McCabe’s first act is to throw Comey under the bus. The lies are hard to keep straight.

McCabe is made because the rules apply to the FBI seventh floor.  He’s mad because it’s okay for him to fire OTHER FBI employees for lying, but he shouldn’t be fired for lying.  He’s mad because he is now caught in a perjury trap and in that trap is his mentor, James Comey.  The trouble with lying out of hand is you can’t keep them straight and the lies tend to compound into a confusing trap. Also just accept THEY thought doing this was the “higher standard” that also, conveniently, made them richer and more powerful.

Image result for photo of comey and mccabe

Three walking perjury traps.

Professor Turley point a big one out.  Either McCabe is lying OR Comey is lying. And Congress should file charges.  More importantly, if Comey is lying about this, he could be lying about a lot of stuff.  And as Turley points out, he’s starting a book tour touting his leadership and higher standards.

McCabe is accused of misleading investigators about allegedly giving information to a former Wall Street Journal reporter about the investigation of Hillary Clinton and the Clinton family’s charitable foundation. McCabe asserts in his post-firing statement that he not only had authority to “share” that information to the media but did so with the knowledge of “the director.” The FBI director at the time was Comey.

“I chose to share with a reporter through my public affairs officer and a legal counselor,” McCabe stated. “As deputy director, I was one of only a few people who had the authority to do that. It was not a secret, it took place over several days, and others, including the director, were aware of the interaction with the reporter.”

If the “interaction” means leaking the information, then McCabe’s statement would seem to directly contradict statements Comey made in a May 2017 congressional hearing. Asked if he had “ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation” or whether he had “ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation,” Comey replied “never” and “no.”

The Justice Department’s inspector general clearly saw this “interaction” as problematic in seeking answers from McCabe. If the inspector general considered this to be a leak to the media, any approval by Comey would be highly significant. Comey already faces serious questions over his use of a Columbia University Law School professor to leak information to the media following his own termination as director.

In leaving the FBI last year, Comey improperly removed memos about the Russian investigation that he wrote concerning meetings with Trump. Since these memos discussed an ongoing FBI investigation and were written on an FBI computer, the bureau reportedly confirmed they were viewed as official documents subject to review and approval prior to any removal or disclosure.

Comey could have given the memos to the congressional oversight committees. Instead, he removed at least seven memos and gave at least four to his professor-friend to leak to the media. Four of the seven memos that Comey removed are now believed to be classified. Since he reportedly gave four memos to his friend to leak to the media, at least one of the leaked memos was likely classified.

Now, McCabe appears to be suggesting that Comey was consulted before the alleged leak to the media on the Clinton investigation. Many of us had speculated that it seemed unlikely McCabe would take such a step without consulting with Comey. Yet, Comey repeatedly stated that he had never leaked nor caused anyone to leak information to the media.

The timing for Comey could not be worse. He already has started selling tickets, for roughly $100 each, to attend the tour for his forthcoming book, “A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership.” If he gave McCabe the green light for his “interaction,” the title could prove embarrassingly ironic.

If this was determined to be a leak with his approval, Comey likely would be labeled not just a leaker but a liar. Worse, his second-in-command just lost his pension after more than 20 years with the bureau, while Comey is about to cash in on a book and publicity tour potentially worth millions.

McCabe is said to be a great agent with a great career.  If you look at his actual career you see he went up the counter-intelligence side of the FBI which isn’t really police work.  So, maybe more political than cop.  That said, he could have been a good cop UNTIL he hit the seventh floor of the FBI and saw that everything there was now political. In a sense, he may be victim to the Obama/Clinton corruption that infected everything it touched.

However, and this is important, he could have said no and stayed out of it.  HE chose to be a bad guy and accept the bag of silver- which would have been the director of the FBI in a future Clinton administration. (Strzok texted about his impending advancement too.)   That’s on McCabe and any whining about being caught red handed is just immature caterwauling.  Like I said, if he fires young agents for lying, then he needs to understand for the FBI to be thought a good agency, then old agents like him should be fired for lying too.


Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Defining “crazy” in an increasingly mad world run by PC fascists. The danger of gun seizures.

If a guy is nuts, then he’s nuts.  But if he is saying things that the progressive machine disagrees with and THAT defines him as nuts, then we have a problem.

In Florida the first case has been ruled on and served.

The guns and ammunition of a 56-year-old Lighthouse Point, Florida, resident were confiscated by police in what is reportedly the first such seizure under gun control laws signed by Gov. Rick Scott (R) last week.

The Orlando Sentinel reports that “four firearms and 267 rounds of ammunition” were taken from the man, and he was “taken to a hospital for involuntary psychiatric treatment.”

The seized firearms were listed as “a Ruger LCP .380 pistol, an M2 Mauser .45 pistol, a Charter Arms .357 mag snub nose revolver and a Mossberg 500 12-gauge shotgun.”

The paper notes that “the civil ruling removing his access to guns and ammunition was granted under … new legislation — which permits confiscating guns from people who have not been committed but are deemed a potential risk to themselves or others, according to the order signed by Broward’s Chief Judge Jack Tuter.”

The details in the story indicate the guy was crazy.  IF the story is accurate, this is a case where maybe the guy should be held for observation.

Lighthouse Point police made the request on March 14, one week after they were called to conduct a welfare check on the man, who they said was behaving strangely at his condominium building. Authorities said it was the latest in a series of encounters law enforcement had with the man, though he has no prior history of arrests in Florida. He had some prior arrests in Pennsylvania, records show.

Police were called after the man turned off the main electrical breakers to the condo building in Lighthouse Point, court records show. The South Florida Sun Sentinel is not identifying the man because of his medical condition.

The man told officers he “was being targeted and burglarized by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and a neighbor who lives in [his] building,” the judge wrote in his order. “[He] could not describe the neighbor but stated that the neighbor [can] ‘shape shift, he can change heights and I’m not sure where he comes from’ and ‘to be honest, he looks like Osama Bin Laden.’”

He also told officers that he had to turn off the electrical breakers because “they are electrocuting me through my legs.”

There are two problems with seizing guns from “dangerous people”.  First, who decides what is dangerous? In California, if you ask your school would it be as proper to have students let out of school to protest FOR gun rights, you get suspended.

A California high school teacher says she was “aghast” to learn she was placed on leave over comments she made about National School Walkout Day.

Julianne Benzel, a Rocklin High School teacher, said that administrators’ decision Wednesday followed a debate she held in her history class about the nationwide school protest supporting gun control reform, news station KOVR reported.

She said she never discouraged students from participating in the 17-minute walkout on Wednesday, but school administrators told her they disagreed with her remarks.

“I just kind of used the example, which I know it’s really controversial, but I know it was the best example I thought of at the time — a group of students nationwide, or even locally, decided ‘I want to walk out of school for 17 minutes’ and go in the quad area and protest abortion, would that be allowed by our administration?” she told the news station.

The history teacher claimed she was only trying to encourage discussion among her students.

“I didn’t get any backlash from my students,” Benzel said. “All my students totally understood that there could not be a double standard.”

