On Wednesday, Parkland shooting survivor and gun control activist David Hogg shouted down Congressman Andy Biggs (R-AZ-05) and disrupted the House hearing on a gun control bill. The day-long Judiciary Committee hearing discussed HR2814, or “Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act.” Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA-28) introduced the bill in April.
Biggs insisted that the bill would only disarm U.S. citizens as they face an ongoing invasion — his estimation of the border crisis — and the increased levels of crime nationwide. He spoke in support of Congressman Chip Roy’s (R-TX-21) proposed amendment to the bill.
“You have every indication of an invasion and you have disarmed — with this bill you’re going to disarm people. You’re going to prevent them from defending themselves along the border,” said Biggs.
Biggs shared that one of his constituents sold his house and moved due to the border crisis, after having lived there 17 years. The congressman said that this man wasn’t alone, but that many others told him that they feared leaving their homes.
Biggs cited border security data to remind the committee that the cartels were trafficking a torrent of criminals, illegal immigrants, and drugs. He cited the assassination plot publicized in May against former President George W. Bush.
Biggs then asserted that the federal government was sanctioning the cartels’ efforts, purposefully allowing the invasion.
“It’s purposeful on part of the federal government, which has basically sanctioned this invasion,” said Biggs.
It was that comment that spurred Hogg to interrupt Biggs. Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY-10) gaveled down Hogg immediately. Police escorted Hogg out of the hearing.
Hogg insisted that Biggs’ remarks were “perpetuating violence.” Hoggs compared Biggs’ argument to those included in mass shooters’ manifestos, insisting that firearms used in crimes were sourced from within the U.S.
The guns in Parkland, Buffalo, El Paso, didn't come from Mexico. They came from the US, and the shooters were inspired by racist, anti-black, anti-immigrant manifestos that rhyme with GOP talking points. pic.twitter.com/0D4QbHvu1t
Biggs’ remarks began approximately 2 hours into the hearing. On the Republican side of the committee were four signs reading a reference to the Second Amendment: “Shall Not Be Infringed.”
Biggs later shared that Democrat leaders invited Hogg to the hearing.
Biggs tweeted that Hogg was a “woke, radical activist” when sharing an interview with Fox News anchor Tucker Carlson. He added that, by Democrats’ standards, Hogg’s interruption was tantamount to insurrection because he interrupted a congressional proceeding.
“He’s trying to grift off this whole thing, it looks like, and he should probably be brought up on charges. Where is that J6 Committee when you need them?” asked Biggs. “Stoking the fire like that is what the Democrats did; that’s why they wanted him there. They were hoping for that kind of incident.”
David Hogg is a woke, radical activist who interrupted a congressional proceeding today by shouting incoherent slurs at me.
Hoggs later called Biggs a “white nationalist,” saying that it was a duty to interrupt free speech — even during a congressional hearing — because it was “harmful rhetoric.”
We have a duty to interrupt white nationalists when they spew harmful rhetoric. We have to, they’re using the same talking points as mass shooter manifestos.
Arizona Speaker of the House of Representatives Rusty Bowers has been censured by the executive committee of the Republican Party of Arizona, it was announced late Tuesday evening.
Bowers will no longer have any formal state GOP support as a member of the Republican Party in part due to his purported “general disregard for Republican Party Leadership at the precinct, legislative, county, state, and federal levels,” according to a statement released by the AZGOP on Wednesday.
“Rusty has failed in his specific actions, including co-sponsoring Democrat-led bills and refusing to work with the most conservative legislative body in 10 years during arguably one of the most critical sessions in Arizona history,” the statement reads. “This goes much further than any policy disagreement and acknowledges his failures in his capacity as Speaker to implement stout conservative legislation.”
The censure vote came less than two weeks before the Aug. 2 Republican Primary Election in which Bowers is being challenged in the newly redistricted Legislative District 10 encompassing much of Mesa. It also came less than one month after Bowers testified in Washington DC about his communications with former President Donald Trump after the 2020 General Election.
The executive committee is comprised of more than 80 registered Republicans, including the AZGOP’s elected officers, three members from each of the 15 county committees, 27 at-large members based on Arizona’s nine Congressional districts, and others. The number of votes cast has not been released, but the state party’s bylaws allow for a quorum based on only one-third attendance provided eight different counties are represented.
According to the AZGOP statement, it is the state party’s duty to hold elected officials within its party “responsible and accountable.” The executive committee further calls on Republicans in the new LD10 “to contemplate a similar censure,” while encouraging “all registered Republicans to expel him permanently from office in the impending primary election.”
Bowers, who is being primaried by David Farnsworth, spent Wednesday ignoring what he called “baseless character attacks, choosing instead to focus on highlights of his tenure as House Speaker. Such as the most expansive school choice options in the country signed into law earlier this month.
