Sheriff Joe
DA
Yes
The Inevitable New The Inevitable Trump Mocking Thread
- Thread starter Nonononono
- Start date
Neologism?
Bruddah IZ
DA
What kind of medal?
Sheriff Joe
DA
CBS Baltimore: By golly, our murder rate actually IS higher than Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador
JAZZ SHAW Posted at 11:31 am on August 03, 2019
The ongoing social media battle between President Trump and Congressman Elijah Cummings of Maryland has drawn in all sorts of supporters on both sides and provided more than a few amusing moments. One of the most recent spun off from a claim that the President made about Baltimore (Cummings’ home town) having a higher murder rate than some of the most dangerous places in the western hemisphere. It actually came from the White House account, not Trump’s personal one.
Nevada, others, may skip GOP primary
The White Househttps://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1157015397696200704
The murder rate in Baltimore is higher than that of Honduras, El Salvador, or Guatemala—the three Central American nations driving our border surge.
Democrats have run Baltimore for 5 decades. It's time for accountability.
Today's news: http://45.wh.gov/8V3xFi
https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1157015397696200704
As usual, this had heads exploding among democrats who rushed to defend Cummings and claim that the President was “lying” again. Unfortunately for them, at least a few media outlets did their homework and went to fact check the numbers. CBS in Baltimore did the required digging and was forced to concede the unpleasant truth. The President was right. (Emphasis added)
ADVERTISEMENT
WJZ reviewed data from 2018, the last full year for which data is available. Data from the U.S. State Department’s Overseas Security Advisory Council lists El Salvador’s murder rate at 50 per 100,000 residents in 2018.
The council’s report listed Guatemala’s 2018 murder rate at 22 per 100,000.
Honduras’ 2018 murder rate was not included in OSAC’s annual crime and safety report published in April, but a report from the Observatory of Violence at the National Autonomous University of Honduras gave a figure of 41.4 murders per 100,000 residents.
HOW DOES BALTIMORE COMPARE?
Charm City ended 2018 with a total of 309 murders, according to the Baltimore Police Department. So far in 2019, police report 196 homicides have occurred. Using the U.S. Census Bureau’s July 2018 population estimate for the city of 602,495, Baltimore’s 2018 murder rate is 51.3 murders per 100,000 residents.
The article ends with two simple words. CLAIM: TRUE.
This is yet another example of a phenomenon we’ve become accustomed to seeing. If the President goes after any individual, organization or even city or country, Democrats and their allies in the media will immediately leap to the defense of the perceived target. Sometimes that works out for them in the media wars because President Trump does say some odd things from time to time. But that knee-jerk reaction also gets them into trouble.
We recently saw that when cable news hosts, newspapers and even Democratic presidential candidates rushed to the defense of Al Sharpton after Trump called him a con man. Seriously? Have any of you actually followed Al Sharpton’s career? That would have been a good time to stay on the bench and hold your tongues. Eventually, both the Washington Post and the New York Times felt compelled to publish op-eds questioning why Democrats were rushing to Sharpton’s defense.
This phenomenon is what Seth Mandell recently referred to as the Trump “unendorsement.” When Trump attacks someone, others rush to their defense under the terrible theory that the enemy of my enemy must be my hero. This leads to many mouths gathering feet.
When it comes to defending Baltimore, I don’t know what most of these critics were thinking. Regular readers know that I’ve been covering Baltimore politics and culture here for years and the President’s claims about it being plagued by violence, crime, drugs, and even rats came as no surprise to me. These endemic problems have been in place for longer than many residents can remember. Trump is also correct that Baltimore has been completely under the control of one party (the Democrats) for a very long time. Three of their last four mayors have left office either facing criminal charges or under a cloud of controversy and failure. (As with Stephanie Rawlings-Blake and her failure in handling the Freddie Gray riots.)
Attack Trump if you feel you must, but before you rush to proclaim Baltimore some sort of success story, get your facts in order. Parts of it are nice enough, but the rough areas on the east and west sides are pretty much war zones.
Sheriff Joe
DA
WATCH: Tapper Presses El Paso Mayor On Trump's 'Racism,' White Nationalism. His Response Is Perfect.
Beth Baumann | Aug 04, 2019 2:00 PM
Source: YouTube/CNN
After former Congressman Beto O'Rourke (D) appeared on CNN's "State of the Union" and cited President Donald Trump's alleged racism as the reason behind the "violence in America," host Jake Tapper pressed El Paso Mayor Dee Margo on the issue.
Despite Tapper's repeated attempts to get Margo to take a stance on Trump's alleged racism, the Mayor shut him down.
"Former Congressman from El Paso, Beto O'Rourke, told me earlier in the show that, in his view, the president's anti-immigrant rhetoric is making things worse and creating an atmosphere of violence. Do you agree? Do you have any concerns about the things President Trump says about immigrants?" Tapper asked.
"Jake, I'm not qualified to make a comment on that. I'm not a talking head. I'm focusing on the El Pasoans and the 20 deaths, their families and what it means to this community and how we can come together and not be victimized by this," Margo responded. "This will not define us. We are a unique region that's been here for 350 years. There's families on both sides. There's commerce on both sides. We're bi-national and bi-cultural. We're almost 2.5 million people and our average age is 32. This will not define us."
Tapper set the stage for another ask.
"The Texas Land Commissioner, George P. Bush, said in a statement that 'white terrorism' is a 'real and present threat that we must all denounce and defeat.' Do you agree that white terrorism is a threat to the United States?" Tapper asked
"Jake, I'm not qualified to respond to that anymore than the previous question," Margo said. "I'm focusing on El Paso. There's evil in this world and it's unfortunate."
Sheriff Joe
DA
Taxpayers Pay $2 Billion To Fund 30,000 Public Employees In Baltimore, Audit Shows
August 4th, 2019
Abandoned buildings stand in a neighborhood with a high murder rate on February 3, 2018 in Baltimore, Maryland. Baltimore, one of the poorest major cities in the United States, experienced 341 homicides last year, the highest per-capita rate on record for the city. The third citywide Ceasefire event began on Friday, with organizers and community members calling for peace for a 72-hour period and holding numerous events, including peace walks, movie screenings and a youth basketball tournament among other gatherings. (Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)
- Baltimore has received nearly $2 billion in federal aid to compensate about 30,000 public local and federal employees, according to an audit.
- Baltimore’s population is about 620,000.
- Milwaukee has 7,871 public employees, Detroit has less than 7,100 public employees and Las Vegas has 9,569 workers on payroll.
Taxpayers have paid nearly $2 billion in federal aid to fund 30,000 public employees in Baltimore at local and federal levels, an audit shows.
Baltimore reportedly has 13,522 employees with a combined payroll that exceeds $821 million annually. The mayor’s office paid $7 million in 2018 for the salaries of 111 employees and $1 million for public relations fees, according to an investigation auditors at OpenTheBooks.com conducted.