On National Walkout Day, she received a letter from the human resources department notifying her that she was being put on paid administrative leave.

Benzel, who has since retained legal counsel, said the school’s decision has raised questions about First Amendment rights.

You go along with that Nazi looking David Hogg kid’s agenda- you are a hero.  And safe to have guns, while your national spokesman tries on Nazi like arm bands.  See the problem? (Here’s a question. If he’s a senior and the Freshman building was targeted, was he there? We are warned not to question these kids, but I have to point out is this guy an actual “survivor”? Or just a Schumer/David Brock opportunist? I say this because he doesn’t act like a person who just survived a mass shooting. That or he’s a sociopath.)

James Woods said it best: You might have a little trouble getting Jewish Americans to embrace this look. Do you have some shiny jackboots and brown shirts to go with it? Guessing maybe you skipped history class while you were shilling for the @DNC… — James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) March 10, 2018

But the bigger issue has been pointed out by my MENSA bright buddy.  His question is simple. If a person is deemed to be so dangerous in his behavior or thought that the government thinks they HAVE to violate his rights and take his guns, then why does the government let that person go free?  Isn’t it dangerous to let a guy who is bent on harm to wander around where he can arm  himself with another gun, or get a knife, or a sword, or get in his car, or maybe drive a semi-truck with a fuel tanker rig into a a building and set it off?  If he is SO dangerous, why is he free? Unless the goal is to slowly seize guns and retard the resistance to gun control.  Remember, to the Left, trained by Mao, this is a long march.

My friend’s thinks if the argument is based on the threat then the people in charge would have to face the reality of incarcerating or hospitalizing thousands of “dangerous people” in a mental facility. Which means BUILDING more mental facilities, staffing them, funding them, etc.  That’s billions of dollars in expenses nobody wants to pay for.  So is the real effort to help the mentally unstable? Or is it a back door way to discourage gun ownership and seize weapons?

In addition, he pointed out once again our national leaders, who are NEVER in the cross-hairs of their bad decisions, are going to create bad policy that will end up forcing violent confrontations between the police and citizens.  If government starts confiscating guns and even one in a thousand say “no way”, you could start hundreds of gunfights where none were ever going to happen. Worse, good people on both sides will get hurt. Again, not the Chuckie Schumer types or the Bloomberg types, but only the grunt patrolman serving a seizure order and the guy who says no.  That’s just crazy.

Everybody says something has to be done.  The truth is sometimes doing nothing IS doing something.  Wait until the dust settles, have a fact based debate about the issues.  Then  figure out what SOLVES the problem, not just keep you elected.  Here’s a guy who should learn that lesson.

Image result for Marco Rubio

Sometimes doing nothing is doing something. Learn the facts, do the right thing.



Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

McCabe whines that he was not actually lying, just misunderstood. Flynn unavailable for comment.

McCabe and is acolytes knew this was coming, and they sent out pre-firing narratives to make McCabe sound like a victim.  Let’s be clear- he is NOT a victim.  He is a person involved in an effort to undermine a lawful federal presidential election.  He wanted “his choice” to win.  And he put his finger on the scales of justice to make that happen.

After an extensive and fair investigation and according to Department of Justice procedure, the Department’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) provided its report on allegations of misconduct by Andrew McCabe to the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR).

The FBI’s OPR then reviewed the report and underlying documents and issued a disciplinary proposal recommending the dismissal of Mr. McCabe. Both the OIG and FBI OPR reports concluded that Mr. McCabe had made an unauthorized disclosure to the news media and lacked candor − including under oath − on multiple occasions.

The FBI expects every employee to adhere to the highest standards of honesty, integrity, and accountability. As the OPR proposal stated, “all FBI employees know that lacking candor under oath results in dismissal and that our integrity is our brand.”

Pursuant to Department Order 1202, and based on the report of the Inspector General, the findings of the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility, and the recommendation of the Department’s senior career official, I have terminated the employment of Andrew McCabe effective immediately.

McCabe offered his own statement. It is an interesting read as it avoids the biggest issues.  The best part is this:

The OIG investigation has focused on information I chose to share with a reporter through my public affairs officer and a legal counselor. As Deputy Director, I was one of only a few people who had the authority to do that. It was not a secret, it took place over several days, and others, including the Director, were aware of the interaction with the reporter. It was the same type of exchange with the media that the Deputy Director oversees several times per week. In fact it was the same type of work that I continued to do under Director Wray, at his request. The investigation subsequently focused on who I talked to, when I talked to them, and so forth. During these inquiries, I answered questions truthfully and as accurately as I could amidst the chaos that surrounded me. And when I thought my answers were misunderstood, I contacted investigators to correct them.

All I hear is “Wahh, wahh, wahh.”

So, you lied. Figured out they had figured it out, tried to correct the record and still got fired.

Image result for McCabe pic

Being corrupt sucks when you get caught. Deal with it.

Gen Flynn may not have lied in an interview set up by McCabe, and done by his little buddy Strzok, but was charged for lying and plead guilty for it.  Flynn’s kid and his brother had some comments.  FLynn hasn’t spoken yet.  But I’m sure Flynn isn’t missing the irony of all of this.

BTW- Remember that McCabe said if they took his pension he’d “take the FBI down.”  If as a supervisor he had information that would bring down the FBI and did not act on that information as long as he got paid, then firing him is the least we could do.

Just saying…

Oh, according to one reporter the real cops in the FBI are happy.  Interesting description of a small group of political employees messing with justice.

7:23 p.m. PDT: “McCabe blaming Nunes and the dossier is beyond incorrect. The internal investigation took all that into consideration and much more. Ask the agents in the bureau, not the politicians and media outside of it. That’s what I did. They had a ton of stuff on him…a ton.”

7:31 p.m. PDT: “McCabe had some friends as part of his group. Some have left…a few are still around. FYI”

7:32 p.m. PDT: “Again…this isn’t about politics..this was an internal thing that became political. It started before Trump. Both sides are tho going to make this political. I mean…that’s what they do.”

7:56 p.m. PDT: “And there is much more. But leave it to some of my colleagues in the media to immediately make it political. RT @debz526: @calvindanielsll @Put2sleep0066 @adamhousley The totality of what McCabe has done hasn’t been disclosed to the public.”

8:25 p.m. PDT: “could care less about Trump and Sessions. According to my sources, who are beyond question, there is much more. This isn’t about Trump. This was about control and business as usual for a few”

8:30 p.m. PDT: “Wray and McCabe’s meeting did not go well and it was McCabe who challenged the Director. McCabe stepped down because of this and tried to ride it out until retirement. Truth internally came out before that happened. This has nothing to do with Trumps tweets or Nunes memo”

8:31 p.m. PDT: “I am told yesterday McCabe felt the heat and went to try and save his last two days and even told some he would take people down with him if he as fired. So…let’s see what comes of this. I know this…a ton of agents…a ton…were watching this very closely.”

8:34 p.m. PDT: “This was about power by a group within the FBI. A clique. I see Republicans already making this political and tying it in a much different way than it was. Dems tying it to Trump…both would be wrong.”