The censure action prompted mixed reactions, although the majority of Arizona’s lawmakers remained on the sidelines.
The Republican Party has officially rebuked and censured Speaker Rusty Bowers and he is no longer a Republican in good standing due to his terrible voting record, unwillingness to work with Republicans and general malfeasance.
Gotta be her way of being allowed to “officially” take a position in the Primary. Sad to see the AZGOP continue with this boorish behavior instead of allowing the voters to make the decision for themselves organically. Can’t say I’m surprised however which is even more sad. https://t.co/TnaAmOfCUl
— AZConservative ✝️ (@CountrygirlMom2) July 20, 2022
You censured a guy for telling the truth about an illegal attempt to overturn an election (as evidenced by the fact you don’t refute his testimony here). Until that point you were totally fine with his “voting record” I guess.
— Raymond Luxury Yacht (@twobblermangrov) July 20, 2022
This week’s viral doorbell videos of a UPS driver fainting outside a Scottsdale home and a squadron of javelinas tearing up a newly landscaped yard in Oro Valley are just the latest example of what homeowners, renters, and business owners might see or hear recorded on their devices.
Many of those types of videos and audio recordings are shared on social media by the device owners, while frequently other recordings are voluntarily provided to law enforcement agencies in response to reports of nearby crimes and accidents.
But who actually owns the right to video and audio recorded by Amazon-owned doorbell company Ring, and who can release those files without a search warrant or permission of the person who owns the equipment? And what if the recording captures something a bit more, um, personal and private?
Those are some of the questions being discussed as members of Congress continue to debate the proposed Facial Recognition and Biometric Technology Moratorium Act. The debate gained some momentum last week following Ring’s admission that company employees have shared video and/or audio recordings with law enforcement agencies without notification to the device owners.
The information about Ring’s activities became public courtesy of U.S. Senator Edward Markey (D-Massachusetts). It shows that the company receives so many requests for video and audio recordings that it has now registered nearly 2,200 law enforcement agencies to better facilitate access.
The vast majority of the releases stem from court ordered search warrants and subpoenas which are normally shared with customers. However, Ring confirmed it has made 11 videos available this year to various law enforcement agencies without advising the device’s owner. The release was based on an “emergency circumstance exception,” according to the company.
The Facial Recognition and Biometric Technology Moratorium Act would set parameters for the collection, storage, use, and third-party release of facial, voice and other biometric data. It would also allow for the withholding of certain federal monies from states and local governments which do not agree to follow the Act.
“As my ongoing investigation into Amazon illustrates, it has become increasingly difficult for the public to move, assemble and converse in public without being tracked and recorded,” Markey said in a statement.
The information released by Markey’s office noted most consumers are not aware Ring’s products typically have been set by default to record. This could result in private acts and conversations being recorded without the homeowner’s knowledge. Such information is then theoretically accessible by the company to share as they wish.
“We cannot accept this as inevitable in our country,” Markey said. “Increasing law enforcement reliance on private surveillance could become central to the growing web of surveillance systems that Amazon and other powerful tech companies are responsible for.”
There are identical bills currently assigned to committees in the U.S. Senate and House of Representative. Neither is co-sponsored by any of Arizona’s Congressional delegation.
Pima County Recorder Gabriella Cázares-Kelly has prohibited political party observers from accessing 15 in-person early voting locations. Counsel for the Republican National Committee (RNC) sent a letter to Cázares-Kelly on Tuesday asking the recorder to reconsider her decision. At present, only 4 of the 15 voting sites have opened. The remainder are scheduled to open next Monday, July 25.
AZ Free News reached out to Cázares-Kelly about the issue. She didn’t respond by press time.
Arizona law allows at least one representative from each political party to be present. Cázares-Kelly declared in a press release last Wednesday that political party observers were “a courtesy” and that requests to allow observers were given on short notice.
Cázares-Kelly further claimed that the early voting locations lacked enough space to accommodate observers, and that her office lacked personnel to oversee observers. The recorder noted that observers were welcome at the ballot processing center instead.
“All our experienced staffers are busy ensuring a successful and secure Early Voting process,” wrote Cázares-Kelly. “While we are unable to accommodate observers at our Early Voting sites at this time with such short notice due to staffing and space issues, we are happy to work with the public to find ways in which they can be certain that our processes are conducted in a fair and secure manner that may include a scheduled one-time visit or revisiting our policy for future elections contingent on conditions that will allow for it.”
The RNC letter obtained by AZ Free News reflected Cázares-Kelly’s concerns. Eric Spencer, the attorney with RNC’s counsel Snell & Wilmer, said that he sympathized with the recorder’s concerns but insisted that party observers ensured free and fair voting, therefore boosting voter confidence.