“We found the city drowning in taxpayer dollars,” Open The Books CEO Adam Andrzejewski wrote in an editorial published in Forbes Wednesday.
Baltimore’s schools pay another 10,770 employees with a combined payroll of $619.3 million — $79.1 million spent outside the classroom, $11.4 million spent on psychologists, $16.4 million spent on social workers, $7.4 million spent on counselors, $2.7 million spent on bus drivers and $41.2 million spent on principals and assistant principals, according to the watchdog group.
“Based on our audit, one fact seems clear,” Andrzejewski wrote. “If more money for public employees was the answer, Baltimore’s challenges would have been solved long ago.”
School children walk back after school on a rainy day in the McElderry Park area on April 12, 2019 in Baltimore. (Photo by ERIC BARADAT/AFP/Getty Images)
Federal workers in Baltimore amounted to 6,472 people who earned $521.4 million in 2018. (RELATED: Ben Carson Backs President Trump’s Attack On Baltimore As A ‘Rodent Infested Mess’)
A total of $1.1 billion in grants and direct payments was given to Baltimore city agencies, nonprofit organizations, corporations and colleges from fiscal year 2015 to fiscal year 2018.
“Baltimore has received a lot of federal money over the last five years. The problems in Baltimore is not for lack of money. It’s for lack of leadership,” David Williams of the Taxpayers Protection Alliance told Fox Baltimore.
The number of state employee in Baltimore, which has a population of about 620,000, is not known because Maryland’s comptroller did not disclose work locations to Open The Books. (RELATED: Flashback: President Obama Describes The Woes Of Baltimore)
Comparatively, Milwaukee and Las Vegas — which are similar to Baltimore in terms of geographic size — have less public employees. Milwaukee has 7,871 public employees and Las Vegas has 9,569 workers on payroll including police. Detroit, too, has less than 7,100 public employees.
Baltimore received $5.44 billion worth of federal aid in contracts, grants and other financial assistance for fiscal year 2018, according to USAspending.gov, Fox Baltimore reported Thursday.
Democratic Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings’ district received more than $9 billion in 2018 and more than $15 billion total between 2018 and 2019, according to the outlet.
President Donald Trump came under fire last week for accusing Cummings of not taking care of his district and calling Baltimore the “worst run and most dangerous anywhere in the United States” in a July 27 tweet.
Sheriff Joe
DA
This is what passes as news on the left.
Fake News.
Media 'optics' police hounded Obama and Clinton for years, now give Trump a pass
Aug 04, 2019 7:20am PDT by Eric Boehlert, Community
87175
What a difference a new administration makes. After spending years as self-appointed patrollers of so-called political optics, relentlessly ticketing Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for supposedly major and minor infractions, the D.C. press has dropped that pursuit under Donald Trump.
No longer obsessing over how things look or bemoaning a lack of proper theatrics, Beltway journalists have shelved that pursuit under the current Republican president, whose optics are routinely horrendous as he tweets out racist taunts, bullies adversaries, and buddies up to foreign dictators. Faced with an openly corrupt president who doesn't even try to hide his misdeeds, the media's police squad has gone into hiding and stopped handing out tickets altogether.
As a rule, there was no brazen corruption or lawbreaking when recent Democratic presidents were in office, so the press had to lean into "optics" in order to create drama and allegations of wrongdoing. The optics-based attacks also helped amplify Republican narratives and attacks on Democrats. The media's same misguided approach was applied to Clinton's 2016 campaign. And the press claims were always the same: We can't find any actual evidence of wrongdoing, but we just don't like the way things look.
Interestingly, the optics beat was recently resurrected—not to judge and assess Trump, but to belittle former special counsel Robert Mueller and his congressional testimony on Russian interference in the 2016 election. Donning their theater critic caps, reporters and pundits rushed out to announce that the optics of the testimony were flat, and that the hearings had been a "flop" for Democrats and their push for impeachment. It was a GOP-friendly conclusion that turned out to be completely erroneous.
Most people look back and laugh at the media kerfuffle that erupted when President Barack Obama wore a tan suit to a press briefing during the summer of 2014. People laugh because, in hindsight, the press outrage seems to be so ridiculously petty and pointless. (It's a suit!) But at the time, it was a big deal for the Optics Police, and journalists were serious in their anger.
Obama was sending the wrong message, they claimed. Obama misread the room. Obama was ignoring Beltway traditions. On and on that kind of nitpicking coverage continued for all eight years of Obama’s presidency, as pundits kept insisting America's first black president just couldn’t quite find his groove and hit the right savvy optics chord. (Why didn't he schmooze more?)
And let's not forget that the media's entire Clinton Foundation witch hunt, which raged through 2015 and 2016, was built entirely around supposed bad optics.
Journalists were completely open at the time that they could not find any wrongdoing by the Clintons or the foundation—no evidence of conflicts of interest or of Clinton selling State Department access to donors—yet the story remained hugely important because, they said, it looked bad. Indeed, “optics” became the go-to campaign theme for journalists who couldn't find any proof of Clinton malfeasance. (See also: the campaign coverage of her paid speeches.)
“Let’s be clear, this is all innuendo at this point. No pay for play has been proven. No smoking gun has been found,” announced NBC’s Chuck Todd. “But like many of these Clinton scandals, it looks bad.” "There's no question the optics are bad for Clinton and the Clinton Foundation," NPR said, while conceding that "no proof has emerged that any official favors—regulations, government contracts, international deals—were curried in exchange for donations or pledges." And from CNN's Anderson Cooper: "At the very least, there is an appearance of a conflict of interest for the foundation.”
Perhaps the strangest Clinton Foundation optics presentation came from a New YorkTimes news report that claimed “the potential for real or perceived conflicts of interest” was causing problems for the candidate. Wait, what? Not only was Clinton being graded on perceived conflicts of interest, but also on potential perceived ones. Talk about a can't-win situation.
It got so weird that some newspaper editorial boards demanded the Clintons shut downtheir A-rated landmark global charity simply because the optics were bad, because it didn't "look good" in the eyes of the accusatory Beltway press. The Optics Police were furious.
Most of that type of commentary got packed away once Trump was sworn into office, but was dutifully brought back last month in order to ding Democrats once again. Mueller’s testimony before congressional committees about the Russia investigation painted a devastating picture of a White House hijacked by a criminal enterprise and a president who does not shy away from obstructing justice and betraying his country for personal gain. But, uh oh! The optics were all wrong.
"On substance, Democrats got what they wanted: that Mueller didn’t charge Pres. Trump because of the OLC guidance, that he could be indicted after he leaves office, among other things," NBC's Chuck Todd announced. "But on optics, this was a disaster."
Fox News' Chris Wallace called the hearings "a disaster for the Democrats." “Impeachment’s over,” ABC News' Terry Moran announced, noting that Democrats “needed more fuel for any kind of impeachment effort.” CBS News' Major Garrett claimed that Mueller lacked the look of a "matinee idol or the central galvanizing figure of that drama." And CNN's David Axelrod said the hearings were “very, very painful to watch.”