8:42 p.m. PDT: “This decision will encourage agents to trust coming forward. Others who had during the clique’s time in charge got buried and mistreated and it kept agents from coming forward. Again..this began before Trump. It was about control.”

8:47 p.m. PDT: “Happy RT @HappyGoldenRule: @adamhousley Are they mad or happy about the firing?”

8:49 p.m.PDT: “As a reporter I will repeat this once more. I could care less if this helps Trump, or helps politically in any way. I just know a ton of men and women in the FBI who do damn good work and they were watching how this clique would be handled. McCabe has many who do not support”

8:50 p.m. PDT: “I am saying agents have told me of a small group of people we’re all about control and they were even tough on their own internally. It had agents not wanting to talk and it started before Trump.”

8:51 p.m. PDT: “I am saying this started before that. What they did and what it became will be revealed in the full report.”



Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Lee Smith explains RussiaGate better than most.

It’s a mindset created by associations and like goals and agendas.  None of which serve the public. All of which serve the perpetrators.  It’s good stuff. The key passage.

Yes, the left hates Trump. I didn’t vote for him, either. But what Gessen, Greenwald, Lears, and Cohen all understand is that Russiagate isn’t about Trump. He’s just a convenient proxy for the real target. Their understanding is shared by writers on the right, like Andrew McCarthy, a former lawyer at the Department of Justice, who hasunfolded the Russiagate affair over the last year in the pages of National Review, where he has carefully explained how the DOJ and FBI misled the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in order to spy on Carter Page and violate the privacy of an American citizen.

What unites Gessen, Greenwald, Lears, and McCarthy obviously isn’t politics—rather, it’s the recognition that the Russiagate campaign represents an attack on American political and social institutions, an attack on our liberties, an attack on us. Russiagate is a conspiracy theory, weaponized by political operatives, much of the press, as well as high-level intelligence and law enforcement bureaucrats to delegitimize an American election and protect their own interests, which coincide with those of the country’s larger professional and bureaucratic elite.


The story of how the Russiagate collusion myth was made and marketed is much easier to understand—it’s social. Imagine a map of professional, academic, and family networks that connect people across professions like law, journalism, public relations, and lobbying, which intersect with political institutions, like the permanent bureaucracies that staff places like the FBI, CIA, Congress, and the White House. That map is largely blue, but there’s lots of red there, too.

The story of how spies and journalists came to collaborate on a disinformation campaign is also, as the left may not be surprised to find, partly explained by economics. With the rise of the internet and social media, and the resulting collapse of print advertising, it was no longer necessary for the media to mass so close to New York City ad firms. Surviving old-media outlets and their new-media cousins moved much of their operations to Washington, which offered one-stop shopping for “national” stories. Having insulated itself from the 2008 economic collapse, the capital thrived. Ambitious and inexperienced young journalists flocked to where the jobs were, staffing startup news and social media operations—which were often simply partisan war rooms that produced and solicited opposition research—just in time to cover Obama’s historic presidency.

For those like Gessen, Cohen, Lears, and others on the left who don’t understand how and when American journalists got in bed with the country’s spies, it started several years before Trump or Russiagate. It was while reporting on the Obama administration that the press came to rely on the White House’s political operatives, including intelligence officials, for sources and stories about American foreign policy. It got worse when the Obama administration started spying on its domestic opponents during the Iran deal, when the Obama administration learned how far it could go in manipulating the foreign-intelligence surveillance apparatus for domestic political advantage. As Adam Entous, then of The Wall Street Journal, wrote in aDecember 2015 article, “the National Security Agency’s targeting of Israeli leaders and officials also swept up the contents of some of their private conversations with U.S. lawmakers and American-Jewish groups.”

They did it because they wanted to and they could.  For our country to survive we must remove at least one of the two motivations from the board.  I don’t think we can take away the self interest and greed, but we damn sure can make it dangerous to attempt.




Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The Broward school shooting radio traffic shows that confusion and bad training will cause failures.

And maybe, not so much the cowardice of the SRO Peterson.  He screwed up.    But he says he wasn’t sure where the shots were coming from.  If he is not lying, then the arriving officers were no help. I have experience being the back up or setting up responding officers as the initial officer on scene. Every cop has at least once in their career.  I listened to the radio traffic.  I suggest everyone do the same and think to themselves what would you do with the information you were getting? Because trust me, the information sucked!

Image result for photo of deputy peterson

Sometimes, toward the end, you just are not ready. Doesn’t mean you are a coward.

First and foremost the SRO should have went in if he was ALMOST sure the gunfire was coming from the building.  That would have been the smart choice. One round fired when he was inside and he would have known for sure.  It is a totally different sound. However, this inaction comes back to panic, stress, tunnel hearing and training.   He may have decided to wait for back up, KNOWING his duty was to go in, siding with caution over bravery. That’s a conscious choice and the wrong one.  But understandable under the circumstances.  Being brave is a lot tougher than people think.  At some point in your career caution dominates bravery. That is why you don’t see 40yr old privates in the Army. If the SRO made that choice, it is something he only knows and has to live with.

If he wasn’t sure and was confused on the location, his back up was no help.  What good would it do to run into any building, just to be in a building, if the shooter is actually outside? Almost immediately you can hear an officer claim he heard gunfire coming from the field.  Now if the SRO was confused and not cowardly, then this information cements his initial concern, that the shooter made it outside on the campus, shooting running students.  This is also reinforced by one officer saying he saw wounded in the field.  If you think the shooter is in a building, how are students wounded in the field?

Understand, this is minute four or five into the shooting.  One second, you are a semi-retired fat cop SRO with 33yrs on the job, maybe looking to retire at 35, and the next you are sprinting into the worst nightmare of any police officer’s career.  That is some serious change of gears for anyone.  If his mindset was lax from years of being an SRO, he may not have been able to switch out.  By the time he got there, he was reverting to the REAL training the police get, set the perimeter.

This is all about visualization and MINDSET, MINDSET, MINDSET!!  If the SRO never believed this would happen to him at this school, and never mentally practiced what he would do IF it did, then when the shooting started, he was already in trouble.

The first major error after the SRO’s decision to not go into a building was that NOBODY asked if someone had.  The Captain, who was trying to manage a scene she was not at – the sound of her radio indicated she was in her office or a building- that would be an interesting piece of information to have- is making a bad command decision. It is the guy on the scene who is in chart. She should have asked if anyone had gone in. That alone might have shaken the SRO loose from being frozen with indecision.  But she allowed the SRO to start the perimeter decision making cycle and it was downhill after that.  Again-   NOBODY ASKED IF ANYONE WAS IN A BUILDING OR HAD EYES ON THE SHOOTER!!!  NOBODY COMMANDED ANYONE TO GO IN AND SEE!!

