focus on finding a good man who is willing to love her and commit to her when she still has her youth and beauty to attract a good man.

There is no point in standing by silent while women waste their teens and 20s on bad men, then expect the good men they passed over to marry them in their 30s. Those good men understand that they were not the first priority for these women, and that their willingness to commit will not get them any respect from women who ranked commitment LOW on their list of criteria for men.

Men have preferences about women and marriage. You can’t bully a man into marrying an older woman who had other things to do with her youth than investing in him. A man marries a woman when she makes him her top priority, and sacrifices her happiness in order to love him and build him up. The earlier she chooses him, the more he is loved, and the more time they have to build together. It’s not blaming women to decline a marriage with them, any more than it is blaming a house that you don’t want to buy. Men are people, too. And men get to decide whether marriage is good for them, based on the value of the marriage offer.

I want to end by talking a bit about myself. I am not white, and was raised by two poor immigrant parents in a non-Christian home. When I was in grade 5, I received a New Testament from the Gideons. I read it, and I was happy to get some guidance on moral issues, as well as learning how to put myself second and serve God. The more I put God’s agenda first, the less I made bad decisions. I studied hard to be able to get a good job so I could give to charity. I was debt-free and financially ready to marry in my early 20s. I was a good steward of my money, and contemptuous of alcohol, drugs and status-enhancing material things.

The end result of that was a long period of chastity and sobriety, during which I accumulated 950K in cash (so far), and a fully paid off house that I bought new valued at around 300K. The point of me saying this is clear – what works with people who need help is to tell them the way the world really works, and what decisions they can make to get out of the mess they started off with.

Everywhere you look today, people are TERRIFIED of telling people who look like me that the solution to their problems is to read the Bible and make God their Boss. Instead, Christians are being dragged into secular solutions to the problems I had: Marxism, destroy the family, single mother welfare, abortion, etc. They don’t want to offend people who look like me by telling us to make better choices.

Their motivation is the same as the pro-family people who don’t want to offend women. “Let’s tell them that the bad decisions they are making are actually good decisions, so they will like us. And when it blows up in their faces, we will just blame those people over there, and demand that they change”. No, the solution to problems is found in the choices we make.

Blaming white people would not have helped me to get where I needed to go. Why do we shy away from telling the women who freely choose bad boys and make babies with them that the solution to their problems is in their own hands? It’s because we want to feel good. We want them to like us. But Christians ought to understand that the best thing you can do for someone is offer them the Bible, and urge them to bring their actions inline with it. And the Bible clearly states that sex outside of marriage is wrong. If a woman takes that seriously, then any children she has will not be fatherless.

A while back, I was asked to mentor a young lady who was born in a divorced home. Her mother made her with her father, then her mother divorced her father. Then her mother married her stepfather who treated her very badly. She shacked up with an atheist and got pregnant, then killed her baby. The atheist dumped her. When she came to me, she was tired of her own decision-making, and wanted to learn how to make men like her without having to give them sex.

So, I put her on a learning plan of Christian apologetics, economics, science, history and philosophy. Today, she is married to her husband and has a son. She organizes apologetics conferences in her spare time. And the highlight of my life so far was that phone call from her where she explained how I was right about everything, and that now she understood why I had told her to make those better choices.

It was not easy. There were times where she chose more bad boyfriends – annoying unemployed students who were younger than her! – and she was mad when I didn’t approve of them.  But she kept coming back for more advice whenever things failed. And in the end, she succeeded. Her husband loved her the moment he saw the books on her bookshelf. And today, her son has a father at home.

I was feeling really upset on Wednesday night, after reading some stories about the hacker who stole the GiveSendGo donors, the Big Banks who froze the accounts of their customers, the Big news media corporations who published articles about the leaked donors, and the Big Tech monopolies who allowed the names of the donors to be splashed all over the Internet.

Let’s start with the alleged hacker. Did you know that he had previously worked for Canada’s Royal Canadian Mounted Police?

American Greatness reports:

A far-left founder of the hacktivist group An0nym0us, who claims to have cooperated with or worked for multiple intelligence agencies, has taken credit for hacking the Christian crowdfund site GiveSendGo.

[…]Cott1e has claimed in public statements on social media and interviews for years that he has worked for or with INTERPOL, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police(RCMP) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). “I helped RCMP + INTERPOL shut down 12chan after a bunch of social engineering,” he wrote on Twitter in September of 2015.