“I respectfully submit that the introduction of party observers is a hugely stabilizing influence on the voting process,” wrote Spencer. “For my part, I stand ready to assist you in any way possible to open some of these doors for a group of dedicated and patriotic individuals who are ready to serve.”
The lack of political party poll observers isn’t the only controversy Pima County has faced over its current elections. They also halved their operations from 280 voting precinct locations to 129 vote centers. These voting centers have faced criticism for their “catch-all” method of accepting ballots from any precinct rather than designated ones.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Arizona was ranked the worst state to live in based on its quality of life and inclusivity scoring by one of the biggest news outlets in the country. Its weaknesses that gave it the bottom ranking were air quality, health resources, inclusiveness, and crime — earning it a “Life, Health, & Inclusion Score” of 67 out of 325 possible points.
As CNBC explained, the metric focused mainly on social justice issues:
Combine an era of enhanced social consciousness with a growing worker shortage, and it explains why, now more than ever, companies are demanding that states offer a welcoming and inclusive environment for employees. We rate the states on livability factors like per capita crime rates and environmental quality. We look at inclusiveness in state laws, including protections against discrimination of all kinds, as well as voting rights. While the pandemic may be past the crisis stage, health care quality, outcomes, preparedness and public health spending remain in the spotlight. All are key drivers in this category.
Part of the inclusivity scoring likely came from GLSEN — a national organization pushing LGBTQ+ ideologies onto minors through schools and communities — as well as the Brennan Center for Justice, Lumina Foundation, and National Education Association. CNBC relied on them as a source.
However, Arizona did rank within the top 10 states for several other categories. The state ranked fourth in business friendliness, sixth in infrastructure, and seventh in workforce.
CNBC published the ranking last week as part of their overall data from their annual “America’s Top States for Business” listing. The rankings were based on six different scoring criteria, weighted based on how frequently states use them as a selling point for economic development marketing materials: workforce, 410 points (16 percent); infrastructure, 380 points (15 percent); cost of doing business, 345 points (14 percent); economy, 325 points, 13 percent); life, health, & inclusion, 325 points (13 percent); technology & innovation, 250 points (10 percent), business friendliness, 200 points (8 percent); education, 165 points (7 percent); access to capital, 50 points (2 percent), and cost of living, 50 points (2 percent).
The other 9 of the 10 worst states to live in based on the Life, Health, & Inclusion Score were, in order: Texas, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Missouri, Louisiana, New Mexico, Indiana, Tennessee, and Nevada.
The outlet ranked the following as the top 10 states to live in based on their Life, Health, & Inclusion Score, in order: Vermont, Maine, Hawaii, North Dakota, Minnesota, Washington, Nebraska, Oregon, New Jersey, and Iowa.
With all factors considered, Arizona ranked 34th. The top ten states for business with all factors included were, in order: North Carolina, Washington, Virginia, Colorado, Texas, Tennessee, Nebraska, Utah, Minnesota, and Georgia.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Nicole Solas, the Rhode Island mother who was sued by the nation’s largest teacher union for requesting public records, offered advice to Arizona parents facing similar transparency battles. As AZ Free News reported last week, Scottsdale Unified School District (SUSD) will post the names of individuals online who submitted records requests — an update that inspired controversy within the community.
The National Education Association of Rhode Island (NEARI), a teacher’s union, sued Solas last year for seeking records on Critical Race Theory (CRT) and gender theory from her child’s Rhode Island school. Not only was Solas sued — the school district attempted to charge Solas $74,000 for access to the requested records.
Solas advised Arizona parents to be loud and engaged until they achieved victory. Her examples of loud engagement were submitting public records requests and filing lawsuits. She advised that district officials would “fold like a paper tiger.” Solas offered the advice and discussed her ongoing legal battle on “Conservative Circus” with host James T. Harris on Tuesday.
Solas pointed out that parents speaking out at school board meetings serves to inform the public, which she says has a far greater impact on schools.
“Keep in mind that when you make public comment at school board meetings, you’re doing that to talk to, not the school board, you’re trying to talk to people that don’t know what’s going on,” said Solas. “You need to be brave.”
Parent Nicole Solas discusses being attacked by teachers' union on curriculum transparency and also being kicked of https://t.co/VT8Snw7eWJ
The Goldwater Institute, a Phoenix-based think tank and legal organization, represented Solas in the lawsuit, National Education Association of Rhode Island, et al. v. South Kingstown School Committee, et al. Most recently, the Rhode Island Superior Court denied Solas’ motion for summary judgment early last month.
Nicole Solas wanted to know what her daughter would be taught in kindergarten.
Her school district hit her w/a $74K bill for asking. But she hasn’t stopped fighting for academic transparency.
Most recently, Twitter deplatformed Solas with a permanent ban for speaking out against child grooming. She revealed that she is seeking legal representation currently to restore her account.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