In law enforcement, micro managing to prove your worth as a commander is a goal.  Ninety-nine percent of the time the police do not need the help of their commanders.  It is almost a useless position except for the large amount of paperwork that is generated inside the police bureaucracy, usually between each other. My commander, who used to be my sergeant and a very, very good leader, would stand in the hallway in the middle of the day just looking to talk to someone. He’d show up on crime scenes I’d be working and hang out because he was bored.  We would laugh at him as he would lean over to see what we were doing during a search.  Once we asked him what was going on and he said moving up the chain was a good financial decision for his family, but he hated the job because it took him away from fighting crime. He wasn’t a cop anymore, just a paper pusher. That Captain is the quintessential paper pusher by this time in her career.

The second major error was that dispatch did NOT tell anyone responding they were getting actual calls from a building (which they were) and telling the deputies of the location.  In fact, the major contribution from dispatch was “911 was blowing up”!  Okay, what were the callers SAYING!! Did they have eyes on the shooter, what building were they in? How long since he left?  What did he look like?  I was stunned the officers on the scene were getting bad descriptions while the 911 people were actually talking to eye witnesses.

To that point, I was also horrified that the police were eager to give out a description of the suspect saying he was “ROTC”! How? Why? After that it was ROTC with a maroon shirt and black pants.  Thank God, one of the real heroes that day, the real ROTC cadets, didn’t pick up the dropped weapon and try to give it to the police, they would have shot him!

But it goes to prove that confusion dominates everything in a large incident like this.


Image result for photo of nikolus cruz

Sometimes bad guys get away with doing bad things.

Here’s the bottom line. In a free society, sometimes bad guys get away with doing bad things. It is the cost of a free society.  If the right cops, with the right mindset, are right there when it happens, the bad guy gets nabbed. If not, then it looks like the mess we see here.

But the other REAL CRIMINAL here is the Sheriff. He is guilty of the crime of being a self centered, lying, political, irresponsible politician who is as accountable for this tragedy as anyone.  And the fact he was “shocked, SHOCKED, I tell you!” that his SRO hesitated, but only AFTER the CNN townhall,  when we find out he knew all along, shows he is suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder and should be immediately removed. These people have no conscience, no guilty, no remorse.  Studies have shown they will drag anything they lead into the gutter. (Ask the State Department about Hillary’s time in office and how many compromises they made.)

He should not be in charge of an agency that is responsible for the law enforcement and protection of the people of Broward.  He can do a Alicee Hastings and run for Congress.  But he can’t run a Sheriff Department, because if he does a bad job there people will- and did- get hurt.

Image result for photo of deputy peterson

The other bad guy. His self interest is also a crime here. And I’m surprised he still has a job.



Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Broward County in cartoons.

The Left is taking it’s best shot at the NRA and guns.  Trump’s no help because as the TRUTH of what happened comes out- proving once again that trusting the government will get you killed- he stepped into it big time by sitting down with Diane Feinstein.

The Broward Sheriff’s Office captain who initially took charge of the chaotic scene at a Parkland high school where 17 people were killed told deputies to form a perimeter around the deadly scene — which they did instead of going in to confront the shooter, according to a partial BSO dispatch log obtained by the Miami Herald.

Capt. Jan Jordan, commander of BSO’s Parkland district, gave the order, the log shows, identifying her by her police call sign.

Why she did it may depend on what she was told.  Did the SRO tell her the gunfire was outside? If he did why? Did dispatch tell her that the police were on scene and going in? Or did a person, who was not on scene, not trust her people to make an on scene decision?

My buddy reminded me that we suffered under some pretty unremarkable supervisors and any one of them would have made such a bad decision.

But the Democrat bill was introduced into Congress. It outlaws about every modern weapon out there!  Two hundred and five weapons and counting including the Marlin 22 and the Ruger  10/22. These two are the type of guns kids get to learn how to shoot safely, target practice and hunt small game like squirrels and rabbits.  Yet, these are now “bad guns” according to the Democrats.

Image result for ruger 10/22

Image result for marlin 22 rifle model 60

Here’s the thing.  As Jake Tapper’s face showed when he was interviewing Sheriff Israel and suddenly realized the guy was a narcissistic nutjob (nice research CNN staff!). Tapper looked like a drunk at a race track who just sobered up enough to realize he bet it all on a glue factory bound nag!

Image result for jake tapper sheriff Israel Oj simpson

Tapper doing the slow “WTF?!! look.

THIS is not the case the gun grabbers should hang their hat on.  In fact, IF Trump had stayed silent, then by now the story would be firmly directed toward what the real problem was- that government basically sucks.   Not all the time, just when you need it to do something outstanding.

Each day Americans wake up to hear new revelations of government incompetence that enabled the Parkland, Florida school shooting. First it was the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s failure to follow existing protocols to investigate a highly detailed tip that the shooter was planning and had the means to do exactly what he did. The FBI and local police received at least four separate tips warning of the shooters’ plans and means, and local police had received 45 calls summoning them to the family’s home since 2008.

Then we learned of the police officer — the only person initially onsite able to return the shooter’s deadly force and tasked by his salary-paying community with doing precisely that — hesitated for approximately four minutes to enter the high school as students lay dying. Then local sources told reporters three other Broward County police officers joined that onsite officer in hiding behind their vehicles until police from another jurisdiction showed up. Reports say the Broward County police didn’t even follow the others inside.

Then it was that police didn’t know they were watching the wrong security tape, putting them off the shooter’s whereabouts by 20 minutes, leaving a mass murderer to endanger more people longer. To add insult to literal injury, the hesitating onsite school police officer, Scot Peterson, was allowed to resign and will receive a lifetime public pension of approximately $60,000 a year plus benefits.

This kind of government employee incompetence with horrific consequences is by no means limited to the Parkland killings. Instead, it is endemic to U.S. government at all levels, with consequences big and small. For example, my colleague Rachel Stoltzfoos reports that government incompetence failed to prevent a slew of recent high-profile mass killings:

Law enforcement protocols already in place also might have stopped the Texas church shooting in 2017, and the Charleston church shooting in 2015. The gunman who carried out the Texas massacre had a history of domestic violence that should have prevented him from legally buying a gun. But the Air Force conceded after the shooting it had failed to enter his name into the federal database that would have prevented his gun purchase.

Similarly, paperwork and communication fumbles between the FBI and local law enforcement resulted in a background check error that allowed Dylann Roof to buy a gun in South Carolina, which he later used to massacre congregants at a Charleston church.

If government agencies can’t follow existing violence-prevention laws and procedures, how can they be trusted to effectively implement additional rules that wild-eyed partisans insist will “do something” to prevent mass murder?

This point contains two related threads: U.S. government forces citizens to support a layer of incompetent fat that impedes our best interests; and government failures force us into a burdened mode of self-government. We have to both pay for government tonot perform basic functions like protect citizens from criminals and carry out justice, and accomplish those same ends ourselves if we want them done at all.

As Charles Murray says, government has become an “insurable hazard,” but only to the small proportion of Americans with the requisite money or connections to secure such insurance. The rest of us are sitting ducks. And we know it.

I had a nice but pointed discussion with a smart friend who thinks raising the age to own a rifle like the AR to twenty-one is a good idea.  Of course I disagree, UNLESS we raise the voting age to twenty-one (frankly in general a far more powerful and dangerous constituitonal right in my opinion) and tell selective service to raise the age of warfighting from 17 to 21.  The man said that was silly because his point is kids at 18 have no idea what they are doing, what they are thinking, are working through serious emotional issues and should be “protected” from getting guns if they want to act out.  I say, if they are that screwed up we certainly do not want them to vote! Or fight in a war!