The first thing I thought when I read that is that Trudeau probably ordered this hacker to commit a crime and steal the donor data. Is that what happened? Is that how the donor data made its way into the mainstream media and onto social media?

Far-left news media:

The best and most detailed article I found was from the far-left UK Daily Mail:

The hack has already had an impact on Canadians who donated – a top political aide to Ontario Premier Doug Ford, Marion Isabeau-Ringuette, was forced out of her job when a local news outlet QP Briefing outed her to his office for making a $100 donation.

Canada’s national broadcaster, the Canadian Broadcasting Company, has gone through the list of 92,844 donors to contact and publicly out them.

It revealed that the former leader of the country’s Progressive Conservative Party Ches Crosbie made an $800 donation.

[…]The CBC also outed a prominent business owner in London, Ontario, as giving the largest single donation to the Freedom Convoy. Holden Rhodes, who owns Killarney Mountain Lodge, donated $25,000.

Another donor outed in the leak was Tammy Giuliani, owner of Stella Luna Gelato Cafe in Ottawa, who was forced to shut down her business after she received an onslaught of threats over her $250 donation.

You might recall that Trudeau pledged to give the failing government-owned Canadian Broadcasting Corporation $675 million when they were heading towards bankruptcy. Not Trudeau’s own money, of course – he’s never earned any. No, he gave them private sector money. Do you think he called in a favor to get these donors persecuted?

Left-wing Fascism

Here is the Deputy Prime Minister of Canada explaining what she will do to the peaceful protesters who dissent from Liberal Party policies:

When I see progressive feminist women telling men who she is going to make it impossible for them to work so they can feed their families, I really feel glad that I never married or had children. If progressive women enjoy bullying men so much, they’ll find that men no longer want to marry and have kids. We can’t afford Big Government AND families. Pick one.

Big Banks

Daily Wire reports:

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance Chrystia Freeland said in a press conference shortly afterward that the order gave banks and financial institutions the power to “temporarily cease providing financial services where the institution suspects that an account is being used to further the illegal blockades and occupations.” The power extends to both personal and corporate accounts. Crowd-funding platforms like GoFundMe and GiveSendGo, which have helped fund the continuing demonstrations, would fall under the enforcement of “Canada’s anti-money laundering and terrorist financing rules,” Freeland added.

Freland also gave the Big Banks complete immunity from civil lawsuits from their customers, even though they broke their terms of service. If you paid for a Bouncy Castle, you’re a terrorist.

Pro-Trump donors targeted

Canada’s “Justice” minister said that will be focusing on punishing Trump supporters who made donations.

Breitbart reports:

Canada’s Justice Minister, David Lametti, has told Trump supporters who donated to the “Freedom Convoy” to “be worried” about having their bank accounts frozen.

[…]“Well, I think if you are a member of a pro-Trump movement who’s donating hundreds of thousands of dollars and millions of dollars to this kind of thing, they oughta be worried,” responded Lametti.

Lametti also said that truckers could lose their trucking license if they participated in the protests or if their company permitted them to participate in the protest.

Can you imagine spending your entire life as a trucker, and having the government take your license? How would you feed your family?

Do women understand that when they empower the government to punish good men for acting on their convictions, that men will opt out of marriage and children? Why do you think that the marriage rate is plummeting? Men are not interested in the responsibilities of marriage when the government can punish them for their conservative and / or Christian views. Unfortunately, women, their parents and their pastors could not care less about men.

Big Tech

The Federalist reported on how Big Tech monopolies protect Democrats from “hacked data”, but are delighted to expose peaceful protestors to hacked data:

Americans shouldn’t need more evidence to prove that Twitter is a malicious political actor that runs interference on behalf of leftists but the Big Tech company keeps providing it.

In its latest outrageous tampering for the left, Twitter sits idly by as the private information of hundreds of people who gave money to the Canadian truckers protesting tyranny circulates on its platform after a hacker leaked donors’ names, email addresses, and zip codes.

In contrast, Twitter banned the Hunter Biden laptop story from being shared in October 2020 because the political optics were terrible for their preferred candidate Joe Biden. The Big Tech company locked the New York Post’s account, blocked users from linking to the article, and then denied any wrongdoing.

I reported several accounts who were spreading around the hacked data of the donors to the Freedom Trucker Convoy, and ever single one of those reports was dismissed by Twitter. Their rules are only enforced in one direction – to protect their secular left allies.

If there is one good thing to come out of this, it’s that Trudeau has attracted universal condemnation from other world leaders.