Trump should prosecute Barack Obama and Eric Holder for Brian Terry’s murder

In Operation Fast and Furious, the Obama administration ordered gun storeowners to illegally sell thousands of guns to criminals.

U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry was murdered with one of these guns.

The murderer was sentenced to 30 years in prison, but his accomplices, Barack Obama and Eric Holder, haven’t even been arrested or charged.

In May 2016, it was reported that newly released documents from the Department of Justice suggested that guns from Obama’s Fast And Furious program had been linked to at least 69 killings by Mexican drug cartels.

In September 2012, Obama said that Fast and Furious had “begun under the previous administration.” In reality, Fast and Furious began in October 2009.

Bush and Obama each had a program where the U.S. government put guns into the hands of Mexican criminals. Bush’s program was called “Operation Wide Receiver,” and Obama’s program was called “Operation Fast and Furious.” However, there were three major differences between the two programs:

First, Bush’s program was carried out with the knowledge, permission, and cooperation of the Mexican government, whereas Obama’s program was not. Mexican attorney general Marisela Morales told the Los Angeles Times that she first learned about Obama’s program from the news, and said, “In no way would we have allowed it, because it is an attack on the safety of Mexicans.”

Secondly, many of the guns used in Bush’s program contained radio tracking devices, whereas most of the guns used in Obama’s program did not. In addition, under Bush’s program, U.S. federal agents followed the guns to see whose hands they ended up in, whereas with Obama’s program, U.S. federal agents were ordered not to do this.

Third, Bush’s program did not cause any known deaths, whereas Obama’s program did.

In April 2016, it was reported that the Department of Justice had illegally ignored a court order to turn over certain Fast and Furious documents.

In October 2013, the ACLU announced that it would be defending John Dodson’s first amendment right to free speech, against the Obama administration, which was trying to prevent Dodson from publishing a book about Obama’s Fast and Furious scandal.

Obama illegally ignored Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information requests regarding Fast and Furious.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder illegally refused to release 1,300 pages of information on Operation Fast and Furious, even after he had been subpoenaed to do so.

On October 3, 2011, CBS News aired a story by Sharyl Attkisson which showed that Attorney General Eric Holder had lied under oath regarding Fast and Furious. The report can be seen at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JaDEShZIvQ

On October 4, 2011, Holder’s top press aide, Tracy Schmaler, wrote the following in an email to White House Deputy Press Sectary Eric Schultz:

“I’m also calling Sharryl’s [sic] editor and reaching out to Scheiffer. She’s out of control.”

Schultz responded with an email that said:

“Good. Her piece was really bad for the AG.”

Afterward, CBS made it harder and harder for Attkisson to do reports on Fast and Furious, and she eventually quit her job at CBS.

October 4, 2018. Tags: , , , , , , , , , . Barack Obama, Donald Trump, Guns, Violent crime. 1 comment.

Kavanaugh accuser asks Senate to limit press access for hearing

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/sep/25/accuser-senate-limit-press-kavanaugh-hearing/

Kavanaugh accuser asks Senate to limit press access for hearing

September 25, 2018

Christine Blasey Ford’s lawyers have asked senators to limit the press who will be allowed in the room to cover Thursday’s hearing with her and Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and sought to dictate at least some of the outlets.

Coverage is one of a number of issues Ms. Blasey Ford’s lawyers are negotiating with Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Michael Bromwich said in emails sent Tuesday afternoon that he was requesting access for three “robocams,” three specific wire services, photographers from the Associated Press, Reuters and one unspecified service, and a pool reporter for newspapers and magazines. In a follow-up email he specified that the robocams should be operated by “the CSPAN TV pool,” and said he also wanted space for a radio reporter.

Those emails were among several seen by The Washington Times detailing the tense negotiations between Ms. Blasey Ford’s team and committee staff.

While committees sometimes limit press based on space at hearings, and some witnesses have arranged to have their identities shielded, longtime Capitol Hill watchers struggled to think of precedent for a witness dictating terms of press coverage.

In Ms. Blasey Ford’s case she has received threats since she went public with her story, and her team has insisted the committee guarantee her safety as she testifies, as well as limited access to the hearing.

Ms. Blasey Ford has accused Judge Kavanaugh of an attempted sexual assault at a party when they were both high school students in the early 1980s. He has vehemently denied the accusation, and as yet no contemporaneous witness has come forward to verify her allegations.

She has agreed to testify but has laid out a number of parameters and is objecting to some of Republicans’ plans.

One major sticking point is the GOP’s plans to use a female lawyer hired specifically for this hearing to ask questions on behalf of the Republican senators. That lawyer will question both Judge Kavanaugh and Ms. Blasey Ford, according to one email from Mike Davis, the chief counsel for nominations to Chairman Chuck Grassley.

Debra Katz, another of Ms. Blasey Ford’s lawyers, said in a Tuesday morning message they still haven’t been told who that outside lawyer will be.

“Please let us know if you have similarly withheld the name of this person from Mr. Kavanaugh and his counsel. If you have not, which we assume to be the case, can you please explain the disparate treatment?” she wrote. “Please also advise whether Mr. Kavanaugh and his counsel have been given an opportunity to meet with this individual. We would similarly like the opportunity to meet with her at her soonest availability.”

She said in the email that Mr. Davis was refusing to talk by phone, so Ms. Blasey Ford’s team was asking for an in-person meeting.

A spokesman for Mr. Grassley didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

September 27, 2018. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , . Donald Trump, Sexism, Violent crime. Leave a comment.

10 Red Flags About Sexual Assault Claims, From An Employment Lawyer

http://thefederalist.com/2018/09/25/10-red-flags-sexual-assault-claims-employment-lawyer/

10 Red Flags About Sexual Assault Claims, From An Employment Lawyer

It’s not nice or politically correct to say, but people do sometimes lie to get money, revenge, power, attention, or political advantage. False allegations of assault have been documented.

By Adam Mill

September 25, 2018

I stand athwart the streamroller of sexual misconduct complaints that crush the innocent, end marriages, and destroy careers. In the Me Too era, I am an employment attorney in the politically incorrect vocation of defending who must pay if misconduct is found.

My skin is thick, and I do not melt when asked, “How dare you!” I dare because I do not want the innocent to be wrongly punished. I know it’s a very unfashionable to advocate on behalf of the presumption of innocence, and I am often reminded of how insensitive and outdated the principle is in today’s climate.

Of course, courtesy to the alleged victim is absolutely essential to be effective. To do otherwise is completely counterproductive and quickly turns the focus from the facts to the conduct within the inquiry. So I go to great pains to make my questions respectful.

I don’t interrupt. I don’t impugn. I just ask the accuser to walk me through what he or she is saying entitles him or her to damages. We know from cases like the Duke lacrosse team that mob justice can trample defense of the falsely accused.

It’s not nice or politically correct to say, but people do sometimes lie to get money, revenge, power, attention, or political advantage. False allegations of sexual assault have been documented. Even the most pro-accuser advocates acknowledge that 5 percent of the claims are simply false.

When the complaint is “he said/she said,” we should not helplessly acquiesce to coin-flip justice that picks winners and losers based upon the identity politics profile of the accused and accuser. Experience with a career’s worth of complaints in hearings, depositions, and negotiations has taught me some tells, red flags that warn that an innocent person stands accused.

Without naming any particular accusation, I offer these factors for consideration to the fair-minded who remain open to the possibility that guilt or innocence is not simply a question of politics. I also remind the reader that politicizing these accusations have allowed men like Harvey Weinstein, Al Franken, Matt Lauer, Les Moonves, Bill Clinton, and Keith Ellison to escape accountability. Nobody seems to care if they walk the walk so long as they talk the talk.

1. The accuser uses the press instead of the process.

Every company has a slightly different process for harassment and assault complaints. Often it begins with a neutral investigator being assigned to interview the accuser first, then potential corroborating witnesses. When an accuser is eager to share with the media but reluctant to meet with an investigator, it’s a flag.

2. The accuser times releasing the accusation for an advantage.

For example, when the accuser holds the allegation until an adverse performance rating of the accuser is imminent, or serious misconduct by the accuser is suddenly discovered, or the accused is a rival for a promotion or a raise, or the accused’s success will block an accuser’s political objective. It’s a flag when the accusation is held like a trump card until an opportunity arises to leverage the accusation.

3. The accuser attacks the process instead of participating.

The few times I’ve been attacked for “harassing” the victim, it has always followed an otherwise innocuous question about the accusation, such as: Where, when, how, why, what happened? I don’t argue with accusers, I just ask them to explain the allegation. If I’m attacked for otherwise neutral questions, it’s a red flag.

4. When the accused’s opportunity to mount a defense is delegitimized.

The Duke Lacrosse coach was fired just for saying his players were innocent. When the players dared to protest their innocence, the prosecutor painted their stories in the press as “uncooperative.” If either the accused or the accused’s supporters are attacked for just for failing to agree with the accusation, it’s a red flag.

5. The accuser seeks to force the accused to defend himself or herself before committing to a final version.

Unfortunately, this has become the preferred approach of the kangaroo courts on college campuses. It’s completely unfair because it deprives the accused of the opportunity to mount an effective defense. When the accuser demands the accused speak first, it is a strong indication that the accuser wants the opportunity to fill in the details of the accusation to counter any defense or alibi the accused might offer. It’s a red flag.

6. The accused makes a strong and unequivocal denial.

In most cases, there’s some kernel of truth to even the most exaggerated claims. When the accused reacts with a dissembling explanation full of alternatives and rationalizations, I tend to find the accuser more credible. Rarely, however, the accused reacts with a full-throated and adamant denial. When it happens, it’s a red flag that the accusation might have problems.

7. The accuser makes unusual demands to modify or control the process.

It’s a flag when the accuser demands a new investigator or judge without having a substantial basis for challenging the impartiality of the process that’s already in place.

8. When the accuser’s ability to identify the accused has not been properly explained.

In the Duke lacrosse case, the accuser was shown a lineup of photos of potential attackers. Every photo was of a member of the team. None were of people known to be innocent. It’s a red flag when an identification is made only after the accused appears in media and the accuser has not seen the accused for a number of years or was otherwise in regular contact with the accused.

9. When witnesses don’t corroborate.

10. When corroborating witnesses simply repeat the accusation of the accuser but don’t have fresh information.

It is now clear that accusations of sexual misconduct will forever be a tool to change results in elections and Supreme Court nominations. It’s disappointing to see so many abandon the accused to join the stampede of a mob that punishes any who ask legitimate questions about accusations.

These accusations destroy the lives of the accused, often men, and bring devastation to the women who love and support them. Some of the falsely accused commit suicide. When the mob attacks legitimate inquiry into the accusation, it’s a sure sign that the mob isn’t confident about the truth of the allegation. Rather than shrink in fear when attacked, we should take it as a sign that there is a risk that the accused is innocent, and the questions need to keep coming.

Adam Mill works in Kansas City, Missouri as an attorney specializing in labor and employment and public administration law. He frequently posts to millstreetgazette.blogspot.com. Adam graduated from the University of Kansas and has been admitted to practice in Kansas and Missouri.

September 27, 2018. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , . Donald Trump, Sexism, Violent crime. Leave a comment.

Alan Dershowitz: Six rules for conducting the Christine Blasey Ford-Brett Kavanaugh hearings

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2018/09/22/six-rules-for-conducting-ford-kavanaugh-hearings/ceJUeP97WOmIcKquyMIhzO/story.html

Six rules for conducting the Christine Blasey Ford-Brett Kavanaugh hearings

By Alan M. Dershowitz

September 22, 2018

It’s not surprising that each side of the Ford/Kavanaugh he said/she said dispute is seeking different procedures. This is an adversarial high-stakes confrontation between a male Supreme Court justice nominee and his female accuser. Reasonable people could disagree about the appropriate procedural steps, but there are basic rules that must be followed for hearings of this kind to be fair.

Rule 1: No one should presume that either party is lying or telling the truth. There is no gender-based gene for truth telling. Some women tell the truth; some women lie. Some men tell the truth; some men lie. Without hearing any evidence under oath, and subject to cross-examination, no reasonable person should declare psychology professor Christine Blasey Ford to be a victim or federal judge Brett Kavanaugh to be a perpetrator. Nor should anybody declare the opposite. The issue is an evidentiary one and evidence must be heard and subject to rigorous cross-examination, preferably by an experienced and sensitive female litigator.

Rule 2: The accuser must always testify first, and be subject to cross examination. The accused must then be allowed to respond to the accusation and also be subject to cross-examination. In the bad old days of the Inquisition, the accused was required to testify first without even knowing the grounds of the accusation. The rule of law in the United States had always been the opposite. The accuser accuses first and the accused then has an opportunity to respond to all accusations.

Rule 3: Political considerations should not enter into he said/she said decision making. Fact-finders and investigators must take as much time as necessary to get as close to the truth as possible, without regard to whether this helps the Democrats or the Republican or particular candidates. There should be no deadlines designed to influence the mid-term elections. Both sides should be given as much time as is reasonable to make their cases and no decision should be made until each side has had that opportunity.

Rule 4: Everybody must be willing to accept the “shoe on the other foot test.” The same rules that would apply if a liberal Democrat had been nominated by a liberal Democratic president must be applied to a conservative Republican candidate nominated by a Republican president. There can’t be one rule for the left and a different one for the right. The rule of law must apply equally in all situations.

Rule 5: The standard for proving a serious sexual allegation must be high. In a criminal case, the evidence must prove the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. “Better ten guilty go free than one innocent be wrongly convicted.” That standard must vary with the consequences to both sides. On university campuses, for example, the standard for proving a charge of sexual assault that could result in expulsion should be close to proof beyond a reasonable doubt, perhaps “clear and convincing evidence.”

But it should never be “a mere preponderance of the evidence,” because that means no more than a 51 percent likelihood that the sexual assault occurred. Under that low preponderance standard, 49 out of every 100 people convicted may well be innocent. That is far too high a percentage.

What about when the issue is suitability to serve a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court? The consequences of an erroneous decision are high on all sides. A nominee rejected for a false allegation of sexual assault will suffer grievous reputational and career consequences. But so will the woman whose accusations are deemed untruthful. There is also the consequence of having a Supreme Court justice serve for many years if he was a sexual assailant. On balance, the standard should be higher than proof by a mere preponderance. It should come close to clear and convincing evidence, especially if the allegation is decades old and the nominee has lived an exemplary life ever since.

Rule 6: No material information should be withheld from either side. Each side should have a full opportunity to examine inculpatory, exculpatory or otherwise relevant material that may have an impact on the truth-finding process. Specifically, the letter written to Senator Dianne Feinstein must be disclosed to Judge Kavanaugh and to the Senators. Ideally it should also be shared with the public as well, but if there is any highly embarrassing and personal information that is not relevant, it could be redacted.

Doubts should be resolved in favor of disclosure because Ford came forward voluntarily with her accusation, thus waiving any right to privacy. Kavanaugh too has waived his privacy rights by being a candidate for the Supreme Court, and any information relevant to his activities, even 36 years ago, should be disclosed.

If these neutral rules are followed, the process may end up being fair to both sides. All Americans have a stake in the fairness of this process and no one should compromise the basic rules of fairness and due process that have long been the hallmarks of the rule of law.

September 27, 2018. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , . Donald Trump, Sexism, Violent crime. Leave a comment.

Man Apologizes For Claiming Kavanaugh Sexually Assaulted His Friend, Says He ‘Made A Mistake’

https://dailycaller.com/2018/09/26/rhode-island-kavanaugh-made-a-mistake/

Man Apologizes For Claiming Kavanaugh Sexually Assaulted His Friend, Says He ‘Made A Mistake’

September 26, 2018

A Rhode Island man who accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting his friend apologized on Wednesday and said he “made a mistake.”

The man called Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse’s office and claimed that Kavanaugh and Mark Judge, a high school friend of Kavanaugh, drunkenly sexually assaulted one of his friends, according to interview transcripts released by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

A committee investigator asked Kavanaugh about the allegation during an interview on Tuesday, which he denied.

The man’s name was redacted in the transcripts released to the public but the investigator quoted verbatim several outlandish anti-Trump tweets from the man’s Twitter account, allowing reporters to identify him on Twitter as “Jeffrey Catalan.”

“Dear Pentagon, please save my country from the parasite that occupies the White House,” Catalan wrote in one tweet. “Our [sic] you waiting until Russians parachute in like in Red Dawn? Please help!”

After Catalan started getting attention on Twitter, he publicly stated that he had recanted the accusation.

“Do [sic] everyone who is going crazy about what I had said I have recanted because I have made a mistake and apologize for such mistake,” he wrote.

The committee is set to hear testimony on Thursday in a separate and unrelated accusation against Kavanaugh.

Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford, who accused Kavanaugh of drunkenly trying to force himself on her while the two were in high school, will both testify before the committee. Kavanaugh has adamantly denied Ford’s accusation.

September 27, 2018. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , . Donald Trump, Sexism, Violent crime. Leave a comment.

Two men say they, not Brett Kavanaugh, had alleged sexual encounter with Christine Ford

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/09/26/brett-kavanaugh-two-men-say-they-had-disputed-sexual-encounter-christine-ford/1439569002/

Two men say they, not Brett Kavanaugh, had alleged sexual encounter with Christine Ford

September 26, 2018

WASHINGTON – The Senate Judiciary Committee has questioned two men who say they, not Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, had the disputed encounter with Christine Blasey Ford at a 1982 house party that led to sexual assault allegations.

The revelation was included in a late-night news release by Sen. Chuck Grassley, the top Republican on the committee. The release includes a day-by-day view of the committee’s investigative work over the last two weeks since allegations surfaced targeting Kavanaugh.

Ford was the first to step forward with allegations and claimed Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed, groped her and attempted to pull off her clothes while both were high school students in 1982. Since then a number of accusations have piled on, including that of a physical assault and several other sexual encounters.

Kavanaugh has repeatedly denied all the allegations lodged against him.

The committee has interviewed two men who came forward about the disputed assault at a summer house party. Both told the committee they, not Kavanaugh, “had the encounter with Dr. Ford in 1982 that is the basis of his complaint,” the release states.

The previously unknown interviews could add a new layer to the evolving saga on the eve of a possible explosive hearing between Kavanaugh and Ford, though it’s unknown whether the men’s claims are being taken seriously.

One of the men was interviewed twice by committee staff. He also submitted two written statements, one on Monday and a second, more in-depth statement on Wednesday.

Committee staff spoke to a second man over the phone Wednesday who also said he believed he, not Kavanaugh, had the disputed encounter with Ford. “He explained his recollection of the details of the encounter” to staff, the release states.

Both men were not named. USA TODAY was not able to independently vet the claims.

The committee has said it is investigating all claims made in the Kavanaugh saga, attempting to “make sure no stone was left unturned.”

In this regard, the committee has also questioned Kavanaugh about a series of anonymous allegations, including a physical assault on a woman in the 1990s.

The release also outlines a number of others the committee has interviewed, including friends of Kavanaugh and those who know the women who have lodged accusations against him.

September 27, 2018. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , . Donald Trump, Sexism, Violent crime. Leave a comment.

Why is the New York government hiding the name of a woman who admitted that she had falsely accused two men of rape after her false accusation caused them to spend 26 and 11 years in prison?

I recently came across this New York Times article from May of this year.

It says that two innocent men were falsely accused of rape, and were convicted largely based on the testimony of the alleged victim.

One of the innocent men spent 26 years in prison. The other innocent man spent 11 years in prison.

The woman now says that the rape “never happened.”

The New York Times article says that the government of New York has not identified the woman.

Why is the New York government hiding the name of this woman who admitted that she had falsely accused two men of rape after her false accusation caused them to spend 26 and 11 years in prison?

And why hasn’t she been prosecuted for these false accusations?

September 23, 2018. Tags: , , , . Sexism, Violent crime. 1 comment.

No jail for Eric Clanton, the Antifa “ethics” professor who used a metal bike lock to assault seven innocent Trump supporters

This video shows a masked Antifa thug using a metal bike lock to smash the head of an innocent Trump supporter at Berkeley, California, in April 2017:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qKCl9NL1Cg

Some awesomely talented amateur sleuth observers at 4chan later identified the thug based on his partially visible face, his clothing, and several other things.

Any one of these things by itself is pretty meaningless. But taken together, it is extremely likely that they identified the correct person.

For specific details, see here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

The police also did their own investigation, and when they searched the person’s house, they found clothing and other items that matched that of the person in the video. Phone records also show that the person was present during the assault.

And it turns out that the thug is left wing Diablo Valley College “ethics” professor Eric Clanton.

Clanton supports shoplifting, opposes private ownership of property, and has defended convicted cop killer Mumia Abu-Jamal.

Earlier this month, we got this new article, which says that Clanton won’t be getting any prison time for his brutal assaults against seven innocent Trump supporters.

It says he used the metal bike lock to assault the heads of at least seven people. It also details the evidence the police found in his home tying him to these attacks.

It’s completely despicable that Clanton is not getting any prison time for what he did.

August 30, 2018. Tags: , , , , , , , , , . Social justice warriors, Violent crime. 2 comments.

Apparently, Elizabeth Warren doesn’t think that Mollie Tibbett’s murder by an illegal alien is a “real problem”

When asked about Mollie Tibbett’s murder by an illegal alien, Elizabeth Warren starts out by giving what seems like a very sincere and heartfelt response.

Good for her!

But then she says “but,” and says we need to focus on “real problems.”

Shame on her!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJ0ORLU_Q3E

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/elizabeth-warren-on-the-tibbetts-murder-sad-shes-dead-but-we-have-to-remember-we-need-an-immigration-system-that-focuses-on-where-real-problems-are

Elizabeth Warren on the Tibbetts murder: Sad she’s dead, but ‘we have to remember’ we need an immigration system that ‘focuses on where real problems are’

August 22, 2018

Sen. Elizabeth Warren is sorry that a 20-year-old Iowa student is dead and that a reported illegal alien has been charged in the killing, but the Massachusetts Democrat wants to stay focused on the “real problems.”

This isn’t a paraphrase of something she said Wednesday on CNN. This is her actual response to a question about reports that law enforcement agents have charged Cristhian Bahena Rivera, 24, in the disappearance and murder of Mollie Tibbetts.

“I’m so sorry for the family here, and I know this is hard, not only for the family, but for the people in her community, the people throughout Iowa,” Warren told CNN’s John Berman. “But one of the things we have to remember is: We need an immigration system that is effective. That focuses on where real problems are.”

Berman asking the senator specifically to respond to President Trump and Vice President Mike Pence claiming the Tibbetts murder is proof of the need for stronger immigration enforcement.

Warren continued, saying, “Uh, last month, I went down to the border, and I saw where children had been taken away from their mothers. I met with those mothers, who had been lied to, who didn’t know where their children were, who hadn’t had a chance to talk to their children. And there was no plan for how they’d be reunified with their children.”

Tibbetts’ remains were found early Tuesday morning, according to law enforcement officials. Rivera, who authorities believe has been living in the U.S. illegally for four to seven years, has been charged with first-degree murder. His bail was set Tuesday at $1 million.

“I think we need immigration laws that focus on people who pose a real threat, and I don’t think mammas and babies are the place where we should be spending our resources. Separating a mamma from a baby does not make this country safe,” Warren said.

Trump signed an executive order on June 20 reversing the policy of separating illegal immigrant families. And as to the issue of mothers being separated from their babies, I think Tibbetts’ mother, Laura Calderwood, might have some thoughts on that.

The Washington Examiner’s Phil Klein disagreed Wednesday with the criticisms of Warren, arguing the Massachusetts senator had not really stepped in it with “outrageously tone-deaf” comment.

“I’m no Warren fan, but this strikes me as a stretch. In clip she goes on to say we need to focus on actual threats, and that family separation doesn’t make us safe,” he wrote. “She isn’t saying that a young girl getting killed isn’t a problem.”

I disagree that the negative reaction is a stretch. The criticisms are well-deserved. Her comments follow a clear path. She starts by saying she’s sorry about the Tibbetts murder, and then changes the subject to attack Trump over an immigration policy he rescinded two months ago.

It’s true Warren’s remarks were about the White House’s response to the murder. That doesn’t take away from the “but” in her “I’m sorry someone is dead” response. There should never be a “but” in those statements.

August 24, 2018. Tags: , , , , , , , , . Immigration, Violent crime. 2 comments.

Even with google, it’s hard to find examples of assaults on reporters by right wing protesters

I just did the following two google searches.

The first search was for reporters assaulted by left wing protesters.

The second search was for reporters assaulted by right wing protesters.

The only difference between the two searches was whether I used the word “left” or “right.”

Here’s the link for the first search:

https://www.google.com/search?num=50&biw=1600&bih=763&ei=VVd3W5uAGoeZwgSj46uQAQ&q=reporters+assaulted+by+left+wing+protesters&oq=reporters+assaulted+by+left+wing+protesters&gs_l=psy-ab.3…53848.55548.0.55651.9.9.0.0.0.0.93.670.9.9.0….0…1c.1.64.psy-ab..0.3.214…33i10k1j35i39k1.0.AUi-zi8SIoM

And here’s the screen capture for the first search.



And here’s what is on the screen when I scroll down to the very next, immediate part of the results for the first search:



So when I searched for reporters assaulted by left wing protesters, I got exactly what I searched for.

Here’s the link for the second search:

https://www.google.com/search?num=50&biw=1600&bih=763&ei=T1d3W_w9if3BBJWas7gI&q=reporters+assaulted+by+right+wing+protesters&oq=reporters+assaulted+by+right+wing+protesters&gs_l=psy-ab.3…4707.5148.0.5599.2.2.0.0.0.0.80.147.2.2.0….0…1c..64.psy-ab..0.1.80…33i10k1.0.sQHms7nYIeU

And here’s the screen capture for the second search.




And here’s what is on the screen when I scroll down to the very next, immediate part of the results for the second search:



So even when I specifically searched for assaults against reporters by right wing protesters, the search still resulted with the first items being assaults against reporters by left wing protesters.

So even with google, it’s hard to find examples of assaults on reporters by right wing protesters.

August 17, 2018. Tags: , , , . Social justice warriors, Violent crime. Leave a comment.

If the biggest racism problem in the U.S. is whites being racist against blacks, then how come the rate of “whites killed by blacks” is more than 12 times the rate of “blacks killed by whites”?

As I’ve pointed out many times before,  the Black Lives Matter protestors don’t care about the 93% of black murder victims who are killed by other blacks.

Here’s a webpage from the FBI that gives even more info.

Someone took the info from that FBI link and created this chart. Please note that all of the numbers are per capita based on the murderer’s race. (I don’t know who created the chart, but I got it from here.)


I think that chart is extremely informative.

If the biggest racism problem in the U.S. is whites being racist against blacks, then how come the rate of “whites killed by blacks” is more than 12 times the rate of “blacks killed by whites”?

July 28, 2018. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Black lives matter, Racism, Violent crime. 2 comments.

Apparently, Anne Hathaway either doesn’t know or doesn’t care that 93% of black murder victims are murdered by other blacks

Anne Hathaway just said:

“White people — including me, including you — must take into the marrow of our privileged bones the truth that ALL black people fear for their lives DAILY in America and have done so for GENERATIONS. White people DO NOT have equivalence for this fear of violence. Given those givens, we must ask our (white) selves — how ‘decent’ are we really? Not in our intent, but in our actions? In our lack of action?”

Apparently, Hathaway either doesn’t know or doesn’t care that 93% of black murder victims are murdered by other blacks.

July 26, 2018. Tags: , , , . Politics, Racism, Violent crime. Leave a comment.