Then he said, “Well we have to do something!”   I ask why?  He seemed confused over the question.  I repeated myself.  “Why do we have to do something?”  He answered because kids are getting killed!  I said, “Kids get killed every day in car accidents, here give me your keys.”  “What?”  “IF the goal is to protect kids from death, and the chances of them getting killed in an accident are astronomically higher than being shot at school, then the logical solution is to take your keys so you can’t drive your two daughters anywhere.  They can walk.”

The man said that was different. But what I  was trying to get him to understand in life there are trade-offs.  If you want freedom, you have to accept there is risk.  Bad things happen to good people in a free society. If you want to be totally safe and think government seizing guns is the answer- you are wrong. Because WORSE things happen to good people in a tyranny. (Ask Venezuelans!)  There is no trade-off that guarantees total safety, it does not, nor should not, exist.

The government cannot keep you safe.  If you want more security the government says you have to give something up.  In this case the Left thinks guns are that something, or your privacy, or your ability to speak freely.   Whereas, other more intelligent people without the ultimate goal of tyranny, think the trade-off may be spending money on hardening schools.  Courthouses where judges and lawyers and politicians operate are hardened, but their children’s schools are not.  Think about that.  Just how greedy and simplistic do you have to be not to figure out what the right thing to do is in this situation!

Schools should have been designed to be secure decades ago as the schools were built. Listen, you cannot stop an attack by a dedicated person who is willing to die.  But you can deflect most other attacks with some common sense steps.  That argument is for another day.

Today the point is this.  These cartoons should reflect the nature of THIS argument. And Broward, and their nutjob Sheriff, earned every one.

In the end Ben Franklin warned us-

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”



Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The movie Annihilation is PC protected. Not a great movie, but we can’t say that.

It’s not that I do not like strong female leads or great plot twists.  I do. I was stunned by the movie “Arrival”.  The writing, the acting, the premise, the twist at the end were all nearly perfect. It left me thinking about the movie in a good way, asking questions about issues like what is time, what would you do if you knew how it ended.

Image result for the arrival movie amy adams

This was done right.


Image result for annihilation

This was done really wrong.

However, Annihilation is not Arrival.  In fact, it’s not close.   The premise is good.  Aliens are always good. Infection is always good. Altering by terraforming earth is a cool plot challenge.  But that is not what Annihilation is about.

It’s a chick flick- and a bad one.  Political Correctness is a cancer that infects and destroys everything. It’s now to the point where it is eating itself.  But, because of it, we are stuck in a world where we can’t say the truth. If we could we would say the movie, if it had males leads, would be panned and rated a 4 on a scale of 10.  But because it had women in it, even though it offended women greatly, we have to say “Yeah! Good job!”

I spent most of the movie with my arms open in a “WTF” pose. My son, his friend and I spent the movie laughing and whispering about the HORRIBLE plot failures and bad writing.

Not only was it a bad chick flick, it was like a promotion for NEVER LETTING GIRLS IN CHARGE OF ANYTHING!  They will screw it up! I was actually insulted, and I’m pretty old fashioned!

For example in one scene, the girls can’t fire their weapons, which they left behind when one of the team members was attacked. (You are in alien environment where nobody survived. The weapon is GLUED to you!)

In another, the “tough girl” picks up a FN M240 machine gun, abandoned by a prior SF team, and decides it’s too heavy to carry.  This AFTER a giant bear monster carried off one of their team.  Dude, there is no such thing as “too heavy” after that happens!

Now, I’m sure Hollywood won’t say that, or even see it. In one comment on an article online, one person talked about the strength of the female characters.  No, they were not strong. They were confused, scared, weak victims and very quickly went insane. Now to be fair, I’m sure the point was all who went in, even strong SF soldiers, went insane.  But not right away. The team was picked, I think, because they were all emotionally damaged.  Why? I..don’t..know! It’s a girl thing!

So I went online and shared my thoughts.  Don’t go any farther unless you want to know plot spoilers.  The bottom  line is the effects are stunning, the premise has promise.  The rest was a “wait until Netflix” moment.

“I just got back from the movie. It was visually beautiful. The premise of an alien presence was interesting.

The rest…well…just SUCKED!

Why? Let me go through just the highlights.

1. The Shimmer’s effects were controllable. But somehow gap in the writing-the leap of faith- indicated the entire combined effort of the world ended up with a group of untrained, emotionally damaged women as a unit. Which they armed with machine guns and knifes (spoiler, didn’t work out well).

They sent SF, experts, scientists into the Shimmer for three years. Their next bright idea was to send in a young girl, an EMT, and dying psychologist? How long did they study this very slow moving phenomenon?  Again- THREE YEARS! And they couldn’t figure out it was changing DNA and causing mutations??? You could SEE the mutations when you approached the edge. The sparse bushy environment of a northern sea coastline was now a JUNGLE! Nobody said, “Uh, dudes, it’s like dangerous to send in people for any length of time. Maybe we should share that info with the teams?

You set up animals on the edge and test them by putting them in, and then taking them out and running DNA. Nope, in the movie the team was in six days and Natalie saw it in her microscope, and one girl turned into a bush! A bush!

Ah come on! Who’s running this operation- the VA?

Image result for annihilation town scene

About now she has to be thinking “A little heads up would have been nice, guys!”


2. They send these women, with basic M16s with NO upgrades? No scopes, no flip up night vision (which got one eaten), no flashlights? That’s standard today. So were they trying to get them killed?  In the six days that they stood by to go into the Shimmer, you’d think someone in the armory would go “Hey Fred, you think you could slap a flashlight and a low power scope on that rifle and maybe spend some time with them on a range doing things like, I don’t know, shooting and changing mags? And the answer is “Heck no, we have these old Vietnam era rifles to unload- so let’s give them to the gals!” ??

Not to mention they sent other people in with bigger guns and they didn’t make it back out so….How about a 12 ga with slugs? Or a 308? Portman’s character was supposed to have 7 years military training, SHE didn’t see a need to check her gear?

Image result for annihilation bear scene

A Streamlight and ONE NV google? Somebody in the armory hates you!

3. Communications. They didn’t spend three years figuring out why their radios didn’t work? All they had to do is stand five feet inside- still in view of a team of experts- and do experiments until you figure out what that girl figured out on day five. Then you do this crazy thing called run a hard line through the woods with a phone on either end. Remember everything works inside, just the wireless signal doesn’t get out. A subtle concession to today’s world of Internet communications.

Set up a base, then expand farther in, set up a base, then farther in. Like in WW2. Also, remember, THREE YEARS back, when it was small, this could be set up. It was expanding slowly, so year one is 300 yards across, not twenty miles in diameter like in year three.

4. You wake up in a tent and THREE DAYS are forgotten and you push on? No, you back out and report this and find a better way in. It’s been here three years, it’s moving slowly, YOU move slowly and…don’t..get…killed!

