This week we’ve seen a representative in the United States Congress politicize the death of a brave patriot who died in the line of duty. This person eavesdropped on a call from the President of the United States to a grieving widow as she was on her way to receive her husband’s casket. The representative then deliberately misinterpreted what the President said in order to make political points instead of allowing the nation to honor the sacrifice made by the fallen soldier and his family, as well as the three others who died with him in an ambush in Niger.
What a betrayal of these families and the nation!
This woman hijacked the solemn nature of the event to make it all about herself and her political party. General John Kelly said it best:
I was stunned when I came to work yesterday morning, and broken hearted, at what I saw a member of Congress doing. A member of Congress who listened in on a phone call from the President of the United States to a young wife. And in his way he tried to express that opinion, that he’s a brave man, a fallen hero. He knew what he was getting himself into because he enlisted. There was no reason to enlist. He enlisted. And he was where he wanted to be, exactly where he wanted to be, with exactly the people he wanted to be with when his life was taken. That was the message. That was the message that was transmitted.
‘It stuns me that a member of Congress would have listened in on that conversation. Absolutely stuns me. And I thought at least that was sacred.
No, General Kelly, it seems that very little is sacred anymore, especially in the age of Trump Derangement Syndrome.
If President Trump’s words can be twisted, manipulated, willfully misinterpreted, or rephrased to change the meaning of what he said in order to “perceive” offense or, better yet, find racism, then his words will be distorted, if by doing so the alt-left, the Democrats, the progressives, the mainstream media, and/or the Never-Trumpers can score political points against him.
After all, their overriding goal is to damage the Trump presidency by any means necessary and, if possible, to remove him from office as soon as they can. Anything else, including honoring our fallen heroes, is not a priority to them.
It’s disgusting. It’s shameful. It’s un-American.
To borrow a phrase from Obama: “It’s not who we are.”
These people–and here I include the mainstream media who gleefully promoted and continue to promote this story–embarrassed our country in front of the entire world when they dishonored the sacrifice of those four brave men who died in Niger, as well as the sacrifices of all others who, down through the centuries, have given their lives in defense of this nation.
A totally bizarre factoid came to light this week during the brouhaha: The phrase empty barrel is apparently racist. To call an obvious narcissistic air-headed blowhard an empty barrel is racist, if said airhead happens to be “of color.” Who knew?
Hostages and hostage statements. We’ve all seen them. Al Qaeda or ISIS or some other terror group captures some poor souls and forces them at gunpoint or at machete point to make a statement. Patty Hearst. John McCain. All good illustrations of how hostages behave under duress. Their cases came to mind recently when I saw the LVPD sheriff revising the timeline for the so-called investigation into the Stephen Paddock terror attack. Have a look:
The sheriff, overseen by his FBI “associate,” as he makes “minute” but very, very confusing and critical changes to the timeline of the event.
The Las Vegas incident gave rise to another similar scene, when the security guard, who may or may not have been present before, during, or after the shooting took place, appeared on a TV talk/entertainment show instead of at the five other interviews he’d lined up and then promptly absconded from. The guard, resembling the sheriff, sat nervously, sweating obviously, looking down as if ashamed, throughout much of the appearance. At his side, as with the FBI agent above, sat a man who, we’re told, is a maintenance engineer at the hotel, who himself may or may not have been present before, during, or after the shooting took place. Oddly enough, this man didn’t appear in the narrative until over a week after the shooting. He came to light only as the timeline began to morph.
So there’s that similarity to statements being made under duress. A greater mind than mine also noticed the strangeness of this appearance:
Excellent question, Mr. James Woods! The worst mass shooting in U.S. history, and the eye witnesses are on a talk show where, bizarrely, they received NFL caps as prizes and got a YUGE check from Ellen, as if they had just won the lottery.
As if there aren’t 58 people dead and more than 500 wounded. Where was the sympathy for or even much mention of the victims?
Gee, it’s almost as if the authorities don’t expect to ever prosecute anyone, so who cares if the one (or two?) sole eye witnesses on the scene contaminate any future testimony and mess up any future prosecutions or civil cases?
A lawyer went to court this week to ask for a temporary restraining order to ensure that the evidence from the scenes, some of which is now apparently under the control of the FBI, is preserved. In other words, not lost or destroyed somehow.
In ordinary times, such measures wouldn’t be necessary. But we’re no longer living in ordinary times.
We regularly see on TV news the surveillance videos of gas station robbers or convenience store thieves. Where’s all the video of Stephen Paddock as he passed by the thousands upon thousands of cameras in Las Vegas, on the streets, in the casinos and the hotels?
Has anyone even seen a photograph of the man other than one that’s decades old, one where he’s nearly got his eyes closed, or the “leaked” one that’s supposed to be him dead on the floor of the hotel room?
Apparently, if social media rumors turn out to be true, cell phones that were turned in by concert workers were wiped clean by authorities before they were returned to their owners. WHY?
Harvey Weinstein. Are we sick of hearing about him yet? Women are coming out of the woodwork like cockroaches when the lights go out. Where were all these women when others were being used and abused, if the stories are true? If he’s what he appears to be, then likely every woman he ever met has a story to tell. So what can we make of this?
Literally for decades, if the stories are true, this man was a predator, stalking the young and the beautiful out there in La La Land. “Everybody knew,” they say. But nobody let on and nobody in the mainstream media, who also surely knew, let on.
Let this be a shining example for those who claim that there can’t possibly be any large-scale conspiracy in this country. That’s exactly what we were told when people questioned Obama’s biographical details.
“You must be insane. Take off your tinfoil hat! Do you really think all the Democrats and all the media could keep a secret like that, if he’s not who he claims to be or wasn’t born where he claims he was born?”
So much for that argument.
Can there really be a vast conspiracy that’s not just a “theory?” The answer is a resounding YES!
Some of us really do think that the alt-left and most of the media (in the tank for Obama) and all the Democrats (dependent upon the power an Obama presidency gave them) would and could keep anything that even hinted at Obama’s ineligibility a complete and total secret.
They covered for Weinstein, so why not for Obama?
If you ever again hear an alt-lefty say that conspiracies to keep secrets about powerful people are impossible to keep secret, remind them of Harvey Weinstein.
Actually, maybe it is impossible to keep the secret, but it’s completely possible (it’s been done) to discredit anybody who knows or suspects the truth by simply calling them crazed conspiracy theorists and refusing to report the truth, or to even look for it.
A liberal professor wrote this in the Wall Street Journal today:
Get Harvey Weinstein out of the newspapers and into the courts. If convicted, punish him as the law requires, but remember that he, like all of us, is a human being. We have forgotten this about anyone who has been labeled our opposition, and this has made us a meaner and ultimately more dangerous country.
Would that academics, the mainstream media, the Democrats, and all the Never-Trumpers would remember that President Trump is also a human being.
Somehow I don’t expect to read anything from this same professor decrying how the president of the United States is portrayed in the newspapers, or how he’s the victim of a “witch hunt,” a “lynch mob,” or an “angry mob,” even though it’s obviously true. Or is that also a “conspiracy theory?”
I’m not holding my breath waiting for intellectual honesty from anybody in the media, academia, or the alt-left.