Attention teen protestors: YOUR texting and driving kills 269 times as many people as school shootings!

Wikipedia has this comprehensive, well documented article called “List of school shootings in the United States.”

School shootings are so rare and infrequent that it wouldn’t be good to just look at any one year, so I’m going to look at all the school shootings from  January 1, 1999 (the year of the Columbine massacre, which is often cited as the beginning of the “modern” era of school shootings) and go up until March 20, 2018, which is the most recent school shooting (Great Mills, Maryland) on the chart.

From January 1, 1999 until March 20, 2018 is a time period of 7019 days.

During those 7019 days, a total of 286 people were killed in school shootings.

That works out to 0.0408 people killed per day in school shootings.

Meanwhile, according to the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety, texting and driving kills an average of 11 teenagers every day.

This means that your texting and driving kills 269 times as many people as school shootings.

 

March 25, 2018. Tags: , , , , , , , . Guns, Violent crime. 1 comment.

Poll: What should the prison sentence be for someone who makes a false accusation of rape?

A false accusation of rape can cost an innocent person their education, their job, and their reputation. It can force them to spend years in prison. It can ruin their life.

In addition, every false accusation of rape potentially gives ammunition to people who might want to falsely argue that other accusations or rape – ones in which a rape really did take place – are false.

It’s also a waste of the taxpayers’ money.

 

https://nypost.com/2017/12/16/rape-trial-falls-apart-after-accusers-40000-texts-are-revealed/

Rape trial falls apart after accuser’s 40,000 texts are revealed

December 16, 2017

A student has described going through “mental torture” after a rape case against him was thrown out in court because police had failed to hand over more than 40,000 messages from his accuser.

Liam Allan, 22, faced up to ten years in jail charged with six counts of rape and six counts of sexual assault against a young woman over a 14-month period that began when he was 19.

The criminology student at Greenwich University had spent nearly two years on bail and three days in Croydon Crown Court when the trial was stopped in a dramatic fashion after it emerged police officers had failed to hand over evidence that proved his innocence.

The alleged victim had claimed she did not enjoy sex, while Mr Allan claimed it was consensual and she was acting maliciously because he refused to see her after he returned to university.

Now, the judge has called for an inquiry at the “very highest level” to understand why police failed to hand over critical evidence including 40,000 messages from the accuser to Mr Allan and friends.

The messages showed how she had continually messaged Mr Allan for “casual sex”, said how much she enjoyed it and discussed fantasies of violent sex and rape, The Times reports.

Outside the court, Mr Allan said he went through “mental torture” over the two year period and relied on the system to uncover evidence that would exonerate him.

When first accused, he turned to a local lawyer he had done work experience with and said he was terrified at the idea of going to prison with sex offenders and worried about what would happen to his mum and flatmates when he was away.

“You are all on your own. I could not talk to my mother about the details of the case because she might have been called as a witness. I couldn’t talk with my friends because they might have been called. I felt completely isolated at every stage of the process,” he said.

“I can’t explain the mental torture of the past two years. … I feel betrayed by the system which I had believed would do the right thing, the system I want to work in.”

The life-changing discovery was made at the 11th hour when a new prosecutor, Jerry Hayes, took over the case one day before the trial began and ordered police to hand over records — including a computer disk that contained 40,000 messages.

Mr Allan’s lawyers had already sought access to the accusers’s telephone records and messages but their requests were denied on the basis there was nothing of interest in them.

Upon discovering the messages, Mr Hayes said he would offer no evidence in court and would like to “apologise” to Mr Allan.

“There was a terrible failure in disclosure which was inexcusable,” he said. “There could have been a serious miscarriage of justice, which could have led to a very significant period of imprisonment and life on the sex offenders register. It appears the officer in the case has not reviewed the disk, which is quite appalling.”

Speaking later, he said detectives had previously told him the sexual messages were “too personal” to share.

“The defence quickly saw the information blew the prosecution out of the water. If they had not been seen this boy faced 12 years in prison and on the sex offenders’ register for life with little chance of appeal. This was a massive miscarriage of justice, which thank heavens was avoided,” he told the BBC.

Judge Peter Gower said Mr Allan was not guilty on all charges.

“There is something that has gone wrong and it is a matter that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in my judgment should be considering at the very highest level,” he said.

“Mr Allan leaves the courtroom an innocent man without a stain on his character.”

Mr Allan’s defence lawyer Julia Smart said she also received details about the text messages the night before she was due to cross examine the accuser, and when she told the court of her findings the trial was scrapped.

Mr Allan’s mum, Lorraine Allan, 46, said the “current climate” means that many people are treated as “guilty until you can prove you’re innocent.”

A spokesman for London Metropolitan Police said: “We are aware of this case being dismissed from court and are carrying out an urgent assessment to establish the circumstances which led to this action being taken.

“We are working closely with the Crown Prosecution Service and keeping in close contact with the victim while this process takes place.”

The Crown Prosecution Service said they will not conduct a “management review” with the Metropolitian Police to “examine the way in which the case was handled.”

Mr Hayes, who is a former Conservative MP, wrote in The Times the case marked the most “appalling failure of disclosure I have ever encountered.”

“The CPS are under terrible pressure, as are the police. Both work hard but are badly under-resourced.

“Crown court trials only work because of the co-operation and goodwill of advocates and the bench — but time pressures are making this increasingly difficult.

 

December 18, 2017. Tags: , , , , . Polls, Sexism, Violent crime. 1 comment.

Cook County Circuit Judge William Hooks is a bigger scumbag than the four scumbags who kidnapped and tortured a learning disabled man in Chicago

In January of this year in Chicago, two black men and two black women kidnapped a learning disabled white man, imprisoned him, tortured him, cut off part of his scalp, forced him to drink from the toilet, demanded ransom from his parents, and posted part of the torture as a video on Facebook. They also called him racial slurs, which puts this into the hate crime category.

Well, one of these scumbags has just been sentenced to probation instead of prison, after spending less than one year in jail. Her name is Brittany Covington. (The other three scumbags – Tesfaye Cooper, Jordan Hill, Tanishia Covington – are still awaiting sentencing.)

Given the horrific kidnapping, imprisonment, violence, and torture that they committed, I think all four of these scumbags should be forced to spend at least several decades in prison.

The fact that Brittany Covington was sentenced to probation instead of prison is inexcusable.

The judge responsible for giving probation instead of a prison sentence to this violent scumbag is Cook County Circuit Judge William Hooks.

Judge Hooks said he could have given her a prison sentence, but chose not to because “I’m not sure if I did that you’d be coming out any better.”

Although prison is referred to as a “correctional facility,” that is not the only reason that we put people who are convicted of violent crimes in prison. We also do it to protect the innocent, as well as to send a message to the guilty that their violent behavior is not to be tolerated.

Judge Hooks is a bigger scumbag than the four scumbags who kidnapped and tortured the learning disabled man.

By not sentencing Brittany Covington to prison, Judge Hooks is giving his approval to what Brittany Covington did. He is saying that what she did is OK. He is saying that what she did is acceptable.

But in the real world, what Brittany Covington did is not OK.

It is not acceptable.

Shame on Judge Hooks.

 

December 9, 2017. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , . Racism, Violent crime. 6 comments.

Slaughterbots: a weapon of the future

This fictional video was created as a warning about what may be real in the near future: tiny little drones with artificial intelligence, facial recognition, and enough explosive to destroy a person’s head. One drone can kill one specific person. A big group of drones can kill a large number of specific people, or an entire city for that matter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA

December 9, 2017. Tags: , , , , , . Military, Technology, Violent crime. 1 comment.

MSNBC reporter Kasie Hunt says Rand Paul getting assaulted “might be one of my favorite stories”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2tY7lD3TAw

 

November 28, 2017. Tags: , , , , , . Media bias, Violent crime. Leave a comment.

Philadelphia councilwoman Cindy Bass introduces bill that would force Asian shopkeepers to remove their bulletproof glass

Despite the fact that bulletproof glass has saved the lives of Asian shopkeepers, Philadelphia councilwoman Cindy Bass has introduced a bill that would force them to remove it.

The Asian shopkeepers claim the bill is racist. Bass says they are mistaken.

But Bass hasn’t offered any other explanation for her proposal, other than to say that she wants to “control” these stores, which she claims are a “source of trouble.”

I’d say the real “source of trouble” is the criminals who try to shoot and stab the employees of these stores.

And banning bulletproof glass will make that problem bigger, not smaller.

 

http://www.fox29.com/news/controversial-bill-would-force-business-owners-to-take-down-bulletproof-glass

Controversial bill would force business owners to take down bulletproof glass

November 27, 2017

PHILADELPHIA (WTXF) – A controversial bill is currently working its way through city hall designed to regulate ‘stop and go’ liquor stores. One part of the bill would force business owners to take down bulletproof glass inside their stores. But at what cost to their safety?

Broad Deli sits on the corner of the 2200 block of North Broad, inside a wall of bulletproof glass separates customers from workers.

“The most important thing is safety and the public’s safety,” owner Rich Kim said.

Rich Kim’s family has run the deli, which sells soda, snacks, meals and beer by the can for 20 years. He says the glass went up after a shooting and claims it saved his mother-in-law from a knife attack. Now, he may be forced to take some of the barrier down.

“If the glass comes down, the crime rate will rise and there will be lots of dead bodies,” he said.

A bill moving through city council reads: “No establishment shall erect or maintain a physical barrier.”

It’s called the ‘Stop and Go’ bill and is being offered by city councilwoman Cindy Bass.

“Right now, the plexiglass has to come down,” she said.

She wants to put some controls on these small stores that she says sell booze, very little food and are the source of trouble in her district.

Rich Kim resents the charge stores like his attract loiters and argues calls to police are often met with a slow response.

Mike Choe runs a non-profit supporting Korean-owned businesses. He plans on raising $100,000 to fight the measure.

“I do think it’s a bad bill that will endanger Korean Americans,’ he said.

Bass says she’s battling for her constituents.

Kim argues as a Korean-American he’s being targeted.

“This bill targets Korean Americans,” Cole asked. Bass responded, “Absolutely not. I find that offensive.”

 

November 28, 2017. Tags: , , , , . Guns, Racism, Violent crime. 8 comments.

Juanita Broaddrick, Kathleen Willey, Paula Jones praise ‘hero’ Drudge, Breitbart, slam legacy media

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1r0wITJU5Q

 

November 20, 2017. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Media bias, Sexism, Violent crime. Leave a comment.

Snopes falsely claims that Sutherland Springs church shooter Devin Patrick Kelley was not an atheist

Devin Patrick Kelley is the evil scumbag thug who murdered 26 people at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas.

According to the New York Times and CNN, Kelley was an atheist.

However, snopes writes:

Claim: The Texas church shooter was an atheist and was also on the payroll of the Democratic National Committee. 

Rating: False

In math, logic, and computer science, (TRUE and FALSE) = FALSE.

However, in journalism, the two statements must be judged separately.

It is indeed false to say that Kelley was on the DNC payroll.

But it is true to say that he was an atheist.

Shame on snopes for treating this as if it were a problem in math, logic, or computer science, instead of treating each claim separately.

Here are some other things I’ve written about snopes’s false claims:

Snopes falsely says the reason that Sweden recently banned Christmas lights on street poles is because of “safety concerns”

Snopes falsely says it’s a “total falsehood” that Black Lives Matter protestors in Memphis, Tennessee, caused a child to delay getting emergency medical care

Snopes falsely says, “The Obama administration didn’t sue on behalf of Muslim truck drivers who refused to transport alcohol.”

 

November 12, 2017. Tags: , , , , , , . Media bias, Religion, Violent crime. 1 comment.

YouTuber Styxhexenhammer666 comments on Kevin Spacey

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDsXMwy0UHg

 

October 31, 2017. Tags: , , . Violent crime. Leave a comment.

NBC almost broke Weinstein bombshell — but turned it down

http://nypost.com/2017/10/10/nbc-almost-broke-weinstein-bomshell-but-turned-it-down/

NBC almost broke Weinstein bombshell — but turned it down

October 10, 2017

Ronan Farrow’s bombshell investigation into Harvey Weinstein’s sexual misconduct was reportedly rejected by NBC over sourcing concerns before he took it to The New Yorker magazine.

Farrow had been working on the investigative piece for the peacock network — where he serves as a contributor, according to the Huffington Post.

Farrow and NBC even had incriminating audio in August where Weinstein admitting to groping a woman, the website said.

Farrow, who has a non-exclusive contract with NBC, asked to bring the story to a print outlet and agreed to return to the network and discuss it’s outcome, a source told The Post.

The New Yorker story included audio from an NYPD investigation while Actress Mira Sorvino and filmmaker Asia Argento were both on the record with their allegations against Weinstein.

An NBC source told The Post that Farrow did not have any accusers on the record while working on the story with them.

October 13, 2017. Tags: , , , , , . Media bias, Sexism, Violent crime. Leave a comment.

Harvey Weinstein’s lawyer gave $10,000 to Manhattan DA after he declined to file sexual assault charges

http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/harvey-weinsteins-lawyer-gave-10000-manhattan-da-after-he-declined-file-sexual

Harvey Weinstein’s Lawyer Gave $10,000 To Manhattan DA After He Declined To File Sexual Assault Charges

October 5, 2017

Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein’s lawyer delivered $10,000 to Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. in 2015, in the months after Vance’s office decided not to prosecute Weinstein over sexual assault allegations, according to an International Business Times review of campaign finance documents. That contribution from attorney David Boies — who previously headlined a fundraiser for Vance — was a fraction of the more than $182,000 that Boies, his son and his law partners have delivered to the Democrat during his political career.
(more…)

October 13, 2017. Tags: , , , , , , . Sexism, Violent crime. 1 comment.

‘Harvey Weinstein’s media enablers’? The New York Times is one of them

https://www.thewrap.com/media-enablers-harvey-weinstein-new-york-times/

‘Harvey Weinstein’s Media Enablers’? The New York Times Is One of Them

The paper had a story on mogul’s sexual misconduct back in 2004 — but gutted it under pressure

By Sharon Waxman

October 8, 2017

A whole lot of fur has been flying since last Thursday, when The New York Times published a game-changing investigative story about Harvey Weinstein’s sexual misconduct that in lightning speed brought the mogul to his knees.

He apologized and took an immediate leave of absence from the company he co-founded, but that wasn’t enough. His board members and legal advisers have been resigning en masse. And as new, ugly details emerge of three decades of settlements for sex-related offenses, he’s quickly becoming a national pariah.

I applaud The New York Times and writers Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey for getting the story in print. I’m sure it was a long and difficult road.

But I simply gagged when I read Jim Rutenberg’s sanctimonious piece on Saturday about the “media enablers” who kept this story from the public for decades.

“Until now,” he puffed, “no journalistic outfit had been able, or perhaps willing, to nail the details and hit publish.”

That’s right, Jim. No one — including The New York Times.

In 2004, I was still a fairly new reporter at The New York Times when I got the green light to look into oft-repeated allegations of sexual misconduct by Weinstein. It was believed that many occurred in Europe during festivals and other business trips there.
(more…)

October 13, 2017. Tags: , , , , , . Media bias, Sexism, Violent crime. Leave a comment.

Harvey Weinstein’s media enablers

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/06/business/media/harvey-weinsteins-media-enablers.html

Harvey Weinstein’s Media Enablers

October 6, 2017

Now that The New York Times has put together a stomach-turning chronicle of alleged sexual harassment by the movie mogul Harvey Weinstein — complete with brave, on-the-record statements from, among others, the actress Ashley Judd — we’re hearing a lot about how the story of his misconduct was “the worst-kept secret” in Hollywood and New York.

But until now, no journalistic outfit had been able, or perhaps willing, to nail the details and hit publish.

For decades, stars of Oscar-winning movies produced by Mr. Weinstein appeared on the covers of glossy magazines, chitchatted with late-night hosts and provided fodder for gossip columns and broadsheet features while the uncouth executive partly responsible for their success maintained his special status in Beverly Hills and TriBeCa.

Somehow the whispers concerning his alleged hotel-room and workplace abuses never threatened his next big deal, industry award or accolades, which included an honorary Commander of the British Empire appointment.

The real story didn’t surface until now because too many people in the intertwined news and entertainment industries had too much to gain from Mr. Weinstein for too long. Across a run of more than 30 years, he had the power to mint stars, to launch careers, to feed the ever-famished content beast. And he did so with quality films that won statuettes and made a whole lot of money for a whole lot of people.
(more…)

October 13, 2017. Tags: , , , , , . Media bias, Sexism, Violent crime. 1 comment.

Next Page »