5. Which brings me to the worst plot gap. The way in to the lighthouse…

Remember, the lighthouse is the goal. Right? Where is the lighthouse? On the coast. What’s next to the coast? Water! That’s right. And entire body of water.

Image result for annihilation movie lighthouse on beach

See a beach. Bad way through jungle. Good way over water. No bears or white alligators in a swamp trying to eat you.

So the choice is walk through a jungle where no one has survived (not get into a 1972 Ford Pickup with no computer – so no interference with the engine – equipped with jumbo tires and stick shift and DRIVE to the lighthouse) or maybe, and call me crazy, take a BOAT to the shore and land next to the lighthouse. It’s only about fifteen miles maybe. Remember, you can see the sky. So use a sexton if you have to. Or the sun. If motors do not work then row in or use a sailboat. There was no mention of weird man eating sea life.

Sail in, figure out the alien is highly combustible, set it on fire. Done and done! (Seriously, travel across the galaxy and you can get burned up like the brush in a California wildfire? Is there no asbestos or fire extinguishers on planet X?) Three years and nobody thought to bomb it with napalm? Or start a fire with some loose paper and a Bic? I mean this place was really combustible!

Image result for annihilation movie lighthouse

One phosphorous grenade. ONE and the alien threat is burned up. But not until the infection has escaped?

Like I said, there was no real plot. Except to reveal that Natalie mourns in a weird way, by bedding her friend.

And that now maybe, just maybe, she and her husband are infected or replaced by aliens.

I saw that movie. Far better and starring Donald Sutherland!

I came away with the feeling this was a chick flick (and not a good one, there was no background or character development with the secondaries in the movie), wrapped in a weird pointless sci/fi plot surrounded by some very beautiful special effects.

Wait until Netflix or someone else picks it up.

Or rent Arrival to see how it is done right.



Posted in politics | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The timeline of bad act by the “small group” in DC.

Doug Ross has been keeping tabs on the scandal.  With help of his readers he has a pretty complete timeline of what happened, when and involving whom.

You can tell how one event seemed to create or impact another.  You can also see the democrats are full of shit when they are pushing the line it is all legitimate, as they did in their response memo in the House.

I think Trump should simply release the entire FISA application and supporting documents, along with the emails and texts.  I would LOVE to know who wrote the application (my money is on Strzok with the help of Page or one of his minions with his direction).

Over at Treehouse, Sundance lays out the players and the plot as he see it.  I used to fight the conspiracy gang by saying nobody would risk doing such things.  It would be stupid.

I was wrong.  They did it, and they cannot get away with it. Or you’ll see it happen again and again.  Here is a piece of it, read the whole thing. Now Sundance may be off on some assumptions and it may be worse than even he thinks, but Sundance is close.


Here’s the basic overview of how all those threads come together to paint a picture.

The FBI group was participating in a plan to exonerate Hillary Clinton. That same FBI group was simultaneously conducting opposition research on candidate Donald Trump and the larger construct of his campaign team. Those FBI officials were allied by entities outside official government structures. The ‘outside group’ were “contractors”. It is likely one of the contractors was Fusion-GPS or entities in contact with Fusion-GPS. {Go Deep}

The contractors were using FBI intelligence databases to conduct opposition research “searches” on Trump campaign officials. This is where the use of FISA-702(16)(17) “To/From” and “About” queries comes in. {Go Deep}  This FISA abuse was the allowed but unofficial process identified in early 2016 by NSA internal auditors.

This is where NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers steps in on April 18th, 2016, and stops the FBI contractors from having any further access. {Go Deep}

Chris Steele would be the laundry for the intelligence information pulled from the U.S. system. Unauthorized FISA-702(16)(17) results were passed on to Christopher Steele, likely by Nellie Ohr. Steele would then wash the intelligence product, repackage it into what became known as his “Dossier”, and pass it back to the FBI ‘small group’ as evidence for use in their counterintelligence operation which began in July 2016 [ intentionally without congressional oversight {Go Deep}].

Evidence of this laundry process is found in a significant “search query” result that was actually a mistake. The faulty intelligence mistake was the travel history of Michael Cohen, a long-time Trump lawyer. The FISA search turned up a Michael Cohen traveling to Prague. It was the wrong Michael Cohen. However, that mistaken result was passed on to Chris Steele and it made its way into the dossier. Absent of a FISA search, there’s no other way Christopher Steele could identify a random “Michael Cohen” traveling to Prague.

The Cohen mistake created a trail from Chris Steele to the FISA database.  {Go Deep}

All of the unauthorized FISA-702 search queries, “To From”(16) and/or “About”(17), of the NSA/FBI database were returning results. Those results were “raw intelligence”.

That raw intelligence needed “unmasking”, that’s where the Department of State (DoS) comes in. The U.N. Ambassador is part of the DoS. Samantha Power stated she wasn’t doing the daily “unmasking” identified by the House Intelligence Committee investigation {Go Deep}. Someone, or a group of people, within the State Department, were doing unmasking requests – presumably using Ms. Power’s authority.

All lot of concentrated power doing bad things…

Between the FBI screwing up cases like Parkland and the obvious corruption through politics in the upper level management, the FBI is hurting.  But the fault lies with the FBI agents who were more interested in a paycheck then holding others accountable.

Hopefully Trump forces the good ones to throw out the bad ones. If not, nobody will want to see the FBI anywhere near their cases.  “We’re from the FBI.” should be a good thing, not a sign of impending doom.




Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Clapper and Brennan, two deep state operators. Will they face accountability?

When Trump won it took the deep state plan and tossed it in the trash.  After that it was a full press court of lies by the two partisan spooks. They were all over the TV screaming about how it was verified that the Russians were hacking America on the behalf of Trump. And no, they did not know about the dossier, this was real spook stuff.

Except that’s a lie. And we know it.


Deven Nunes is slowly driving a stake into the heart of these two ghouls, and they know it.  Expect them to be added to the “taking the fifth” crew in the near future. They lied to Congress. Now they will have to change their stories or lawyer up.  So far, everyone has lawyered up, including John McCain’s aide who met with Steele.  The Congress needs to make the DOJ actually file charges on anyone who lies to them. No excuses now.

An associate of Arizona Sen. John McCain is invoking his Fifth Amendment rights in order to avoid revealing information to Congress about the Steele dossier.

David J. Kramer, a former State Department official, pleaded the Fifth in response to a subpoena issued in December by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Fox News reported.

In a Dec. 19 interview with the committee, Kramer said that he had information about some of the sources of information in the dossier, which was written by former British spy Christopher Steele and financed by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

This a HUGE scandal and if it were targeting Hillary it would be a 24/7 CNN story. But it’s Trump so what’s a felony or two or a dozen “for the greater good.”

At some point even the best Tom Clancey replacement has to be going “Ah, come on! Nobody will believe this!!”

Image result for john Brennen and Clapper

Both professional deep state liars


Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Parkland Shooting. What a difference a week makes.

