March 29, 2019
A Chicago woman and immigrant from Bosnia has pled guilty to charges of terrorism in providing ISIS with equipment and aid.
According to the Riverfront Times article:
The six defendants were key backers for Abdullah Ramo Pazara, also a Bosnian immigrant who lived in St. Louis before traveling in 2013 to Syria to join the Islamic State, authorities say. They were indicted in February 2015, and the case has been handled at the federal court in St. Louis.
Salkicevic is the third of the defendants to plead guilty. A husband and wife from St. Louis, Ramiz Zijad Hodzic and Sedina Unkic Hodzic, have pleaded not guilty.
These were people who were graciously allowed to immigrate to the United States by us for a better life. America rescued them - from the Serbians, with whom they had been fighting a civil war - and from the wreckage of their communities. We fought the war for them, driving the Serbs out of Bosnia and giving their country independence. We let them settle here, and take government benefits to get on their feet. And this is how they repay us?
Americans died because of the equipment they sent to their ISIS buddies.
According to the article:
So, they should be excused for helping to kill Americans because they suffered in a war that we ended in their favor, then let them immigrate here. I hope this judge throws the book at them.
America is like the big, soft kid with a mild temperament who is bullied by smaller punks on the playground. They abuse him because he's unwilling to defend himself. We are forever trying to do good things and then the object of our kindness spits in our faces, because everyone hates a benefactor. It's especially true of Muslim immigrants, who are more eager to impose their religious beliefs on others than to show gratitude. See, in Islam the Muslim is owed. It is the ultimate entitlement and we have a duty to protect them, no matter how poorly they repay us.
America has got to start wising up to that simple fact.
Oh, by the way, Treason is defined in the U.S. Constitution as giving material aid and comfort to the enemy. These immigrants were doing exactly that. They should be tried for treason and if necessary given the punishment that is established for said crime. Yes, I do mean the death penalty. Americans died because of their actions, which were designed to hurt their adoptive country.
Here is the Constitutional definition of Treason:
Anyone remember John Candy's character Barf in the Mel Brooks movie Spaceballs? Candy played a Mog - half man, half dog. Well...
A Florida man (where else?) believes he is a Mog, and was arrested for proving it!
According to the Belleville News Democrat: 22 year old Austin Harrouff was arrested after he fatally attacked John Stevens and his wife. Harrouff was found biting Mr. Stevens' face and growling like a rabid dog. Police tased and kicked the psychotic pseudo-pooch repeatedly while he continued the attack in front of the officers. Police took Harrouff to St. Mary's hospital from the pound, er, Martin County Jail.
The AP article makes no mention of the toxicology report, but I suspect this guy was stoned out of his mind. Nobody thinks they are dogs, even if they are psychotic.
Harrouff should have stuck to humping on legs.
March 28, 2019
Our times resemble nothing if not 1930s Britain. Our politics are roiled by tensions between a large (largely young), ignorant population of idealists taken in with the concept of socialism/communism and an older, wiser populace who recognize the greatness of the contributions of our country. We face external enemies today as ruthless as those faced by England in the ‘30s. Our alliances are complex and our national fiscal situation is deeply concerning, just as the UK’s was. The similarities between Britain of that era and America of today, to my mind, are almost eerie. And the similarities between Donald Trump and Winston Churchill bear description.
I’ve taken comfort in these troubled times, however, in reading William Manchester’s three-volume biography of Winston Churchill, The Last Lion. In the midst of Britain’s turmoil in the early 20th century was an unusual man. Really, an incredible man. Winston Churchill. He was pugnacious beyond belief, maddening to his enemies, and often to his friends as well. Sound familiar?
The source of his inability to "fit in” was his own brilliance. And like most brilliant people, he recognized the disparity between his own immense intellectual powers and those of the lesser lights with whom he had to interact, producing a tiresome sense of pushing a Sisyphean boulder up a hill. In the governance of the British Empire, with its multitude of responsibilities, this was no mean feat. This intellectual imbalance naturally made for contentious relationships.
And like other genius statesmen in parlous times, such as Abraham Lincoln, Churchill was beset by the "Black Dog” - his euphemism for what we might call depression. One way that he coped with it was through self-medication with alcohol. Another way he coped was by directing his prodigious energies and powerful intellect into his unrivalled command of the English language and his preternatural understanding of history and England’s role in it.
And speaking of Churchill’s copious use of alcohol, I’m reminded of another interesting parallel with Trump. Although President Trump is a teetotaler, he shares with Churchill a mastery of the put-down. Churchill was once allegedly rebuked by his perpetual nemesis, Lady Astor, who accused Churchill of being "disgustingly drunk.” Without missing a beat, Churchill responded, "My dear, you are ugly, and what’s more, you are disgustingly ugly. But tomorrow I shall be sober and you will still be disgustingly ugly.”
Is that really much different from Megyn Kelly starting a question to Trump in a 2016 GOP debate with: "You’ve called women you don’t like ‘fat pigs, dogs, slobs, and disgusting animals,’” and Trump abruptly cutting in with: "Only Rosie O’Donnell.”[...]Burn.
Moving along, Churchill’s love for Victorian English ideals reflected his belief in the greatness of British culture and bears considerable resemblance to the visceral love that Donald Trump feels for America -- or the American Ideal. In another time, that might have been referred to as Manifest Destiny. The sense that God foreordained America to be the vessel through which He expanded human greatness and individual dignity, in opposition to some ever-present urge among many people to collectivize, to oppress, to assert dominance in the view that they alone possess the knowledge to achieve human happiness through the imposition of will.
For Churchill, this evil imposition of will took a very clear form in Adolph Hitler. As Manchester describes in his epic biography, genius is not some great cognitive ability to unravel mysteries that stump others (although there may be an element of that). Rather, it is the ability to see some vitally important goal in the distance and direct oneself toward that goal relentlessly, despite all the slings and arrows that one might encounter along the way. It is a resoluteness in one’s drive to realize that vision. In the case of a great statesman like Churchill, that vision took the form of recognizing the great threat to liberty for Western civilization that Hitler represented.
This is a very worthwhile read, and it's here: https://townhall.com/columnists/williammarshall/2019/03/28/donald-trump-americas-winston-churchill-n2543898
Jackson Cosko, the aid to Dianne Feinstein, Friend of Bernie, and the man who doxxed numerous Republicans during the Brett Kavanaugh hearings, may avoid any jail time due to his family connections.
From the Daily Caller
A former Senate aide charged with doxxing Republican senators and extorting a witness reached a plea deal with federal prosecutors in Washington after his wealthy and well-connected family brought in experts to talk about his mental health and the private supervision they could provide him.
A judge signaled that Jackson Cosko had allegedly taken large quantities of sensitive information from the Senate, but banned media from hearing the details. A hearing had been scheduled for Thursday, but on Tuesday, the court canceled it and indicated that a deal had been struck behind the scenes. A plea agreement hearing, where the deal is to be officially signed, was set for April 5…
Cosko — a supporter of Democratic socialist Bernie Sanders — is the son of an enormously wealthy and politically connected California family with ties to Feinstein. Republicans suggested the California Democrat leaked a letter soon before Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing that alleged the Supreme Court justice sexually assaulted Christine Blasey Ford.
Cosko's victims include Mitch McConnell, Lindsay Graham, Mike Lee, and Orrin Hatch. He posted their home addresses, phone numbers, and other identifying information to encourage assaults, threats, intimidation, and harassment. Cosko is a cyber security grad student and comes from a very wealthy, politically connected family.
Isn't this suspiciously similar to the Smollett case? Not in what happened, but in how officials are dealing with it. And why is the Trump DOJ letting this creep off?
Cosko was facing decades of jail time. His family argued he was mentally ill and could be better treated in their care.
Some are more equal than others in modern America, especially if one is a Democrat, socialist, minority, or whatnot.
Cosko's father is Greg Cosko, CEO of Hathaway Dinwiddie, a major construction company that built the university building named after California Senator Dianne Feinstein's husband. He serves on the board of San Francisco State University.
Jackson Cosko also worked for Sheila Jackson Lee, Barbera Boxer, and New Hampshire Senator Maggie Hassan. He was on Jackson-Lee's staff at the time of his crime. See more here.
It appears to me that the liberal elites are planning these things then protecting their foot soldiers.
Victoria Toensing: Mueller’s investigation was deeply flawed
Special Counsel Robert Mueller has been described as a public servant carrying out his final assignment for the United States by investigating allegations of "collusion” between Russia and the Trump Campaign.
In reality, Mueller’s prosecutorial history is deeply flawed, marred by a series of failures resulting in injustice to those he targeted. Like his previous work, his last labor is rife with errors in judgment and government overreach.
An example of just one of his victims involves the 2001 anthrax mailings. Shortly after Mueller became FBI director, he personally directed the investigation of who mailed anthrax to government officials, killing five and injuring others. Despite relying on what was later deemed unreliable evidence, the FBI fixated on one suspect, leaking his identity to the media. The person was wiretapped and his home searched. The unjustly accused man even lost his job. He was later cleared and received more than $5 million as a settlement for the Privacy Act violation. The real perpetrator committed suicide in 2008, just prior to the FBI arresting him.
Mueller refused to apologize for ruining an innocent man’s reputation.
Now let’s turn to his latest fiasco: the Russian collusion investigation.
For starters, Mueller loaded his team with Democratic activists — there was nary a Republican among the 19 lawyers.
Andrew Weissmann, who attended HRC’s "victory” party and emailed then-Acting Attorney General Sally Yates that he was "so proud’ and "in awe” that she had defied President Trump’s travel ban order, was the worst of the bunch. In 2011, a federal appellate court found Weissmann’s team of prosecutors had "plainly suppressed” evidence favorable to the defense when it prosecuted Enron accounting firm Arthur Andersen.
Recently unsealed documents reveal that his misconduct in the Enron case went even further. FBI agents working under Weissmann’s supervision warned potential witnesses against helping the defense by suggesting they might be indicted if their testimonies conflicted with other witnesses. His modus operandi is to threaten witnesses and their families with indictments unless they swear to information he wants.
Just ask Jerome Corsi, who was so threatened when he "couldn’t tell the special prosecutor what he wanted to hear.” Corsi went public with his charges against the Special Counsel, a clever move that apparently thwarted indictment.
Another biased investigator, Jeannie Rhee, has represented not only the Clinton Foundation, but also Hillary Clinton herself during a 2015 lawsuit regarding her private emails. Can you imagine the outcry if a lawyer investigating Hillary Clinton had represented Donald Trump and the Trump Foundation?
And then there is the Mueller Report itself. When Mueller could not get witnesses to allege untrue facts he was forced to clear the President of "Russian collusion.”
The other issue was obstruction of justice. Mueller claimed there were arguments on both sides of the obstruction issue, and left it up to the Attorney General to make the call. We do not yet know what acts could possibly amount to obstruction of justice. It could not be President Trump’s firing of FBI Director James Comey, because Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein would surely be a co-conspirator, having penned a memorandum recommending the firing.
Yet, former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe claimed it was Comey’s firing that triggered the need for a Special Counsel because it raised concerns that the President was trying to obstruct justice.
But wait — Rosenstein did not even mention the firing of Comey in his document appointing Mueller. Justice Department Regulations creating the position require that the Special Counsel "be provided with a specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated.” Firing Comey was not on the list. Moreover, contrary to the Regulations, Rosenstein specified no criminal conduct in the appointing document, broadly directing Mueller to investigate "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated” with the Trump campaign — a counter-intelligence matter, not a criminal investigation. We now know that Rosenstein had not one iota of evidence to justify that directive.
And so forth. The end of the article strikes home, as far as I'm concerned. With my emphasis added.
Mueller claimed he could not "exonerate” the president of obstruction. But prosecutors never exonerate. It is not a phrase an honest prosecutor without an agenda would use. Prosecutors simply decide whether or not to indict. The exoneration statement was Mueller’s (and probably Weissmann’s) final poke in the eye to President Trump and a consolation prize to Democrats, who can now claim that because the President was "not exonerated,” he must be guilty.
Entire article here: https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/victoria-toensing-muellers-investigation-was-deeply-flawed
Let us pray that his abusive Special Counsel investigation is the last "service” Mueller is allowed to perform for our country.
Just a reminder; Kim Foxx, the Cook County Prosecuting Attorney who dismissed charges against Communist actor Jussie Smollett for his fake hate crime, was elected with help from our old buddy George Soros. That help was to the tune of 408 thousand bucks dumped in at the last second so nobody would know it was the creepy Hungarian judas goat.
Soros has been buying up prosecuting attorney's offices, installing radicals in those positions for just this sort of thing. The plan is to use the power of the law to harass conservatives and excuse the Left. It's working, too, as the Smollett case illustrates.
Bear in mind that Kim Gardner, St. Louis City District Attorney (our name for Prosecuting Attorney) was a Soros-funded radical. She spearheaded a politically motivated attack on Governor Eric Greitens, and despite despicably unethical and downright illegal behavior she managed to drive the Missouri governor out of office. Chalk up a win for Soros!
He knew what he was doing when he decided to pursue control of D.A. offices nationwide.
Europe continues to drink the hemlock. From Breitbart:
In what was described as a "landmark” resolution passed on Tuesday with 535 in favour to 80 votes against, and 44 abstentions, EU member states were ordered "to develop anti-racism policies and stop discrimination in the fields of education, housing, health, criminal justice, political participation and migration”.
So why would any British citizen want to remain in the E.lU.?
Here is an example of how the "don't be evil" company has waaaayyyy too much power.
Apparently a "minor glitch" made an error in a money conversion table and crashed the value of the currency of the nation of Ghana.
The increased figure was apparently the result of an issue with Google’s currency conversion system for which the company has apologized. In a letter to Ghana’s Ministry of Finance, Google explained the issue with Google’s head of Public Policy & Government Relations, West and Francophone Africa, Titi Akinsanmi, writing:
The ministry of finance noted that both Nigeria and Pakistan have suffered similar errors from Google’s currency converter; a Google spokesperson noted that the error in Ghana was rectified within an hour and that the Nigerian issue was also resolved in a quick and timely manner. However, it is extremely worrying that Silicon Valley tech firms now have the ability to greatly influence the value of a currency in other countries simply by changing a few figures in their system.
If they can do it to Ghana, who else can they do it to? This may have been a mistake, but then it may have been a test, too. Google could potentially crash the world economy if they played their cards right. Isn't it time we used anti-trust and break Google up?
Warner Todd Houston posted this on Facebook:
Today I criticized a liberal for having his female staffers wear hijabs in solidarity with Islam. I tweeted to the guy that it was a shame he forced his staffers to wear a symbol of oppression and misogyny. Then, Stephen King jumps on to slam my tweet and actually wrote "You mean like a tie in church?" Seriously. Stephen King equated a man's tie to a woman being forced to wear a hijab. because... you know... men are beaten and stoned all the time for not wearing a tie just like women are for not wearing a hijab. Wow. Just wow
Sharia is diametrically opposed to freedom of speech, to freedom of conscience, to religious freedom, to any form of alternative lifestyle, to just about everything we hold dear. And it spreads at the point of a gun. If you don't voluntarily accept it you will be made to - or die.
I know a pastor in a church in little Bosnia here in St. Louis. He had a parishioner who converted from Islam. One night four masked men jumped him in the alley behind his home as he was taking out trash and beat him within an inch of his life. The fellow had to move away for his own safety; they were going to come back and kill him. Why? He was an apostate, and Islamic law says apostates must be killed. I guess King doesn't know that.
Stephen King used to be a good writer, now he's just a dope.
March 27, 2019
How long has Mueller known there was no Trump-Russia collusion?
Almost from the start, Democrats and their media echo chamber have moved the goal posts on collusion. The original allegation – the political narrative that the Clinton campaign, through Obama administration alchemy, honed into a counterintelligence investigation – was that that the Trump campaign was complicit in Russia’s "cyberespionage” attacks on the 2016 election.
But there was no evidence that candidate Trump and his surrogates had anything to do with the Kremlin’s hacking and propaganda schemes. And no supporting logic. The Russians are very good at espionage. They neither needed nor wanted American help, their operations predated Trump’s entry into the campaign, and some of those operations were anti-Trump.
Nevertheless, in short order, that endlessly elastic word, collusion, was being stretched to the breaking point – covering every conceivable type of association between Trump associates and Russia.
I'd like to take a moment here and point out, not for the first or the tenth time, that collusion is NOT illegal. A couple of years ago, Alan Dershowitz wrote about how (sorry, no link available) it would be impossible to write a law making it illegal.
Now that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has concluded that there was no criminal collusion, the question arises: When during their exhaustive 22-month investigation did prosecutors realize they had no case?
I put it at no later than the end of 2017. I suspect it was in the early autumn. (emphasis added)
By the time Mueller was appointed on May 17, 2017, the FBI had been trying unsuccessfully for nearly a year to corroborate the dossier’s allegations. Top bureau officials have conceded to congressional investigators that they were never able to do so – notwithstanding that, by the time of Mueller’s appointment, the Justice Department and FBI had relied on the dossier three times, in what they labeled "VERIFIED” applications, to obtain warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
And make no mistake about what this means. In each and every application, after describing the hacking operations carried out by Russian operatives, the Justice Department asserted:
The FBI believes that the Russian Government’s efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election were being coordinated with Page and perhaps other individuals associated with [Donald Trump’s] campaign.
As with anything by Mr. McCarthy, there is a lot of important detail. Please read it all. It just goes to show how the U.S. has been, well, jerked around by the Deep State. https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/andrew-mccarthy-how-long-has-mueller-known-there-was-no-trump-russia-collusion
Greenland's akobshavn glacier, once one of the most highly touted glaciers because it was shrinking so fast - comes roaring back!
From the article in Accuweather:
A NASA study revealed a glacier that was one of the fastest-shrinking ice and snow masses on Earth is making an unexpected comeback.
Greenland's glacier, named Jakobshavn (pronounced YA-cob-shawv-en), was retreating roughly 1.8 miles and thinning nearly 130 feet annually around 2012; however, it started growing again at about the same rate in the past two years, according to NASA's Oceans Melting Greenland (OMG) project.
NASA research found that the glacier is now flowing more slowly,
It's a strange global warming where ice returns after melting...
British Prime Minister Theresa May will resign if Brexit deal goes through.
According to CNBC:
British Prime Minister Theresa May has announced she will step down as the leader of the United Kingdom if her Brexit deal finally secures a majority in parliament, allowing a successor to take the lead on future negotiations with the European Union.
"I am prepared to leave this job earlier than I intended in order to do what is right for our party and country,” she said at a meeting of a powerful lobby of Conservative lawmakers known as the "1922 Committee,” according to media reports.
U.K. lawmakers have twice already refused to sign off on May’s Brexit "Withdrawal Deal” and the first rejection marked the biggest U.K. Parliament defeat in modern political history. It’s expected she will attempt to bring a third vote to Parliament in the coming days.
May’s timetabled departure is seen as key for securing a switch in votes from the right-wing Euroskeptic element in her party who want a different leader to take the reins for the next stage of negotiations with Europe.
Heavy jostling between Brexit-supporting Conservative lawmakers to become Britain’s next prime minister is now predicted
If you want my opinion - and you're getting it anyway, since it's my blog - May has been trying to kill Brexit with half-hearted efforts and an emphasis on a "soft" Brexit, one so soft as to be merely a kind of minor autonomy. Europe still will tell Britain how they can handle their economy, and how to run their country.
May is from the Establishment, and they are internationalist wherever they are to be found. Patriotism is as disagreeable to them as swimming in a septic tank. I think PM May has done a terrible disservice to Britain and she should quit now.
Liberals' Latest Outrage Over Chick-fil-a Is Purely Ludicrous
May 4, 2019
This book will stay with me for the rest of my days.
WASHINGTON, D.C.—In a closed meeting Tuesday, the Democratic caucus briefly considered investigating ways to beat Trump in an election, sources familiar with the meeting said.
"Someone suggested defeating him in an electoral process might be the quickest, simplest way to get him out of office at this point, but the idea was not popular,” one meeting attendee said on condition of anonymity for fear of being too closely associated with such a radical idea.
"Hard pass,” said one high-ranking attendee, before assuring fellow party members re-investigating everything Special Counsel Bob Mueller just investigated is the key to ending Trump’s presidency.
"Maybe if we just worked harder to earn votes in Michigan and Pennsylvania,” a caucus member from the Midwest meekly suggested, before being thrown out of the meeting.
"Earning votes is a distraction! Don’t you see what Trump is doing? He’s always distracting us!” newly minted Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez reportedly shouted, according to people inside the meeting. "Voting is for people in the cheap seats."
Some in leadership echoed the fiery, progressive leader’s concerns.
"She has a point. We don’t want the party to be caught flat-footed in some place like Wisconsin when the game is being played here. Eye on the ball, people.”
Between you and me, I doubt the idea will catch on. At least, I hope it doesn't. We've seen that the end of the Mueller "Investigation," with Attorney General Bob Barr firmly stating that the President is exonerated (Mueller left that up to him), has not deterred a number of Democrats from indicating they'll just keep on digging. It's so much more fun than actually doing the job their constituents pay them to do, don't you know? I would expect this will start to annoy said constituents, if it hasn't already, and perhaps siphon a number of votes away from their side. Let's hope so.
The article is found here: https://babylonbee.com/news/democrats-briefly-consider-investigating-ways-to-beat-trump-in-an-election
This is just wrong.
Purdue Pharma, makers of Oxycontin, has had to shell out $270 million to settle the first of a thousand lawsuits stemming from the opioid addiction epidemic.
It is speculated the innumerable lawsuits may bankrupt the company.
Oklahoma Attorney General Mike Hunter crowed about how this will start to address the problem of opioids:
"The addiction crisis facing our state and nation is a clear and present danger, but we're doing something about it today,"
Sorry, but suing the manufacturer of a product for misuse is despicable and useless. All that will happen is people will stop making needed drugs out of fear of lawsuits. Do we sue the maker of a food processor because someone chops off a finger sticking it in the gadget? Do we sue the electric company when someone sticks a fork in an electrical outlet? But here we have multiple lawsuits because a.a doctor prescribed an addictive medication and b.a patient misused it.
This is out of control and we desperately need torte reform.
I suspect Mike Hunter and the other vampires seeking ill-gotten gains from these lawsuits will have a very different attitude if they are in serious pain and require narcotics.
March 26, 2019
If you read or watch political news these days, you’ve probably already realized the Democrats’ presidential nominee next year will be Robert Francis "Beto” O’Rourke.
So great was the media’s adulation over that campaign launch this month that his selection seems preordained. So, you have to wonder why Democrats are going through the painfully divisive and expensive process of staging primaries to determine who will actually face President Donald Trump in 84 weeks.
Coronating a nominee this early is, of course, ridiculous given the amount of time and the number of competitors seeking to inherit the Hillary Clinton Chair of Presidential Campaigning.
Trump looks weak in the gauzy eyes of wishful liberals. So, ambitious Democrats may well exceed the 17 GOP wannabes in 2016, which sets up an intriguing potential 2020 scenario designed by the political gods who’ve watched over Trump’s brief career in electoral politics.
Even more Democrats wait in the wings, including former Vice President Joe Biden, who thinks a third shot is his charm, and Sen. Michael Bennet from Colorado. Never mind, he won’t matter either in the end.
Let’s be honest. With so many competitors appealing to so many sectors of that fractured party, no single candidate is likely to attract majority support anywhere. Think Republicans 2016.
This sets up perhaps a contested convention in Milwaukee and/or victory by an unexpected one who squeaks through with a slightly larger plurality. Which is why the party has kept some establishment superdelegates in reserve to rig results again the least worst way.
Already, the field has blacks and whites, a Hispanic, a child of immigrants, a Hindu, ex-mayors, ex-governors, current senators, a former professed Native American, a retired microbrewer who claims to have been bullied in childhood, a candidate opposed to circumcision and a New Yorker who calls herself "a young Mom ” at 52.
There’s also a democratic socialist who’s OK with owning three homes and is a half-decade older than the incumbent president, who at 70 was the oldest man ever to take the presidential oath.
For now, voters can learn about them from scattered print profiles. In an elongated act of contrition for carrying so many full-length Trump rallies last time, CNN is staging a stream of town halls with Democratic candidates, even unannounced ones. And there’s my favorite, C-SPAN’s vaunted and unfiltered "Road to the White House” series.
How are all these similar progressives going to differentiate themselves? The quick answer: with difficulty.
That’s a real opening for a celebrity candidate to compete against a celebrity president. At 46, O’Rourke has consciously avoided specific policy pronouncements beyond a desire to unite Americans.
You’d think as an empty vessel with a nice smile, he’s likely to get eaten alive on a debate stage with sharks. But such an inviting void allows would-be supporters to see in him whatever their heart desires.
What he said: "Former CIA Director John Brennan said Monday morning that he was "relieved” by the Attorney General’s summary of the Mueller report, admitting the findings presented less than he anticipated in terms of criminal activity."
What he meant: "Former CIA Director John Brennan said Monday morning that he was "horrified” by the Attorney General’s summary of the Mueller report, admitting the findings presented way less than he anticipated in terms of criminal activity and that he doesn't believe the report for a second."
What he said: ""Well, I don’t know if I received bad information but I think I suspected there was more than there actually was. I am relieved that it’s been determined there was not a criminal conspiracy with the Russian government over our election. I think that is good news for the country,” Brennan said when asked by MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough if he was surprised by the lack of collusion evidence."
What he meant: ""Well, I ignored any information I received -- I made it up as things went along. I suspected the worst because I hate Trump's guts. I am sorry that it’s been determined there was not a criminal conspiracy with the Russian government over our election. I think that is terrible, awful, crushing news for the country,” Brennan said when asked by MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough if he was surprised by the lack of collusion evidence."
What he said: "Brennan added "I still point to things that were done publicly, or efforts to try to have conversation with the Russians that were inappropriate, but I’m not all that surprised that the high bar of criminal conspiracy was not met.”
What he meant: "Brennan added "I still point to things that were done publicly, or efforts to try to have conversation with the Russians that were inappropriate, and I’m surprised and horrified that the high bar of criminal conspiracy was not met. I'm still gonna do everything possible to nail the bastard”
What he said: "There are some surprises there,” Brennan added. "I think that’s why getting to the full Mueller report is the best way to get some of these if not all of these questions answered.”
What he meant: "There are some surprises there,” Brennan added. "I think that’s why getting to the full Mueller report is the best way to get some of these if not all of these questions answered, because it's for damn sure Barr was paid off. And if necessary, we'll get somebody to fudge the report. But in the final analysis, I don't need no steenkin' Mueller Report. I know the President's guilty because... I know the President's guilty, and that's that.”
We all suspected this.
Wikipedia took money to protect media outlets.
From the article:
The report by Ashley Feinberg detailed former journalist Ed Sussman’s work as a paid Wikipedia fixer for clients such as Axios, NBC, and Facebook. Sussman did this work through the firm WhiteHatWiki, which he argues follows Wikipedia policies. Sussman disclosed his paid editing on Wikipedia and ostensibly worked within the rules by having other editors approve proposed changes.
However, Feinberg’s article noted several of Sussman’s requests involved removing or watering down potentially damaging material about clients, even when citing sources considered reliable on the site. Such removals would appear to violate Wikipedia’s neutrality policy, which states:
All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic.
In one example Feinberg cited, Sussman requested changes to the page of Axios journalist Jonathan Swan regarding a false report he made last September claiming Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein was resigning. A line noting the incident in Swan’s article was replaced with a paragraph hyping that Swan was "the first to report” Rosenstein’s offer to resign, despite the offer being refused. Sussman backed this spin with a New York Times article treating the incident as a failure of the Axios reporting model, a fact not mentioned in Sussman’s proposed edit.
Who here is suprprised by this? Anyone?
Bernie Sanders, Dems Praise New Zealand for New Gun Ban, Prove 'Common Sense Gun Reform' Means Confiscation
Others of the Usual Suspects joined Bernie, of course. Read the article to find out if the ones you expected are actually on the list: https://www.gunpowdermagazine.com/bernie-sanders-dems-praise-new-zealand-for-new-gun-ban-confiscation-order/?awt_l=5DZcm&awt_m=hlQFCfaS8XtbXZc
Presidential hopeful and self-proclaimed Socialist Bernie Sanders joined Democrats last week in cheering New Zealand’s newly enacted gun ban, proving that by "common sense gun reform" they really mean gun confiscation.
"This is what real action to stop gun violence looks like,” Sanders wrote on Twitter. "We must follow New Zealand's lead, take on the NRA and ban the sale and distribution of assault weapons in the United States.”NRA-ILA reported on New Zealand’s recent action:
This is what real action to stop gun violence looks like. We must follow New Zealand's lead, take on the NRA and ban the sale and distribution of assault weapons in the United States. https://t.co/lSAisDG9Ur— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) March 21, 2019
On March 21, the New Zealand government issued an order in council that immediately reclassified certain commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms as "military style semi-automatics,” or MSSAs. The order re-defined MSSAs in statute to include the following,
(a) a semi-automatic firearm that is capable of being used in combination with a detachable magazine (other than one designed to hold 0.22-inch or less rimfire cartridges) that is capable of holding more than 5 cartridges:
(b) a semi-automatic firearm that is a shotgun and that is capable of being used in combination with a detachable magazine that is capable of holding more than 5 cartridges.
However, this is a temporary measure. In a statement to the public, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern made clear that the orders in council were a "transitional measure until the wider ban takes effect,” and further legislation is still being drafted.
Ardern noted that there will be "a ban on all military style semi-automatics (MSSA) and assault rifles in New Zealand.” Going further, she noted that, "related parts used to convert these guns into MSSAs are also being banned, along with all high-capacity magazines.”
41 queries taking 0.2677 seconds, 166 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.