"The grossness continued Thursday morning as both the Washington Post and the New York Times ran articles declaring that Mueller's inability to play to the cameras means that any hope of impeachment is probably dead," noted Amanda Marcotte at Salon.
This is where I will remind readers that the Mueller hearings were such a "disaster" for Democrats—indeed, such an optics failure—that 25 (!) additional members of Congress have since come out in favor of impeachment proceedings against Trump. Talk about the media completely missing the story. But that's what happens when they're blinded by a Democratic "optics" pursuit.
It's so strange that they have so little interest in applying those same optics standards to Trump.
Eric Boehlert is a veteran progressive writer and media analyst, formerly with Media Matters and Salon. He is the author of Lapdogs: How the Press Rolled Over for Bush and Bloggers on the Bus. You can follow him on Twitter @EricBoehlert.
Fake News.
Media 'optics' police hounded Obama and Clinton for years, now give Trump a pass
Aug 04, 2019 7:20am PDT by Eric Boehlert, Community
What a difference a new administration makes. After spending years as self-appointed patrollers of so-called political optics, relentlessly ticketing Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for supposedly major and minor infractions, the D.C. press has dropped that pursuit under Donald Trump.
No longer obsessing over how things look or bemoaning a lack of proper theatrics, Beltway journalists have shelved that pursuit under the current Republican president, whose optics are routinely horrendous as he tweets out racist taunts, bullies adversaries, and buddies up to foreign dictators. Faced with an openly corrupt president who doesn't even try to hide his misdeeds, the media's police squad has gone into hiding and stopped handing out tickets altogether.
As a rule, there was no brazen corruption or lawbreaking when recent Democratic presidents were in office, so the press had to lean into "optics" in order to create drama and allegations of wrongdoing. The optics-based attacks also helped amplify Republican narratives and attacks on Democrats. The media's same misguided approach was applied to Clinton's 2016 campaign. And the press claims were always the same: We can't find any actual evidence of wrongdoing, but we just don't like the way things look.
Interestingly, the optics beat was recently resurrected—not to judge and assess Trump, but to belittle former special counsel Robert Mueller and his congressional testimony on Russian interference in the 2016 election. Donning their theater critic caps, reporters and pundits rushed out to announce that the optics of the testimony were flat, and that the hearings had been a "flop" for Democrats and their push for impeachment. It was a GOP-friendly conclusion that turned out to be completely erroneous.
Most people look back and laugh at the media kerfuffle that erupted when President Barack Obama wore a tan suit to a press briefing during the summer of 2014. People laugh because, in hindsight, the press outrage seems to be so ridiculously petty and pointless. (It's a suit!) But at the time, it was a big deal for the Optics Police, and journalists were serious in their anger.
Obama was sending the wrong message, they claimed. Obama misread the room. Obama was ignoring Beltway traditions. On and on that kind of nitpicking coverage continued for all eight years of Obama’s presidency, as pundits kept insisting America's first black president just couldn’t quite find his groove and hit the right savvy optics chord. (Why didn't he schmooze more?)
And let's not forget that the media's entire Clinton Foundation witch hunt, which raged through 2015 and 2016, was built entirely around supposed bad optics.
Journalists were completely open at the time that they could not find any wrongdoing by the Clintons or the foundation—no evidence of conflicts of interest or of Clinton selling State Department access to donors—yet the story remained hugely important because, they said, it looked bad. Indeed, “optics” became the go-to campaign theme for journalists who couldn't find any proof of Clinton malfeasance. (See also: the campaign coverage of her paid speeches.)
“Let’s be clear, this is all innuendo at this point. No pay for play has been proven. No smoking gun has been found,” announced NBC’s Chuck Todd. “But like many of these Clinton scandals, it looks bad.” "There's no question the optics are bad for Clinton and the Clinton Foundation," NPR said, while conceding that "no proof has emerged that any official favors—regulations, government contracts, international deals—were curried in exchange for donations or pledges." And from CNN's Anderson Cooper: "At the very least, there is an appearance of a conflict of interest for the foundation.”
Perhaps the strangest Clinton Foundation optics presentation came from a New YorkTimes news report that claimed “the potential for real or perceived conflicts of interest” was causing problems for the candidate. Wait, what? Not only was Clinton being graded on perceived conflicts of interest, but also on potential perceived ones. Talk about a can't-win situation.
It got so weird that some newspaper editorial boards demanded the Clintons shut downtheir A-rated landmark global charity simply because the optics were bad, because it didn't "look good" in the eyes of the accusatory Beltway press. The Optics Police were furious.
Most of that type of commentary got packed away once Trump was sworn into office, but was dutifully brought back last month in order to ding Democrats once again. Mueller’s testimony before congressional committees about the Russia investigation painted a devastating picture of a White House hijacked by a criminal enterprise and a president who does not shy away from obstructing justice and betraying his country for personal gain. But, uh oh! The optics were all wrong.
"On substance, Democrats got what they wanted: that Mueller didn’t charge Pres. Trump because of the OLC guidance, that he could be indicted after he leaves office, among other things," NBC's Chuck Todd announced. "But on optics, this was a disaster."
Fox News' Chris Wallace called the hearings "a disaster for the Democrats." “Impeachment’s over,” ABC News' Terry Moran announced, noting that Democrats “needed more fuel for any kind of impeachment effort.” CBS News' Major Garrett claimed that Mueller lacked the look of a "matinee idol or the central galvanizing figure of that drama." And CNN's David Axelrod said the hearings were “very, very painful to watch.”
"The grossness continued Thursday morning as both the Washington Post and the New York Times ran articles declaring that Mueller's inability to play to the cameras means that any hope of impeachment is probably dead," noted Amanda Marcotte at Salon.
This is where I will remind readers that the Mueller hearings were such a "disaster" for Democrats—indeed, such an optics failure—that 25 (!) additional members of Congress have since come out in favor of impeachment proceedings against Trump. Talk about the media completely missing the story. But that's what happens when they're blinded by a Democratic "optics" pursuit.
It's so strange that they have so little interest in applying those same optics standards to Trump.
Eric Boehlert is a veteran progressive writer and media analyst, formerly with Media Matters and Salon. He is the author of Lapdogs: How the Press Rolled Over for Bush and Bloggers on the Bus. You can follow him on Twitter @EricBoehlert.
Sheriff Joe
DA
NEWS AUGUST 02, 2019
Rapper A$AP Rocky freed from Swedish jail after U.S. hostage envoy warns of 'negative consequences'
Trump had been calling for his release
Recording artist ASAP Rocky (L) in Los Angeles on October 29, 2016, Swedish Prime minister Stefan Lofven (C) in Paris on June 24, 2019 and US President Donald Trump (R) at the White House in Washington, DC on July 24, 2019. (DAVID MCNEW,THOMAS SAMSON,ROBERTO SCHMIDT/AFP/Getty Images)
AARON COLEN
Rapper Rakim Mayers, who goes by the stage name A$AP Rocky, was freed from Swedish jail and allowed to return to the United States on Friday, apparently aided by some Twitter pressure from President Donald Trump and a strongly-worded letter by a U.S. hostage affairs envoy, according to CNN.
Ditch the fake news ==> Click here to get news you can trust sent right to your inbox. It's free!
Mayers was facing assault charges in Sweden stemming from an altercation in June, during which he claims he acted in self-defense and that the alleged victim had confronted and harassed his group more than once before violence broke out. Here is some footage of the altercation (there is some profanity in the video):
President Donald Trump, reportedly at the urging of Kim Kardashian, had attempted to advocate for Mayers' release via Twitter, even offering to vouch for his bail, but the Swedish government initially rejected the notion that he would be released in response to the tweets.
CNN reported Friday that Robert C. O'Brien, U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage Affairs, wrote a letter to to Swedish prosecutors a few days before Mayers' release, requesting the "immediate humanitarian release" of Mayers and two other men who were being detained.
"...the government of the United States of America wants to resolve this case as soon as possible to avoid potentially negative consequences to the U.S.-Swedish bilateral relationship," the letter read.
Mayers' trial ended Friday and he was released, with a final judgement of his guilt or innocence to be rendered sometime this month. President Trump celebrated Mayers' release on Twitter.
"A$AP Rocky released from prison and on his way home to the United States from Sweden," Trump wrote. "It was a Rocky Week, get home ASAP A$AP!"
Rapper A$AP Rocky freed from Swedish jail after U.S. hostage envoy warns of 'negative consequences'
Trump had been calling for his release
Recording artist ASAP Rocky (L) in Los Angeles on October 29, 2016, Swedish Prime minister Stefan Lofven (C) in Paris on June 24, 2019 and US President Donald Trump (R) at the White House in Washington, DC on July 24, 2019. (DAVID MCNEW,THOMAS SAMSON,ROBERTO SCHMIDT/AFP/Getty Images)
AARON COLEN
Rapper Rakim Mayers, who goes by the stage name A$AP Rocky, was freed from Swedish jail and allowed to return to the United States on Friday, apparently aided by some Twitter pressure from President Donald Trump and a strongly-worded letter by a U.S. hostage affairs envoy, according to CNN.
Ditch the fake news ==> Click here to get news you can trust sent right to your inbox. It's free!
Mayers was facing assault charges in Sweden stemming from an altercation in June, during which he claims he acted in self-defense and that the alleged victim had confronted and harassed his group more than once before violence broke out. Here is some footage of the altercation (there is some profanity in the video):
President Donald Trump, reportedly at the urging of Kim Kardashian, had attempted to advocate for Mayers' release via Twitter, even offering to vouch for his bail, but the Swedish government initially rejected the notion that he would be released in response to the tweets.
CNN reported Friday that Robert C. O'Brien, U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage Affairs, wrote a letter to to Swedish prosecutors a few days before Mayers' release, requesting the "immediate humanitarian release" of Mayers and two other men who were being detained.
"...the government of the United States of America wants to resolve this case as soon as possible to avoid potentially negative consequences to the U.S.-Swedish bilateral relationship," the letter read.
Mayers' trial ended Friday and he was released, with a final judgement of his guilt or innocence to be rendered sometime this month. President Trump celebrated Mayers' release on Twitter.
"A$AP Rocky released from prison and on his way home to the United States from Sweden," Trump wrote. "It was a Rocky Week, get home ASAP A$AP!"
Sheriff Joe
DA
Get a load of this dickhead.
Mexico Plans To Take Legal Action Against The U.S. As A Result Of El Paso Shooting
Beth Baumann | Aug 04, 2019 5:17 PM
Source: AP Photo/Moises Castillo
Mexican Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard on Sunday vowed to take legal action against the United States after at least three Mexican nationals were killed during Saturday's shooting at an El Paso Walmart. Of the 26 that were injured, at least nine were Mexican nationals, NBC reported.
According to Ebrard, the shooting was an “act of barbarism,” but the United States failed to protect Mexican citizens.
“The president has instructed me to ensure that Mexico’s indignation translates into ... efficient, prompt, expeditious and forceful legal actions for Mexico to take a role and demand that conditions are established that protect ... Mexicans in the United States,” Ebrard said in a Twitter video.
Marcelo Ebrard C.
✔@m_ebrard
https://twitter.com/m_ebrard/status/1158055433464090624
Posición sobre la tragedia en El Paso Texas :
8,019
9:41 AM - Aug 4, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy
4,473 people are talking about this
In his alleged manifesto, 21-year-old Patrick Wood Cruisus said he was carrying out of his attack because of the illegal immigration invasion that threatens our nation. El Paso is predominantly Hispanic or Latino.
The gunman is currently booked in El Paso County Jail, although it's unclear whether or not he will receive a bond. He faces capital murder charges and the El Paso County District Attorney, Jaime Esparza has vowed to seek the death penalty against the shooter.
As of now, federal authorities are considering bringing hate crime charges against Cruisus as well.
“We are treating it as a domestic terrorism case, and we’re going to do what we do to terrorists in this country,” John F. Bash, the U.S. attorney for the Western District of Texas, told the Washington Post. “Which is deliver swift and certain justice.”
Mexico Plans To Take Legal Action Against The U.S. As A Result Of El Paso Shooting
Beth Baumann | Aug 04, 2019 5:17 PM
Source: AP Photo/Moises Castillo
Mexican Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard on Sunday vowed to take legal action against the United States after at least three Mexican nationals were killed during Saturday's shooting at an El Paso Walmart. Of the 26 that were injured, at least nine were Mexican nationals, NBC reported.
According to Ebrard, the shooting was an “act of barbarism,” but the United States failed to protect Mexican citizens.
“The president has instructed me to ensure that Mexico’s indignation translates into ... efficient, prompt, expeditious and forceful legal actions for Mexico to take a role and demand that conditions are established that protect ... Mexicans in the United States,” Ebrard said in a Twitter video.
Marcelo Ebrard C.
✔@m_ebrard
https://twitter.com/m_ebrard/status/1158055433464090624
Posición sobre la tragedia en El Paso Texas :
8,019
9:41 AM - Aug 4, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy
4,473 people are talking about this
In his alleged manifesto, 21-year-old Patrick Wood Cruisus said he was carrying out of his attack because of the illegal immigration invasion that threatens our nation. El Paso is predominantly Hispanic or Latino.
The gunman is currently booked in El Paso County Jail, although it's unclear whether or not he will receive a bond. He faces capital murder charges and the El Paso County District Attorney, Jaime Esparza has vowed to seek the death penalty against the shooter.
As of now, federal authorities are considering bringing hate crime charges against Cruisus as well.
“We are treating it as a domestic terrorism case, and we’re going to do what we do to terrorists in this country,” John F. Bash, the U.S. attorney for the Western District of Texas, told the Washington Post. “Which is deliver swift and certain justice.”
Sheriff Joe
DA
AUGUST 5, 2019
El Paso: The Real Root Causes of Mass Shootings
By Selwyn Duke
In the El Paso shooting’s wake, evident is same wash-rinse-repeat pattern. There are the inevitable calls for gun control by demagogues concerned only about people control, those who put the onus on whites when most mass shooters are non-white, and propagandists who blame the “Right” when most violence originates with the “Left.” It’s quite tiresome, really. In truth, the main underlying cause of increased mass-murder events -- and so much evil in general -- is a severe philosophical/spiritual malaise besetting our nation.
Were gun control the remedy here, mass shootings would be rare. Not only were there fewer firearm laws many decades ago, but in 1940s and ‘50s New York City, boys would often take guns on the subway because they had rifle clubs at school. So is access to firearms really the problem’s root cause?
As for the El Paso shooter’s motivation -- our immigrationismcombined with left-wing environmental concerns -- there are people who will do evil in a cause’s name regardless of its nobility or ignobility. The real question here is, boiled down: Why are we seeing so much more evil in America now than in bygone days?
Many people find it ironic that the El Paso shooter’s father is a mental-health therapist. I find it unsurprising. I used to work with children, and “social scientists” often had horribly behaved kids (in fact, a psychologist’s young son was involved in the theft of $300 at the business where I worked).
These anecdotes absolutely relate to a much wider phenomenon. Psychologists have done much to shape modern parenting habits -- and thinking in general -- in today's society, and, of course, they tend to epitomize what they peddle.
“Psychology” is a Greek word meaning “study of the soul,” ironic since today the field is soulless. While once part of philosophy, psychology was divorced from it in the 19th century in an effort to make it a science. This was a grave mistake.
Science confines its study to the material world, to what can be observed and measured within it. This means that, from a scientific standpoint, man can only be a physical being, an organic robot comprising chemicals and water.
In this vein and very much to the point, morality -- properly understood as something transcending man -- cannot exist, by science’s lights. Can you see a principle in a Petri dish or a moral under a microscope?
This idea was reflected in a man I know of who once said, “Murder’s not wrong; it’s just that society says it is.” How can the wholly scientific -- that is to say, the wholly atheistic -- argue with him?
A person of faith could say, “No, that’s not true because God exists, and divine law dictates homicide’s wrongness.” Of course, that murder-winking man could dispute this theist’s “data” (i.e., that God and His law exist), but he cannot dispute his logic; it’s airtight.
(Note here that logic is not an answer, but simply a method by which answers are found. Thus, the answers will only be as good as the data fed into the system.)
But what can the atheist say? His data is exactly the same as the murder-winking man’s. Under his worldview, society is all there is to say that murder is wrong -- because society is all there is to say anything. It then all boils down to Greek philosopher Protagoras’ belief, “Man is the measure of all things.”
This engenders what’s often called moral relativism, the notion that what we call morality changes with the time, place and people. In reality, though, it essentially is moral nihilism. For if man’s “values,” which really are just people’s preferences, are all there is, then morality doesn’t actually exist.
This idea has swept society, as evidenced by a Barna Group research company study I often cite. It found that, in 2002 already, a minority of Americans and only six percent of teens believed in Truth (absolute by definition), with a majority saying, quite oxymoronically, “Truth is relative.”
Forget Protagoras, the problem with this is that it also boils down to occultist Aleister Crowley’s maxim, “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.” Moral relativism/nihilism is the ultimate justification. Rape, kill, steal -- commit mass murder? Who’s to say it’s wrong? Don’t impose your values on me, dude.
This moral relativism/nihilism -- along, of course, with the godlessness of which it’s a corollary -- is our deep cultural malaise. It has been encouraged by modern psychology and so many other things; it is why, while we once viewed misbehavior and criminality as moral problems, we now consider them psychological problems. In other words, the organic robot is malfunctioning, a result of a defect in its hardware (genetics) or software (programming).
Translation: Forget that mythical thing called morality; we need to find out what kind of chemical intervention or programming alteration (or future gene therapy) can correct the machine’s operation.
This cultural malaise is devastating. Stop believing in something (i.e., morality) and you’ll cease learning about it; this is why most today can’t explain what virtues (“good moral habits”) are, let alone enumerate any great number of them (charity, diligence, chastity, honesty, prudence, etc.).
Moreover, if you neither believe in nor understand something, it follows that you’ll have neither the inclination nor capacity to teach it. Is it any surprise, then, that moderns are doing such a poor job imparting morality to children?
Returning for a moment to the El Paso shooter, do you want to bet that he and his father aren’t part of the morally relativistic/nihilistic majority? How likely is it that dad provided old-fashioned discipline and inculcated his son with virtue?
Interestingly, I’ve long pointed out that when people can no longer reference Truth when making moral decisions, the only yardstick they have left is emotion. Ergo, the modern credo, “If it feels good, do it.” Barna’s study vindicated this, mind you, finding that most Americans now “base their moral choices on feelings.”
Contributing Factors in Our Moral Decay
Given that emotion is holding sway, we should ask: What’s shaping feelings today? Entertainment is, largely, and it does much to stoke man’s animal nature. Just consider, for instance, the mindless, gratuitous violence; prurient sexuality; and morally nihilistic messages in modern movies and television programs.
Note something else also, and this is where I get pushback even from conservatives and (especially) libertarians, as it slaughters many people’s sacred entertainment cows and, they fear, may imply censorship’s necessity. Studies have shown that 15 years after television’s introduction -- and this is true the world over -- crime increased precipitously. (I explored this in-depth here.) Now consider that the Internet is TV10.
Video games are a factor as well (and this is where I really get pushback). Lt. Col. David Grossman, one of the world’s foremost experts on what he calls “killology,” contends that simulated video-game participatory violence (and the extreme violence on TV) amount to the kind of conditioning/desensitization used to inure soldiers to killing.
Then, of course, with mass shootings there’s also the psychotropic-medication factor and the copycat phenomenon. As to the latter, in a morally relativistic/nihilistic world where all is vanity, mass murder can be an alluring ticket to fame for those wallowing in meaninglessness.
Yet it all comes down to morality, or to a lack of morality -- or, even more precisely, to a lack of belief in it. Note here that the six percent of 2002 teens who believed in Truth simply reflect a pattern, as each succeeding generation is more relativistic/nihilistic than the last. This also corresponds to the generational increase in wickedness. It’s as strong a correlation as you’ll find anywhere.
Say what you will about TV, the Internet, video games, violence, or mass murder, it can’t be right or wrong if there is no right or wrong. It’s the ultimate self-evident reality: How can you build a moral society when its shades-of-gray people don’t even believe in morality?
El Paso: The Real Root Causes of Mass Shootings
By Selwyn Duke
In the El Paso shooting’s wake, evident is same wash-rinse-repeat pattern. There are the inevitable calls for gun control by demagogues concerned only about people control, those who put the onus on whites when most mass shooters are non-white, and propagandists who blame the “Right” when most violence originates with the “Left.” It’s quite tiresome, really. In truth, the main underlying cause of increased mass-murder events -- and so much evil in general -- is a severe philosophical/spiritual malaise besetting our nation.
Were gun control the remedy here, mass shootings would be rare. Not only were there fewer firearm laws many decades ago, but in 1940s and ‘50s New York City, boys would often take guns on the subway because they had rifle clubs at school. So is access to firearms really the problem’s root cause?
As for the El Paso shooter’s motivation -- our immigrationismcombined with left-wing environmental concerns -- there are people who will do evil in a cause’s name regardless of its nobility or ignobility. The real question here is, boiled down: Why are we seeing so much more evil in America now than in bygone days?
Many people find it ironic that the El Paso shooter’s father is a mental-health therapist. I find it unsurprising. I used to work with children, and “social scientists” often had horribly behaved kids (in fact, a psychologist’s young son was involved in the theft of $300 at the business where I worked).
These anecdotes absolutely relate to a much wider phenomenon. Psychologists have done much to shape modern parenting habits -- and thinking in general -- in today's society, and, of course, they tend to epitomize what they peddle.
“Psychology” is a Greek word meaning “study of the soul,” ironic since today the field is soulless. While once part of philosophy, psychology was divorced from it in the 19th century in an effort to make it a science. This was a grave mistake.
Science confines its study to the material world, to what can be observed and measured within it. This means that, from a scientific standpoint, man can only be a physical being, an organic robot comprising chemicals and water.
In this vein and very much to the point, morality -- properly understood as something transcending man -- cannot exist, by science’s lights. Can you see a principle in a Petri dish or a moral under a microscope?
This idea was reflected in a man I know of who once said, “Murder’s not wrong; it’s just that society says it is.” How can the wholly scientific -- that is to say, the wholly atheistic -- argue with him?
A person of faith could say, “No, that’s not true because God exists, and divine law dictates homicide’s wrongness.” Of course, that murder-winking man could dispute this theist’s “data” (i.e., that God and His law exist), but he cannot dispute his logic; it’s airtight.
(Note here that logic is not an answer, but simply a method by which answers are found. Thus, the answers will only be as good as the data fed into the system.)
This engenders what’s often called moral relativism, the notion that what we call morality changes with the time, place and people. In reality, though, it essentially is moral nihilism. For if man’s “values,” which really are just people’s preferences, are all there is, then morality doesn’t actually exist.
This idea has swept society, as evidenced by a Barna Group research company study I often cite. It found that, in 2002 already, a minority of Americans and only six percent of teens believed in Truth (absolute by definition), with a majority saying, quite oxymoronically, “Truth is relative.”
Forget Protagoras, the problem with this is that it also boils down to occultist Aleister Crowley’s maxim, “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.” Moral relativism/nihilism is the ultimate justification. Rape, kill, steal -- commit mass murder? Who’s to say it’s wrong? Don’t impose your values on me, dude.
This moral relativism/nihilism -- along, of course, with the godlessness of which it’s a corollary -- is our deep cultural malaise. It has been encouraged by modern psychology and so many other things; it is why, while we once viewed misbehavior and criminality as moral problems, we now consider them psychological problems. In other words, the organic robot is malfunctioning, a result of a defect in its hardware (genetics) or software (programming).
Translation: Forget that mythical thing called morality; we need to find out what kind of chemical intervention or programming alteration (or future gene therapy) can correct the machine’s operation.
This cultural malaise is devastating. Stop believing in something (i.e., morality) and you’ll cease learning about it; this is why most today can’t explain what virtues (“good moral habits”) are, let alone enumerate any great number of them (charity, diligence, chastity, honesty, prudence, etc.).
Moreover, if you neither believe in nor understand something, it follows that you’ll have neither the inclination nor capacity to teach it. Is it any surprise, then, that moderns are doing such a poor job imparting morality to children?
Returning for a moment to the El Paso shooter, do you want to bet that he and his father aren’t part of the morally relativistic/nihilistic majority? How likely is it that dad provided old-fashioned discipline and inculcated his son with virtue?
Interestingly, I’ve long pointed out that when people can no longer reference Truth when making moral decisions, the only yardstick they have left is emotion. Ergo, the modern credo, “If it feels good, do it.” Barna’s study vindicated this, mind you, finding that most Americans now “base their moral choices on feelings.”
Contributing Factors in Our Moral Decay
Given that emotion is holding sway, we should ask: What’s shaping feelings today? Entertainment is, largely, and it does much to stoke man’s animal nature. Just consider, for instance, the mindless, gratuitous violence; prurient sexuality; and morally nihilistic messages in modern movies and television programs.
Note something else also, and this is where I get pushback even from conservatives and (especially) libertarians, as it slaughters many people’s sacred entertainment cows and, they fear, may imply censorship’s necessity. Studies have shown that 15 years after television’s introduction -- and this is true the world over -- crime increased precipitously. (I explored this in-depth here.) Now consider that the Internet is TV10.
Video games are a factor as well (and this is where I really get pushback). Lt. Col. David Grossman, one of the world’s foremost experts on what he calls “killology,” contends that simulated video-game participatory violence (and the extreme violence on TV) amount to the kind of conditioning/desensitization used to inure soldiers to killing.
Then, of course, with mass shootings there’s also the psychotropic-medication factor and the copycat phenomenon. As to the latter, in a morally relativistic/nihilistic world where all is vanity, mass murder can be an alluring ticket to fame for those wallowing in meaninglessness.
Yet it all comes down to morality, or to a lack of morality -- or, even more precisely, to a lack of belief in it. Note here that the six percent of 2002 teens who believed in Truth simply reflect a pattern, as each succeeding generation is more relativistic/nihilistic than the last. This also corresponds to the generational increase in wickedness. It’s as strong a correlation as you’ll find anywhere.
Say what you will about TV, the Internet, video games, violence, or mass murder, it can’t be right or wrong if there is no right or wrong. It’s the ultimate self-evident reality: How can you build a moral society when its shades-of-gray people don’t even believe in morality?
Sheriff Joe
DA
AUGUST 5, 2019
Why Democrats Own El Paso
By Christopher Paslay
Mark Twain once said, “The difference between the almost right word and the right word is really a large matter -- ‘tis the difference between the lightning bug and the lightning.”
Donald Trump is a nationalist who supports all things American, and has admitted as much. What he is not is a white nationalist -- a detail that, like a decimal point, seems minor on the surface yet really is the difference between a lightning bug and lightning. Yet Democrats and the hard left continue to play with lightning, incessantly labeling Trump a white nationalist despite knowing how such language could be misperceived by legitimate neo-Nazis and white supremacist groups in America, possibly emboldening them to act.
Although the horrific El Paso shooting is still under investigation, Democrats and the mainstream media have wasted no time using the massacre to further inject the word white into Trump’s pro-American nationalism.
“The President of the United States is condoning white nationalism,” South Bend Mayor and presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg said of the attack. “White nationalism is one of the evils that is motivating and inspiring at least some people to go kill Americans. The president has a responsibility to nip this in the bud.”
Interestingly, it’s the Democrats that want to keep white nationalism alive in the White House, as Trump has nipped this in the bud, many times. In August of 2017, when violence started to escalate during a white supremacy rally in Charlottesville, Va., Trump tweeted, “We ALL must be united & condemn all that hate stands for. There is no place for this kind of violence in America. Let’s come together as one!” Later, after a 32-year-old female was hit and killed by a white nationalist’s car that ran into counterprotesters, Trump made the following statement: “We condemn in the strongest most possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides. On many sides.”
Trump’s short impromptu response -- made during televised remarks about a bill signing already underway -- suggested it takes two to tango, and failed to specifically condemn white nationalism, although Trump and White House officials insisted this was implied in Trump’s original tweet. But this was not good enough for those Trump haters who so desperately wanted to see America’s highest office stained by white supremacy. After claiming Trump was himself a white nationalist or at the very least a neo-Nazi apologist, Trump publicly condemned such hate groups and their sympathizers, stating, “Racism is evil and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups.”
A White H
ouse official even clarified Trump’s initial remarks. “The President said very strongly in his statement yesterday that he condemns all forms of violence, bigotry, and hatred,” the statement said. “Of course that includes white supremacists, KKK, Neo-Nazi, and all extremist groups. He called for national unity and bringing all Americans together.”
What Democrats should have done at this point was back President Trump, forever putting to rest the ridiculous notion that white supremacist hate groups have an ally in the White House. Instead they did the opposite. They rallied together with the mainstream media to create the narrative that Trump was indeed a vicious racist, that yes, the President of the United States was a white supremacist, and that he welcomed -- even encouraged --such displays of hatred and intolerance.
Of course Trump did not, and Democrats and the hard left knew it. Trump is an American nationalist, not a white nationalist, the former being patriotic and putting the interests of America and all its citizens first, the latter being a bigot who uses violence and fear to preach and establish white supremacy. Because Democrats have no solid platform of their own, they must use a scorched-earth approach, bending over backwards to frame everything Trump says and does as “racist” and thus evidence of him being a “white nationalist.”
More in Home
“The first order of business to reduce white nationalism is to eliminate white nationalism in our White House,” Washington state Gov. Jay Inslee said after the El Paso shooting. “The sentiments of fear and division, and outright racism, that this president has emboldened out to be sickening to anyone.” Inslee went on to say that fear and division are “Donald Trump’s stock-in-trade,” and that Trump owed it to the country to heal its historic racial wounds.
Heal, really? How can Trump or anyone else heal racial wounds when people like Inslee continue to rip these wounds wide open by constantly framing everything in terms of race, and by disingenuously referring to America’s president as a “white nationalist,” whereby providing legitimate hate groups with the misconception that they have a partner in the White House?
Wajahat Ali, a journalist for Al Jazeera America and former consultant for the U.S. State Department under Obama, recently mocked the Republican party and slammed Trump as a white nationalist, too:
“I think the Republican Party is the most diverse party on Earth. When I look at the Republican Party I see every shade of white under the sun, I see white men, old white men, young white men, white men with facial hair, some white men with fades. I even see some white women. What I don’t see are people of color. Why? Because Donald Trump is a racist. He’s a racist president and he’s promoting a white nationalist ideology.”
This isn’t racist? Mocking the very color of someone’s skin? Still, what on earth is this “white nationalist ideology” that Trump espouses, anyway? Trump criticizes the Squadfor bad mouthing America, inviting them to go to struggling countries like Somalia — fix them up — and then come back and let us know how it’s done. Yet somehow Trump is a bigot and white nationalist who told the congresswomen to go back where they came from, as if they weren’t welcomed in the U.S. because they weren’t white enough. Not only was race not mentioned by anyone except Democrats, but the invitation to come back was conveniently dropped.
Trump criticizes Elijah Cummingsbecause Baltimore is overrun with rats and urban blight, bringing attention to an area of America neglected by Cummings and the Democrats for decades, and Trump’s an intolerant bigot. Again, no mention of race anywhere, except from liberals themselves.
Trump calls for a merit-based immigration policy, one that accepts people who have viable skills and the ability to assimilate to American culture and values, and the left insists he’s a white nationalist, favoring white countries over nonwhite ones. Who bought up skin color? Not President Trump, but the race-obsessed left.
Ironically, it’s the Democrats who want white nationalism in the White House, not Trump and his conservative supporters. It’s high time they take responsibility for their dangerous and irresponsible rhetoric, before they embolden more hate groups to act out.
Why Democrats Own El Paso
By Christopher Paslay
Mark Twain once said, “The difference between the almost right word and the right word is really a large matter -- ‘tis the difference between the lightning bug and the lightning.”
Donald Trump is a nationalist who supports all things American, and has admitted as much. What he is not is a white nationalist -- a detail that, like a decimal point, seems minor on the surface yet really is the difference between a lightning bug and lightning. Yet Democrats and the hard left continue to play with lightning, incessantly labeling Trump a white nationalist despite knowing how such language could be misperceived by legitimate neo-Nazis and white supremacist groups in America, possibly emboldening them to act.
Although the horrific El Paso shooting is still under investigation, Democrats and the mainstream media have wasted no time using the massacre to further inject the word white into Trump’s pro-American nationalism.
“The President of the United States is condoning white nationalism,” South Bend Mayor and presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg said of the attack. “White nationalism is one of the evils that is motivating and inspiring at least some people to go kill Americans. The president has a responsibility to nip this in the bud.”
Interestingly, it’s the Democrats that want to keep white nationalism alive in the White House, as Trump has nipped this in the bud, many times. In August of 2017, when violence started to escalate during a white supremacy rally in Charlottesville, Va., Trump tweeted, “We ALL must be united & condemn all that hate stands for. There is no place for this kind of violence in America. Let’s come together as one!” Later, after a 32-year-old female was hit and killed by a white nationalist’s car that ran into counterprotesters, Trump made the following statement: “We condemn in the strongest most possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides. On many sides.”
Trump’s short impromptu response -- made during televised remarks about a bill signing already underway -- suggested it takes two to tango, and failed to specifically condemn white nationalism, although Trump and White House officials insisted this was implied in Trump’s original tweet. But this was not good enough for those Trump haters who so desperately wanted to see America’s highest office stained by white supremacy. After claiming Trump was himself a white nationalist or at the very least a neo-Nazi apologist, Trump publicly condemned such hate groups and their sympathizers, stating, “Racism is evil and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups.”
A White H
What Democrats should have done at this point was back President Trump, forever putting to rest the ridiculous notion that white supremacist hate groups have an ally in the White House. Instead they did the opposite. They rallied together with the mainstream media to create the narrative that Trump was indeed a vicious racist, that yes, the President of the United States was a white supremacist, and that he welcomed -- even encouraged --such displays of hatred and intolerance.
Of course Trump did not, and Democrats and the hard left knew it. Trump is an American nationalist, not a white nationalist, the former being patriotic and putting the interests of America and all its citizens first, the latter being a bigot who uses violence and fear to preach and establish white supremacy. Because Democrats have no solid platform of their own, they must use a scorched-earth approach, bending over backwards to frame everything Trump says and does as “racist” and thus evidence of him being a “white nationalist.”
More in Home
“The first order of business to reduce white nationalism is to eliminate white nationalism in our White House,” Washington state Gov. Jay Inslee said after the El Paso shooting. “The sentiments of fear and division, and outright racism, that this president has emboldened out to be sickening to anyone.” Inslee went on to say that fear and division are “Donald Trump’s stock-in-trade,” and that Trump owed it to the country to heal its historic racial wounds.
Heal, really? How can Trump or anyone else heal racial wounds when people like Inslee continue to rip these wounds wide open by constantly framing everything in terms of race, and by disingenuously referring to America’s president as a “white nationalist,” whereby providing legitimate hate groups with the misconception that they have a partner in the White House?
Wajahat Ali, a journalist for Al Jazeera America and former consultant for the U.S. State Department under Obama, recently mocked the Republican party and slammed Trump as a white nationalist, too:
“I think the Republican Party is the most diverse party on Earth. When I look at the Republican Party I see every shade of white under the sun, I see white men, old white men, young white men, white men with facial hair, some white men with fades. I even see some white women. What I don’t see are people of color. Why? Because Donald Trump is a racist. He’s a racist president and he’s promoting a white nationalist ideology.”
This isn’t racist? Mocking the very color of someone’s skin? Still, what on earth is this “white nationalist ideology” that Trump espouses, anyway? Trump criticizes the Squadfor bad mouthing America, inviting them to go to struggling countries like Somalia — fix them up — and then come back and let us know how it’s done. Yet somehow Trump is a bigot and white nationalist who told the congresswomen to go back where they came from, as if they weren’t welcomed in the U.S. because they weren’t white enough. Not only was race not mentioned by anyone except Democrats, but the invitation to come back was conveniently dropped.
Trump criticizes Elijah Cummingsbecause Baltimore is overrun with rats and urban blight, bringing attention to an area of America neglected by Cummings and the Democrats for decades, and Trump’s an intolerant bigot. Again, no mention of race anywhere, except from liberals themselves.
Trump calls for a merit-based immigration policy, one that accepts people who have viable skills and the ability to assimilate to American culture and values, and the left insists he’s a white nationalist, favoring white countries over nonwhite ones. Who bought up skin color? Not President Trump, but the race-obsessed left.
Ironically, it’s the Democrats who want white nationalism in the White House, not Trump and his conservative supporters. It’s high time they take responsibility for their dangerous and irresponsible rhetoric, before they embolden more hate groups to act out.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Chicago experiences most violent weekend of 2019: 52 shot, 10 killed
KRISTIN LAM | USA TODAY | 10:22 pm EDT June 3, 2019
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Chicago police say more than 50 people were shot, eight of them fatally, in gun violence over the weekend. Two people were stabbed to death, bringing the total number of homicides to 10. (June 3)
AP, AP
With the national homicide rate hovering near historic lows, Chicago’s police chief on Monday decried a “despicable level of violence” over the weekend in which 52 people were shot, eight of them fatally, and two people were stabbed to death.
KRISTIN LAM | USA TODAY | 10:22 pm EDT June 3, 2019
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
- Chicago experienced its most violent weekend of 2019, with 52 shootings and 10 deaths.
- Most of the shootings were gang related, police said.
Chicago police say more than 50 people were shot, eight of them fatally, in gun violence over the weekend. Two people were stabbed to death, bringing the total number of homicides to 10. (June 3)
AP, AP
With the national homicide rate hovering near historic lows, Chicago’s police chief on Monday decried a “despicable level of violence” over the weekend in which 52 people were shot, eight of them fatally, and two people were stabbed to death.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Murders Increase In Baltimore Through First Half Of 2019
July 11, 2019 at 8:32 pm
Filed Under: Baltimore, Baltimore News, Baltimore Police Commissioner Michael Harrison, Baltimore Police Department, BPD, Homicides, Katelyn Haas, Local TV, Maryland, Maryland News, Mayor Jack Young, Murder, Murders, Shootings, Talkers
BALTIMORE (WJZ) — As of July 11, there have been 171 murders in Baltimore.
13 of those have happened since July 1.
The first half of 2019 has been full of deadly gun violence, with often multiple shootings daily throughout one of Maryland’s most violent cities.
Baltimore City Fraternal Order of Police released their year-to-date homicide rate from the last two years Wednesday morning but updated it Thursday after three more homicides occurred throughout Wednesday and overnight Thursday.
This time last year, there had been 147 murders. This year, the number has already hit 170, a 16 percent increase.
In a 28 percent increase, there have been 388 non-fatal shootings/failed murders in 2019, with 31 of those since June 30, according to Baltimore FOP.
After citing these numbers, FOP tweeted #CityInCrisis and tagged the Baltimore Police Department’s Twitter account.
July 11, 2019 at 8:32 pm
Filed Under: Baltimore, Baltimore News, Baltimore Police Commissioner Michael Harrison, Baltimore Police Department, BPD, Homicides, Katelyn Haas, Local TV, Maryland, Maryland News, Mayor Jack Young, Murder, Murders, Shootings, Talkers
BALTIMORE (WJZ) — As of July 11, there have been 171 murders in Baltimore.
13 of those have happened since July 1.
The first half of 2019 has been full of deadly gun violence, with often multiple shootings daily throughout one of Maryland’s most violent cities.
Baltimore City Fraternal Order of Police released their year-to-date homicide rate from the last two years Wednesday morning but updated it Thursday after three more homicides occurred throughout Wednesday and overnight Thursday.
This time last year, there had been 147 murders. This year, the number has already hit 170, a 16 percent increase.
In a 28 percent increase, there have been 388 non-fatal shootings/failed murders in 2019, with 31 of those since June 30, according to Baltimore FOP.
After citing these numbers, FOP tweeted #CityInCrisis and tagged the Baltimore Police Department’s Twitter account.
Did t tweet "Too bad" when he heard?
I see your twitter master is up early today.