CNN and it’s anti-gun fellow travelers worked hard to set up a scenario where guns rights would be impacted by spooked politicians (including Trump apparently).  Thankfully, a week later we are now seeing a different TRUTHFUL narrative come out.  It seems the people who want to take our guns in exchange for the “security of government” are unable to provide ANY security at all!

If there is a lesson here it is that once again Reagan was right. The most terrifying words in the English language are: “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”

So after a week, let’s get to it.

One- Let us all believe this is not about sensible gun laws. This is about gun confiscation.

Two- Let us all believe the reason for the desire for gun confiscation by politicians is not about safety but about being able to further abuse citizens who will have no ultimate recourse. Which is why the founding fathers created the Second amendment in the first place- for the “just in case” moment.  They knew the weakness of the humans in charge, and the potential for abuse.  And we have certainly witnessed it through a number of administrations, the last one being the most weaponized. We know it, they know it, etc.

Three- The Main Stream Media is not longer filled with journalist, just activists and advocates, and that is not by accident.

Four- the Left, who wants to disarm you so they can abuse you, is playing a long game.  Eric Holder explains this in 1995.  He couches it within “gun safety” but make no mistake, the long game is to get the next generation of voters to hate guns and allow the politicians to take them from other citizens.

This guy was Obama’s AG and sent ATF bought weapons to Mexico in order to have the cartels use them in criminal activity. When that happened, he wanted Feinstein’s bill to be passed as a way to stop the illegal trafficking of guns- which the ATF was doing- by outlawing lawful ownership of guns.  When confronted with his out of control political plan, which got over two hundred Mexicans and a couple of our guys killed, he refused to cooperate with Congress- with the support of Obama’s “scandal free administration” ( I know, I giggle every time I hear it!)- and was cited by Congress for contempt.  And he didn’t care.

Remember, these types of people run our government.  They are dangerous ideologues.  And they want to do more harm now using the Parkland shooting as an excuse.

However, time has allowed the facts to come out. I won’t bother repeating them here, but will spend more time on the actual law enforcement response and the media’s attempt to look the other way.

There has been a movement, and a horrible nickname given, over the SRO’s refusal to go to the sound of the gun.  He was wrong.  He may have been cowardly. But I will hold my fire on whether he is a coward.  And I’ll tell you why.  He was 33yrs on the job, close to retirement, put in that school as a glad-handing SRO that handles the hugely political school board operation. That guy is not an alpha male anymore. He may have been at one time- a hard charging, hit the door first, kind of guy.  But that guy wouldn’t be THIS guy.  People change.

That said, initially it appears he should have run in.  Why? It is the training all police receive today. It used to be you waited just long enough for some backup and THEN you went in to seek out and kill the shooter. More people meant the chances of you getting killed by the shooter and NOT killing him were reduced. In my training, which I had for ten years, we were told up front this technique would almost guarantee one of us would be shot or killed. It was an acceptable trade off. The shooter shoots one of us, we all shoot back, we kill him.

Today, it is a case of getting onto the shooter as quickly as possible and make him change his plan from a killing spree to defending himself in a gunfight. It gets him off of his plan to kill unarmed people and onto police who are shooting back.  If he sees the cop coming, there’s a good chance that cop is killed, but the trade off is the shooter now has to worry about the police and it slows his killing down.

For anyone to say “I’d run in!” without ever being shot at or shot someone before is wrong.  I have former colleagues,  who when they say it I believe them, and I believe the bad guy is as dead in that second as he will be when they find him.  They are that good at what they do.

But those kind of cops are the exception to the rule. Police work is a blue collar job. Most of the older cops are blue collar guys- your neighbors and your friends. Thinking of your buddies, which one of them would you really trust to go in a firefight with a rifle carrying nutjob?  It’s an honest question I ask you to think about.  Those kinds of guy and gals are also in uniform. David French puts it in perspective and sums up the issue about gun control and our security being handed over to government better than most.

We can and should state this moral truth while remaining deeply humble and self-aware. There is a world of difference between stating, “That cop should have intervened” and puffing out your chest and declaring, “I would have done better.” You can imagine the kind of person you want to be, and you can dream of being a hero, but many imaginary warriors have turned tail at the sound of the guns. Simply put, you don’t truly know how you’ll respond to a crisis until you’ve been in a crisis.

In other words, we can understand his failure even if we cannot justify that failure. To fail to understand is to fail to grapple with fallen humanity. To justify it is to surrender to that fallen nature and normalize cowardice.

Failure is not inevitable. Courage is possible. Killers with assault rifles? Cops have taken them on before. Just ask the Capitol Police who engaged the man who tried to massacre congressional Republicans in Alexandria, Va. An AR-15 does not render a man bulletproof. There were unarmed students and teachers inside Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School who exhibited greater courage than did the armed officer who had promised to protect them.

The gun-control debate is growing truly twisted if it becomes necessary to excuse cowardice to advance public policy. It is entirely acceptable for law-abiding gun-owning Americans to demand that the government do its job before considering sweeping new restrictions that will primarily impact people who’ve done nothing wrong. Part of law enforcement’s job is to follow up on specific tips and warnings. Part of its job is to ask specific men and women in uniform to lay down their lives to protect the public.

Yes, men may be cowards. No, none of us know how we would respond to a crisis until we face that ultimate test. But none of the events in Parkland have taught me to trust others to protect my family. And certainly none of the events in Parkland have built my trust in government. I may not be a hero when the chips are down, but if I have a weapon in that fateful moment, at least I have the chance.

Worse, it now appears the single deputy was not alone.  In fact, the police officers were the first to go in.  Why? I have no earthly clue!  Even if you think the bad guy is gone, you have to respond to the INJURED kids and apply basic first aid!! So what the heck were they thinking????!  Trust me, you will find some very bad command decisions being made over the radio and computer that will shed light on this colossal fuck up.

Over at the Daily Caller one OFF DUTY police officer tells his story. Listen closely because this is how it is done.  Which makes you wonder what the Broward SO was thinking.  When the FIOA hits and the actual radio traffic and the computer traffic and the personnel records get out, this is going to get even uglier.  We know now FOUR deputies stood down while the police went in.

Remember, all of this was KNOWN to the Sheriff, who then went on TV peacocking around like he was somebody special,  blaming gun owners and the NRA for what will end up to be HIS FREAKING FAULT! Just like his buddy Hillary.

Image result for Sheriff Broward county with hillary pic

Birds of a corrupt feather… It is always someone else’s fault.

A Sheriff in Florida is a powerful and very political position.  Unlike other states, a county Sheriff is the top law enforcement officer in that county.  So having someone in the position that is willing to lie in a situation like this should be a reason for his immediate removal.  There is a trending twitter effort to do just that. Now Broward is a corrupt democrat county.  So doing the right thing for the right reasons is foreign to them.

Broward county has a series of problems over there unlike other places. One of them is the school board refusing to arrest offenders inside schools. The SRO is more a political hack than a cop when working inside that system and it takes a special type of mentality to look the other way when a crime is committed because the principal wants to keep his/her numbers down!  That is the same deputy who also didn’t run in, but did manage to get an award for top SRO in 2014.

Lastly, when the county education policy is intentionally constructed to ignore criminal behavior in schools, the Sheriff and School superintendent cannot rely on “law-and-order-minded” school police officers to carry out the heavily nuanced policy.  The county officials need the people closest to the work, the officers, to be able to think quickly on their feet to safeguard their prized district-wide statistics.

2013 – Broward announced broad changes designed to mitigate the use of harsh punishments for minor misbehavior at the beginning of this school year. While other districts have amended their discipline codes, prohibited arrests in some circumstances, and developed alternatives to suspension, Broward was able to do all these things at once with the cooperation of a group  that included a member of the local NAACP, a school board member, a public defender, a local sheriff, a state prosecutor, and several others. In early November, The Miami Herald reported that suspensions were already down 40 percent and arrests were down 66 percent. (2013 article link)

A Broward County SRO must carry a political hat and be able to intercept behavior, modify his/her action based on a specific policy need, falsify documents, hide evidence, manipulate records and engage inside the system with an understanding of the unwritten goals.

Broward County school law enforcement are given political instructions, and carrying out political objectives.  They are not given law-enforcement instructions.

The school officers are the primary foot soldiers carrying out county political policy. Physical security of school students is not their role, they don’t have time for that. The Broward County SRO is in place to protect the school system “policy” and ensure students are not arrested for criminal conduct.

If Broward were a real county and not a corrupt cesspool of democrats, Scott Israel would be forced to resign in shame and a total overhaul would be done. Of course, the same thing would happen at the FBI tip line department, but don’t hold your breath. (Although with Trump, he HATES failure, so maybe someone gets transferred….to Fairbanks!)

On the media front, it is easy for CNN to lie about the facts, then lie and attack a kid who caught them trying to manipulate the questions in their “townhall” ambush event that promoted Scott Israel.  Even though CNN yelled at anyone who questioned the motive in manipulating the student victims, …because they were victims.., and called the questioners “monsters!”.  So I guess one “victim” is more precious than another in CCN’s eyes.  CNN gave a spotlight to the Sheriff of a department which allowed innocent kids to be murdered by a kid they should have locked up or put away MONTHS ago! One poster on a website wondered if CNN wanted to hold another townhall now…


But even George Orwell couldn’t make this crap up!

Lastly, and this is important, as a Constitutionalist and and former law enforcement officer with friends from all political areas, I worry about the continued push for gun control.  Not only because it is an attempt to take away a right, but because how people will react.

In my opinion one act that occurred in 2004 made Europe’s elites and Hollywood celebrities totally change how they handle a critical threat.  That event was the murder of Theo Van Gogh. Van Gogh made a film critical of Islam.  An assassin, a Muslim named Mohammed Bouyeri, was thought to be part of a terror group, walked up and shot him then stabbed him, then cut his throat.  Message delivered, if you will.

It doesn’t matter if Theo was right, because Mohammed was offended and then Mohammed killed Theo who offended him by telling the truth about Islam.  Here is the outtake about the actual murder. The killer pinned a note to Van Gogh, a warning for anyone who crosses the Muslims.

Bouyeri shot van Gogh eight times with a handgun, and also wounded two bystanders. Wounded, van Gogh ran to the other side of the road and fell to the ground on the cycle lane. According to eyewitnesses, van Gogh’s last words were: “Mercy, mercy! We can talk about it, can’t we?”

Bouyeri then walked up to van Gogh, who was still lying down, and calmly shot him several more times at close range. Bouyeri then cut van Gogh’s throat and tried to decapitate him with a large knife, after which he stabbed the knife deep into van Gogh’s chest, reaching his spinal cord. He then attached a note to the body with a smaller knife before fleeing. Van Gogh died on the spot.[3]

The written note contained a warning to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, consisting of five pages which make mention of the Jewish political actors in Ali’s party, as well as other parties in Dutch politics.

From that point on, I noticed people bending over backward to appease the people who would kill them in a blink of an eye.  One place bucked that deal, Charlie Hebdo magazine. And the Muslims came in and reminded them of the rule. Since then MORE appeasement by political leaders and celebrities.

How does that affect the Left’s desire to ban guns in America? Because if they try it they will make outlaws out of about a hundred million people.  That isn’t going to go over well for them because the numbers are off.  Here they are as best as I can remember;

  1. There are 320 million people in the country.
  2. There are over 100 million gun owners
  3. There are over three hundred million guns
  4. There are 5 to 10 million AR15s in circulation.
  5. There are approximately twelve BILLION rounds of ammo in the country.
  6. Billions of rounds of ammo are produced every year.
  7. There are less than a million law enforcement officers in the country.
  8. There are about 1.2 million soldiers under arms and about 800k in reserves.

Even if every swinging dick with a gun from the DEA to the FBI to the Department of Education decided to pull together and “seize guns” as the Left wants, the numbers are not in their favor!  Worse, if the government tried to seize guns using the military, which it won’t, the soldiers would not go along.  No Johnny Private in the army is going to shoot his grandpa over a model 700 ’06 rifle!

So what is the plan?  It’s simple for the democrats- train up kids to hate guns, flip Congress, get Trump to blink, move up the age to buy a rifle to 21, then 25, then never, etc.

It’s a long game and Trump should see it coming.

Right now, the Left is trying an end run by using states to do the dirty work like in California, New York and Connecticut, and that works because of the good graces of the people in those states. Already we are seeing abuses by the police and government in New York.  Right now the abused seek redress through the court system as they should. But when the judges stop listening things will go from bad to worse.  As it is said people who have no voice to be heard will resort to other means.

I read a quote by John Kennedy.

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”

He may be talking about another subject, but his reference to human nature spans all conflicts.  Another person who made the same point but in a different way was Johnny Joey Jones on Tucker Carlson.  And he’s not wrong either. Watch the whole clip.  But the key statement starts about the 4:17 mark.

This is my fear. Last spring a “crazy” from the Left tried to assassinate Republican lawmakers at a ball park over some policies differences.  (Poor Rand Paul, he’s been attacked TWICE for being a decent principled guy!)  How do people on the Left think they are immune to the same thing if their policy and wild rhetoric triggers (pardon the pun) some crazy in the gun side to act out?  Or how can some celebrity thinks he or she can demonize MILLIONS of decent people without someone deciding to act out?

Right now we see random violence on the Left in the form of Antifa and BLM.

How many “Theo Van Goghs” will it take before the Left leaders and supporters realize that two can play at the game of “whack the other guy to shut him/her up”? I keep opening up headlines on the Net every day worried if this is the day someone on the other side of this debate acts out. It will lead to a tit for tat response and things will go south quickly.

We are better than that as a people, but as individuals… .  You squeeze any group of people hard enough and long enough, one of them his going to pop.

My advice, is to lower the heat.  Be more reasonable. Understand the other side. Realize some things are just too precious to demonize.

Oh, and to reduce the threat to schools simply arm the teachers and make sure your SROs are alpha males, not near retirement.

And one more thing- FIRE Israel. He lied to you- a lot. He doesn’t deserve to wear the badge.








Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment