Let’s put aside for a moment all the political angles surrounding the story of Scot Peterson, the former Broward County Sheriff’s deputy who was recently charged with 11 crimes because of his response, or lack thereof, to the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting.

Among other allegations, Peterson is charged with

child neglect, culpable negligence and perjury for his role in the massacre that shocked the United States, galvanized gun-control activism and led to changes in Florida’s law.

Peterson, who has long insisted he acted properly and was not sure Nikolas Cruz was inside the 1200 building, faces nearly 100 years in prison if convicted. As a school resource officer trained to engage an active shooter immediately, Peterson “was responsible for the welfare and safety” of the students and “failed to make a reasonable effort” to protect them, according to an arrest warrant.

[emphasis added to quotes]

This is a novel approach, to say the least. One doesn’t have to be a lawyer to recognize that. Whatever anyone’s politics and whatever anyone believes or personally feels about this man, this is the slipperiest of slippery slopes ever.

But for the perjury allegation, the charges are based not upon what the man did but upon what he did not do.

(The perjury charge involves subjective perception–the number of gunshots Peterson says he heard at a particular time versus what other witnesses say they heard. Again–subjective. Try proving beyond a reasonable doubt that someone heard what he says he did not hear.)

All over social media, Peterson is derided as a “coward” because he did not go into the school to confront the shooter. Even government officials have publicly called him a coward. Was it cowardice?

Doesn’t it all depend upon the circumstances as he saw them, what really happened, what was happening at the time, what he knew, what he couldn’t possibly know, and what the rules of engagement were? Indications are that the rules did not require him to engage the shooter:

[A]t the time of the shooting, Broward County Sheriff’s office’s policy stated that deputies “may enter the area” to confront an active shooter — not that they are required to.

Real or only alleged, apparently cowardice is now a criminal offense, not only for members of the military during combat, but also for school resource officers!

Also apparently, the officer is guilty of cowardice until proven innocent. Those on social media second guess the officer, politicians jump on board to virtue signal, and prosecutors go looking for a scalp. Someone, anyone, must be blamed, other than the person who committed the atrocity because he, you see, is also a victim.

A victim of the system. A victim of white supremacy. A victim of poverty. A victim of the lack of funding for mental illness. A victim of the NRA or FL laws. Or bullies. Or shunning. Whatever.

When a scapegoat is needed, in a classic case of redirected aggression, blame a white man. (Sorry. But when the left constantly plays the race card, why shouldn’t we be on the lookout for it? Why does this man remind me of Richard Jewell, another scapegoat?)

The left in this country already push for the punishment of thoughtcrime, as in Orwell’s book 1984 and as happens in third-world totalitarian countries.

Is there to be charactercrime, as well? A person will be prosecuted for not being a hero?

Who among us can positively affirm that he or she would not be “guilty” of charactercrime, no matter the circumstances? We’re not all Oskar Schindler. Or Audie Murphy. Or the troops who so bravely stormed the Normandy beaches 75 years ago. Or Navy SEALS. Or the many heroes of 9/11.

We rightfully honor and applaud heroes who risked or even gave their lives to save others. But now it’s to be a crime to not do so? This attitude diminishes the sacrifices of storied heroes.

Nobility, honor, courage are now simply required elements of a job description? Who will qualify?

Certainly, one might consider Peterson’s alleged cowardice as a civil offense, but criminal? Arguably, he did not do his job as his bosses (now say they) expected him to.

What usually happens to someone who doesn’t do his job? He gets fired or resigns in disgrace. Maybe loses benefits, like a pension. But criminally prosecuted? Up to 100 years in jail?

All across this country, criminals, some violent, are being released from prison, or not prosecuted in the first place, because of various progressive theories such as disparate impact, implicit bias, the supposed “white supremacist” system of government, “equal justice” (aka social justice), immature brains, “mass incarceration,” lack of job training, among other excuses. Look beneath the surface and you will find the usual suspect: George Soros.

Murderers, drug dealers, child abusers, rapists are not being prosecuted, much less sentenced to 100 years in prison. Yet Peterson may potentially go to prison for that long.

When Peterson signed up for the job as “school resource officer,” do you think he signed up for the possibility of a century in prison if he got a bad performance review?

First we prosecute cops for doing their jobs; then we prosecute them for, arguably, not doing their jobs. Who wants to be a cop? Then again, maybe that’s the goal.

There are indeed many political factors involved here, such as whether the powers-that-be needed to offer up a scapegoat to grieving parents, whether in today’s political climate somebody (other than the actual perpetrator) must be to blame for “gun violence,” whether there’s a cover up with regard to any potential “stand down” orders or even a false flag, or whether this is to cover up a complete failure of the school system, as well as law enforcement, with regard to recognizing and dealing with Cruz or similarly disturbed students, as a policy, based upon political correctness. (Their progressive “diversionary program” seems more worthy of indictment than Peterson.)

All that aside, though, and taken to its logical conclusion, what may happen next, if these charges stand against Peterson?

Will school administrators likewise be charged? Individual teachers? They have also been trained to secure students during “active shooter” incidents. Teachers are more intimately responsible for the welfare of their immediate charges–the children in their classes; teachers are their caregivers.

Are there ongoing investigations into the actions or inaction of every teacher on scene the day of the shooting? If any failed to follow the active shooter protocols upon which they also were trained, will they be held similarly responsible?

If not, then why not? One activist has already proposed holding school administrators responsible:

Brian Claypool, a lawyer and mass shooting survivor who lobbies for stricter gun laws, says he is sensitive to the mental health issues associated with such attacks.

But Claypool rejects claims that Florida school resource officer Scot Peterson was made a scapegoat this week when he was criminally charged with child neglect and culpable negligence …

Claypool said he would support charges against school administrators for providing security officers that allowed a dangerous former student access to the school – “they failed, too.”

“This is  one of the components,” Claypool said. “But Peterson isn’t a scapegoat, he should be a starting point.

“A starting point.”

So who’s next? Firefighters?

We all remember the stories of heroic firefighters who entered the World Trade Center to save lives on 9/11. They were true heroes, risking their lives, with too many giving their lives, to save the lives of others. What they did that day was truly “above and beyond the call of duty.”

Did you know there are rules of engagement for firefighters? One rule is

DO NOT Risk Your Life for Lives or Property That Cannot Be Saved.

Another rule:

You Are Required to Abandon Your Position and Retreat Before Deteriorating Conditions Can Harm You.

If someday a firefighter does not enter a burning building to save children who may perhaps already be deceased or whom it may be impossible to save, in order to avoid throwing away his or her own life needlessly, should that firefighter nevertheless be criminally charged for being a “coward?”

Who else is potentially next?

Social workers? Or anyone in Broward County or Florida government who ever encountered Nikolas Cruz in the course of doing their jobs but did not take proactive steps, much less risk their lives, to protect other children from potential harm?

The FBI employee(s) who

blew an extremely detailed tip that Cruz was a potential school shooter?

Is there an investigation into their inaction with regard to Cruz? If not, why not?

Who else is potentially next? Day care workers? Where do you draw the line as to who is required to surrender his or her constitutional right to life in order to avoid being prosecuted for being a “coward?”

Make no mistake, though, this issue is political, being all tied up with controversies over gun control, arming teachers, placing armed officers in schools, diversionary programs versus more discipline and zero tolerance, government corruption and finger-pointing, social justice and political correctness, hatred of police in general (iow, the war on police), blaming life circumstances or societal factors instead of the perpetrators of such atrocities. Is the prosecution a shot across the bow of teachers who may believe they wish to be armed?

People on the left, in the middle, and on the right are supporting Peterson’s prosecution, for varying reasons. But in making this one man a scapegoat, what harm is being done to our system of justice? Keep this in mind:

SUPREME COURT RULING: Police Have No Duty To Protect The General Public …

People who don’t understand taking responsibility for your own safety often ask me [the writer] why I wouldn’t just call the police to stop a crime instead of drawing a gun. Well for one, a great police response time would be 1-2 minutes, but most crimes take place in a matter of seconds. Two, police have no duty to protect me, or you.

Based on the headline of this article you might think this is an important new ruling, but it’s not. The court has kept this stance for over 30 years.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that police officers at all levels of the government have no duty to protect the citizens of this country.

It is the job of police officers to investigate crimes and arrest criminals.

We are on our own for protection.

Which may explain why those on the left might be on board with the prosecution of Peterson. They don’t want citizens to rely on their own selves, using their Second Amendment rights under the Constitution.

Did Peterson have a duty to rescue?

In the common law of most English-speaking countries, there is no general duty to come to the rescue of another. Generally, a person cannot be held liable for doing nothing while another person is in peril … 

Where a duty to rescue arises, the rescuer must generally act with reasonable care, and can be held liable for injuries caused by a reckless rescue attempt. However, many states have limited or removed liability from rescuers in such circumstances, particularly where the rescuer is an emergency worker. Furthermore, the rescuers need not endanger themselves in conducting the rescue.

What if Peterson had engaged Cruz in a firefight and students in crowded halls or classrooms were hit by “friendly fire?”

Peterson was employed as the school resource officer. Did his contract require him to risk his own life, to in essence be a hero instead of a coward? Is he guilty of a crime of “omission?”

An omission is a failure to act, which generally attracts different legal consequences from positive conduct. In the criminal law, an omission will constitute an actus reus and give rise to liability only when the law imposes a duty to act and the defendant is in breach of that duty. …

In the criminal law, at common law, there was no general duty of care owed to fellow citizens. …

Nevertheless, such failures might be morally indefensible and so both legislatures and the courts have imposed liability when the failure to act is sufficiently blameworthy to justify criminalisation. Some statutes therefore explicitly state that the actus reus consists of any relevant “act or omission”, or use a word that may include both. Hence, the word “cause” may be both positive in the sense that the accused proactively injured the victim and negative in that the accused intentionally failed to act knowing that this failure would cause the relevant injury. In the courts, the trend has been to use objective tests to determine whether, in circumstances where there would have been no risk to the accused’s health or well-being, the accused should have taken action to prevent a foreseeable injury being sustained by a particular victim or one from a class of potential victims.

Would there have been “no risk to the accused’s (Peterson’s) health or well-being,” had he confronted Cruz that day?

Consider this:

A parent has a legal duty to take every step reasonably possible under the then existing circumstances to protect [his] [or] [her] child from harm including physical attack. The parent however need not risk death or great bodily harm in doing so  …

What made Scot Peterson the person most responsible as caregiver for those children on that particular day? Even their own parents would not have been held similarly responsible! Why does the buck stop with him? Why not his boss? Why not with those persons more directly and intimately responsible for each child’s well being (i.e., their teachers)?

A 2005 ruling by the Supreme Court held that

police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation.

In this horrific case, the “violent husband” subsequently kidnapped his children and murdered them after his wife had begged police to locate and arrest him.

Ms. Gonzales conveyed the information to the police, but they failed to act before Mr. Gonzales arrived at the police station hours later, firing a gun, with the bodies of the girls in the back of his truck. The police killed him at the scene.

As noted, the SCOTUS ruled that police had no duty to act in this case. Had they acted, the individual officers may or may not have placed their own lives at risk. In Peterson’s case, without a doubt his life would have been at risk had he entered the school and confronted Cruz.

The court of public opinion, many news articles state, has decided that Peterson is a coward who should be prosecuted for that charactercrime. Do not discount the role of social media in this mob mentality. This has become a virtue signaling world. “Do as I think you should, not as I myself do, although I pretend to do as I think you should.”

Consider also how progressives support a woman’s “right” to an abortion, which is nothing less than a supposed right to destroy the life of another human being, one’s own child.

This, they believe, is her constitutional right because the child exists within her body. She has a right to do with her body as she pleases, according to the argument. This is her body, her choice, even if it means destroying another’s body and life–a life that she chose, in most cases, by her own actions, to bring into existence.

Women, progressives firmly believe, have a constitutional right to kill their children, if those children are pre-born. Some actually believe that the right to kill extends to post-birth children, if they are unwanted and were supposed to die during an abortion but miraculously did not.

How is it, then, that Scot Peterson has no similar right to preserve and protect his own body, to do with it whatever he deems necessary for his own well being? Why doesn’t he have the right to not rush blindly into a fire fight, outgunned, risking his life, perhaps losing his life, in an attempt to save other lives?

Peterson had no role whatsoever in the choice Cruz made that day to slaughter his fellow students in cold blood. Yet somehow Peterson is being held responsible for their lives.

This is in stark contrast to women who choose to abort the lives of their own children, children who exist, in most cases, because the direct actions of their mothers brought them into existence.

Yet women, in the illogic of progressives, are not responsible in any way for those lives. Their better angels are not to be appealed to. They’re not to be held responsible in any way for preserving the lives of their unwanted children. Don’t you dare ask them, much less expect them, to make a heroic sacrifice and bring those lives into this world, by continuing an unwanted pregnancy.

How DARE you judge them? How DARE you presume?

But Scot Peterson is somehow responsible for the lives of the children that Nikolas Cruz chose to take. He was expected to make a heroic sacrifice in, perhaps, a vain attempt to save them.

He’s already been judged a coward in the “court of public opinion.”

Are women who abort their own children cowards? Selfish? Which is it? Or are we not even supposed to ask or wonder?

Excuse me, but this makes no sense.

After Peterson is eventually acquitted (or the charges are thrown out), don’t be surprised to see him sue for malicious prosecution. He’ll win a large settlement, courtesy of the taxpayers.

What then will be the judgment from the court of public opinion?


83 responses to “Charactercrime

  1. I don’t know how this post will be received, but after reading and puzzling over the comments on stories in the mainstream media and, especially, on “conservative” blogs, I felt the need to give my take on the subject. So here it is. If you disagree, then I’m open to reading your arguments.

    • facebkwallflower

      Excellent, Miri. You pushed be beyond knee-jerk thinking and established paradigms in this pretty ‘lil head!

      I agree with what you presented and hope as I share it, it is with with pen minds to open thought processes and eyes,

      Thank you.

      • Thanks! I am truly open to other opinions, though, especially because I saw so much celebrating about his indictment on conservative blogs. It just struck me as odd. Like jumping on the bandwagon without thinking it through.

        Yeah. My knee jerk reaction to the guy is negative, too, but I can’t tell you why. I didn’t follow all the revelations about what he did or didn’t do, what he said or didn’t say, whether he’s a liberal, progressive, whatever. I think just going by what sinks into one’s head from media, without paying attention, influenced my original negative opinion. Sort of like with George Zimmerman.

        And then you start to think about things like: Who does this benefit? WHY are Republican politicians on board with this prosecution?

        I can see the liberals’ point of view. They are trying to cover up the complete failure of their diversionary program, which, at least in my opinion, is more guilty of the blood of those children than this mid-level security guard. It’s in their interest to divert (pun kind of intended) attention away from their progressive policies (that cause deaths in the same way sanctuary cities do, as well as the new non-prosecuting prosecutors in inner cities) and ONTO this scapegoat.

        I even wondered, conspiracy theorist that I am, whether he’s in on it. “You take it on the chin and we’ll see you’re taken care of, once the uproar dies out.” I am still not convinced this wasn’t a false flag. Maybe one that they didn’t think through well enough. They perhaps didn’t expect that their liberal policies would come in for blame, so they had to hurry up and blame someone, anyone.

        But WHY are Scott and DeSantis calling him a coward? To get brownie points in liberal Florida so they get elected or re-elected? Gives you insight into THEIR character. Are they lawyers, as so many politicians are? If so, then they ought to know better.

        The citizens of FL are going to pay for this prosecution, just as We the People are paying for the tremendous cost of the bogus investigation of POTUS. Then they’ll pay for any settlement the guy will probably (and deservedly) get. In fact, that, if the false flag theory holds, that just may be the plan all along–his payoff for letting them scapegoat him. This can be a win/win for progressives, who hate cops, anyway.

        They don’t want the issue of gun control to be sidetracked by people who BLAME THE PERP and they do want to stick it to people who argue that if only people are armed, they will defend themselves. They’re going to say, see, even if the cops are armed, they don’t save lives.

        On the other hand, they want to punish cops for just being cops (they hate any kind of authority) and they can also intimidate cops from doing their jobs, out of fear of being prosecuted, then from not doing their jobs, out of fear of being prosecuted, and then also (even better) make being a cop so unappetizing that nobody of any substance (or of the wrong color or political bent) will want to be cops.

        Then all cops will be progressive-minded persons of color who will become nothing more than social workers in blue who make excuses for criminals while they hand out ice cream cones (a la the Ben & Jerry program against incarceration) in “communities.” iow, non-policing police to go with the non-prosecuting prosecutors. But no jobs will be sacrificed in this. The positions will remain, the salaries will be paid, even though the work (as we knew and expected it) will not be done.

        I don’t know how people will take my analogy to abortion but it suddenly came to me when I considered that these people are prosecuting a man for NOT sacrificing his life, because they believe that by accepting a job he gave up his own right to life because he’s “responsible” for the lives of other people’s children by working at that school, yet at the same time women who are completely responsible for the existence in their own bodies of someone else’s body are NOT held responsible in any way for their own lack of actions (i.e., using readily available and free birth control and/or taking a “morning after” pill. Mind you, I’m not sure that I believe in that pill, but if it prevents conception, then it’s no worse than other methods. In any case, these women who support abortion wholeheartedly should have no objection to morning after pills, anyway.)

        RESPONSIBILITY is the key word and as with other concepts, there’s a double standard between how that is enforced depending upon one’s political party and/or race, color, creed, etc. Conservatives are held to the extreme letter of the “law,” which in this case isn’t even a law but is a stretch.

        On the other hand, women who want to abort an unwanted pregnancy seem to be given a pass with regard to how their own negligence may have caused the pregnancy, which they now wish to end. Nobody’s supposed to say: Why didn’t you use any of the many forms of birth control? Since you chose not to, then you have to sacrifice your own comfort, do the right thing and give birth, and then if you don’t want the child there are people who do.

        Yeah, back in the day, when there was no birth control, one could see the dilemma of a woman who became pregnant but whose circumstances (whether economic or health-wise) made it untenable to keep a child. But then, again, there’s adoption. If there weren’t a demand for babies to adopt, then why are people going to Korea, Russia, and China to find babies to adopt?

        Why not adopt American? Why not promote LIFE?

        Peterson was expected to sacrifice his safety and perhaps his life by running into a life and death situation when he had no idea what he would find. I read stories that said even the students and other employees at the school, even teachers and administrators, who knew Peterson, said he’s a good guy and that he would have been killed, or students would have been killed, had he rushed into the situation where there were crowded halls and panicked people. It’s all speculative, but so is the idea that but for his staying outside lives would have been saved.

        Again, we’re back to the idea of a false flag. When this all happened and the huge media push was right there, front and center, all ready to go with Camera Hogg, with the pre-recorded episode in the closet that was a drill, etc., I wondered if there even were any lives lost. IF it was all theater, then this, too, is theater. And if it turns our justice system upside down, then all the better from the point of view of progressive Alinskyites who want to destroy our Republic. It’s all good. It all serves their purpose.

        Isn’t it oddly coincidental, btw, that the most recent shooting involved a “silencer” and the SCOTUS JUST REFUSED TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF SILENCERS, YESTERDAY, leaving stand a ruling that in certain places they must be registered as part of local gun control laws? Was there really a silencer involved or was that just a claim being made by progressives who could and who knew this ruling was coming up?

        One would think all this is wild speculation but on the other hand, who would believe that the FBI and the CIA and the Obama administration and the Dept. of State would politicize the NSA, spy on Americans, collude with FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS (UK, Australia, Ukraine, Italy) to SET UP an American just to set up a coup against the potential presidency of Donald Trump?

        Who would believe that a candidate with a sketchy foreign background, multiple citizenships, no records, would with the collusion of some of those same actors in the “intelligence community,” usurp the office of the presidency and instigate radical chaos that will redound through history for decades if not centuries to come?

        I’m just sayin’.

  2. Also a crime, either a speakcrime, or a thoughtcrime, or a charactercrime; I can’t determine because their logic is not:

    Now it’s a Facebook “crime” to simply post the word HONK. Thou SHALT NOT make fun of stupidity.

    How many times will these idiots fall for 4Chan’s tricks, proving how totally stupid they are?


    I can NEVER get enough of PJW.

  3. JOE …WHO? … HIDE & SNEAK? ….ha’ O’ JOE …. run joey run…

  4. SUPER DICK HEAD DAVID J Crapper wheredothese FOOLS comefrom
    ~ Christopher Conway …Hey Supervisor Canepa, please stay way away from OUR part of the county. No one Voted for you outside your district & don’t care what Your position is. Look forward to having a Great Chicken Sand-Wich & MORE in RWC.

    ~ Myresponse ..Do you not know that the new morality is that we Only tolerate opinions with which we agree? No room for those who have a different moral compass. ….. We are obsolete.

    ~ philf …While I think this food chain is wrong for it’s stance on LGBTQ issues, I can’t see NOT letting them open a place in San Mateo county.

    Canepa or anyone else Doesn’t have to G O …. >>> there to eat. !!!!
    If Not wanted …. people won’t go & they …. will close!!!!
    Canepa is trying to Score Points >>>>> YEP YEP YEP YEP!!!
    by taking a Stand on this, …..IDIOTS …..YES THEY R !!! U LOSE! JERK
    I say let the Residents Decide.
    Maybe he’s trying to make up for supporting SB50?……HA’ ….LOVE YA ALL ??? …kiss-kiss ? PUKE

    Ariana Grande hits back at anti-LGBTQ protester outside her concert…ha’

  5. 1 Question for those opposed to Chick-fil-A … Editor, ^^^ shicken-CRAP
    I have 1 Question for those Opposed to Chick-fil-A setting up in Redwood City: does the chain not allow the LGBTQ community into their stores? No? Then it should N O T matter what personal beliefs their President holds
    …SEE SOME-thing ….SAY ? SOME-THING? …CAN’T take it BACK? F- them….all & the foolish HORSE-CRAP they rode in WITH! FOOL?WHO?
    (“Chick-fil-A plans ruffle feathers” in the June 5 edition of the Daily Journal).

    Maybe instead of grandstanding, >>>David Canepa<<< and the Board of Super-visors can think of a Way to keeping longtime residents from moving out in droves because it’s become 2 expensive to raise a family if you don’t work for Google or Facebook. Maybe then Redwood City wouldn’t need to Shut down schools left & right. ….$LEEPIN' & GETTIN' PAID on the JOB??
    ~ Joe Guttenbeil

    if it ain’t the chicken-little .. what will BE NEXT & NEXT & NEXT?

    • Bought and paid for by George Soros.

      • Example:

        “Liberal billionaire George Soros has continued his bid to “overhaul” the criminal justice system in the United States by pouring nearly $1 million into local Virginia prosecutor races to prop up far-left candidates.

        Soros’s most recent round of donations include $580,000 to Parisa Dehghani-Tafti, a candidate for Arlington County commonwealth’s attorney, and almost $400,000 to Steve Descana, a Fairfax County commonwealth’s attorney candidate, for their June 11 primaries.

        Soros pushed the contributions to Dehghani-Tafti and Descana from his Justice & Public Safety PAC, a committee used to fund local races across the country that could make an impact on the criminal justice system. The donations represent an overwhelming majority of what both candidates have raised, the Washington Post reports.

        Soros, who has quietly flooded local district attorney and prosecutor races for some time now, puts his preferred candidates at a major money advantage for such a race. Soros typically sets up a “pop up” PAC in states where the races are taking place in order to push the money in to back their candidacy’s. At the conclusion of the race, any remaining money in the PAC’s coffers is refunded and the PAC is often shut down. …”

        Making the non-prosecuting prosecutors, one race at a time.

  7. KIDS … BABIES .. DISTORT .. ABORT … WHAT do they CARE 4?
    It’s all a GAME play-in’ with them-selves ….the ending is SICK -ness
    as WTP ALL seem 2 have a FREE FRONT ROW >SEAT? & do nothing?

  8. the ………. T R U T H ………….. the sad TRUTH
    Here’s a LIST of the Enemies of America who are committing treason in
    an actual war effort to destroy this nation from With-IN
    All of these traitors must be identified, detained & removed from power
    by authorized forces before they succeed in destroying this nation:

    Corrupt Liberal Judges who Defy the President’s efforts to Secure the U.S. Border. It is time to Arrest Corrupt, anti-American Judges & RE-move them from SUCH ……POWER!!!!
    Journo-terrorists who pretend to be journalists but are actually anti-American traitors spreading lies, hatred & insanity to indoctrinate liberals & leftists, whipping them up into an attempted “cultural revolution” that has literally driven millions of Leftists to the point of mass mental illness.
    CEOs and top managers of the tech giants, which have now sold out to communist China & are using their power to selectively silence pro-America voices across all search engines, social media & online platforms. These tech giants must be occupied & either shut down or forced to respect a level playing field of online speech.
    Antifa terrorists and other radical left-wing groups that promise an armed insurrection to attempt to overthrow the United States of America.
    Deep state operatives who conspired to carry out a political coup against President Trump. (James Comey, Robert Mueller, John Brennan, etc.)
    Liberal university professors who use their positions of influence to actively recruit students into domestic terrorism organizations such as Antifa.

    as WTP …PLAY the GAMES with the SICK .. mental CASES ..2 OFTEN

    • And they were and still are being ORGANIZED by the biggest community organizer of all. Make no mistake about it. The tentacles are EVERYWHERE, but especially in our cities, where progressives have grabbed hold of power. Where justice is whatever they say it is–and racially based–and nobody will dare to stand against it lest they be called racist. Malignant sociopaths now run our cities. Consider this gem I just found today:

      “In Philadelphia, city councilman Kenyatta Johnson has pushed for the city to ban balconies and bay windows from new apartments and condos, saying that they are a “symbol of gentrification” that causes anxiety, as he criticizes the new housing developments being built in the city. …

      For some homeowners in the market for newly constructed homes, balconies and bump-out bay windows offer two things that a traditional rowhouse can’t: additional space and light. Other people see these architectural features as a defining symbol of gentrification — bringing with it anxieties about cost-of-living increases and displacement. …”

      Now architecture is a micro-aggression and one’s home plans are subservient to whether or not they create “anxiety” for special others who see them. The feelings of the ONE (so long as a member of the “right” group) has precedence over YOU and what YOU want and what YOU decide to build, buy, design, etc. YOU and YOUR GROUP do not count IF any member of the preferred group is “offended” or gets “anxious” by seeing what you’re doing. YOU’RE “displacing” them.

      Doesn’t this remind you of the fears of blockbusting in the Fifties? Back then, and rightfully so, it was considered bigoted and RACIST. But now certain groups are ALLOWED to fear displacement and they’re ALLOWED to demand separatism. It’s scary. THIS IS NOT AMERICAN.

    • The MOB. That’s all it is. People are encouraged to become savages via social media, where they write things they would never say to a person’s face, and so it spills over into MOB action like cheering a person’s injury. Reminds me of the Roman Colosseum. Thumbs up or thumbs down. Bread and circuses. Look there! Don’t think! ALL is emotion and dehumanization.

  9. Jim Acosta

    • Thanks for that link. It’s the truth for sure.


      This woman won in St. Louis. She’s been not prosecuting criminals and also using alleged bias on the part of a secret list of certain police officers to throw out cases that they were witnesses for. Now, with these latest allegations of bias “proven” by social media posts by doxed cops, she’s looking to examine every case they worked on to try to dismiss prosecutions of anybody THEY arrested–all on the premise of “implicit bias” making the cases unprovable. The prosecutor in Chicago (the one who let Jussie Smollett off the hook) was also in the same group that “won” their offices on account of megabucks from Soros.

      btw, she’s currently under investigation herself for allowing a private contractor she employed to allegedly commit perjury while she sat there and listened to him.

      • You can easily imagine how insidious it is. If they don’t arrest in the first place, “crime” stats go down. If they don’t prosecute even if the people are arrested, same result. If they give people “alternate sentencing” or “reparative justice” or “restorative justice,” again, crime stats go down. In addition, in all cases, there are no felony records and so, criminals can vote! (For the DemoncRATS who let them off the hook.) This is ALL the legacy of Ferguson. Specifically, it involves treating perpetrators as VICTIMS. Giving them jobs or training instead of jail time. Letting them supposedly make it up to the real victims. Making sure they don’t get a record that follows them throughout time. So there, too, you see the benefit for the likes of Kim Gardner. No record, then no PROOF that this new non-color-blind, special system of injustice is the CAUSE of further crime. IF you have no record, then when you commit another crime, nobody knows that Gardner let you off the hook multiple times! No stats that will PROVE that these people are recidivists. Imagine how they’d love to have NO RECORDS of previous deportations of criminal illegal aliens. Then nobody will be able to cry out about the injustice when their child, like Kate Steinle, is similarly murdered by a repeat offender who’s been deported but then allowed back in multiple times. WHAT YOU DON’T KNOW CAN’T HURT YOU, RIGHT? First there are sanctuary cities for illegals and now all the big cities will be sanctuary cities for criminals.

      • btw, one has to wonder: WHO FUNDED THIS?

        Make no mistake. It seems that if you are NOT a progressive and don’t hew to all the politically “correct” points of view, then they WILL BE COMING FOR YOU. These are the new Nazis. The new Brownshirts. They will hunt you down for your thoughtcrimes, your charactercrimes, your speechcrimes and out you like the criminal they believe you are (to HELL with your constitutional rights) and they will see to it that your careers, your FAMILIES (who depend upon your career) and your very lives are RUINED. This is a witchhunt on steroids, yet these people likely may believe they’re doing righteous work. It’s interesting that so far I can’t find a list of who these “researchers” are, nor who funds them. Surely this project must have cost a pretty penny. You’d think they’d proudly believe in transparency. It’s a public service to begin a discussion, they say. Well, does anybody think that perhaps police are similar to soldiers in combat who practice bravado and other psychological defense mechanisms simply to enable themselves to be able to get through the day, preserving their sanity? Could this all be bravado and have NOTHING TO DO with how they do their jobs? btw, not all the outed officers are white, as the media seems to imply.

        • I have to wonder how all these researchers will hold up if someone similarly takes all the public social media posts they have EVER MADE, going back as far as their young lives allow, and make a database of posts that particular someone and his or her group of researchers find of “concern.” Where do THEY WORK? Do they work for the government and so, in essence, for We the People? Should people of this mindset be employed by the government? That is, do we want people who are witchhunt-minded in public office? What’s good for the goose?

  10. …Door 1 ? Door ? …..Moreover:
    The board’s report also noted that Omar and Ahmed Hirsi, her current husband, “filed joint tax returns for 2014 & 2015.” That could add fuel to persistent allegations that Omar had been Married to 2 Men at the Same Time ? 1 of whom, Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, City Journal noted in 2016, was rumored (though never Proven??? O’ sure WHY NOT??? ) …to be
    Her B R O-ther !!!

    The AP reports that it asked for Omar’s tax returns but received no response.

    Last week, Minnesota State Rep. Steve Drazkowski (R-Mazeppa) told Breitbart News Tonight that Omar’s violations were part of a pattern of behavior: “I had Never seen that Amount of campaign finance law Violations,” he said.

    • Good point. When will the Republicans GROW SOME? It’s NOT islamophobic or sexist to demand that muslim female congresspersons FOLLOW THE SAME RULES AND LAWS AS THE REST OF US. So if you’re female and muslim you can break the law against bigamy? Against perjury? Against tax evasion? Against immigration fraud? And how do you evade justice? By playing the race and religion card? I think not.

  11. ? …is it …TRUE or a LIE ??? ….100% TRUTH ….see folks it’s EASY !
    In all seriousness, Trump has a point. Biden was Never a serious contender for the presidency, and the strength of his current candidacy is entirely based on his association with Barack Obama, & that Obama nostalgia appears to be fading already. Biden claimed he specifically didn’t Want Obama’s endorsement, but has done everything but Tattoo Obama’s name on his Forehead to RE-mind Voters that he was Obama’s number 2.

    • His association with Obama? That’s supposed to be a plus? It’s a YUGE minus, but I supposes some don’t think so. Silly them.

    Jussie Smollett From ‘Disparaging’ Searches…24 / 7 !!!
    News that Chicago police charged Jussie Smollett with Staging a Brutal attack on himself was Covered on every network & in every major newspaper, BUTT’…. Google is Hiding searches of it from its platform due
    to concerns of “potentially disparaging” the liberal actor.

    A review of Google’s autocomplete function on searches of Smollett found
    no references to anything regarding the hate Crime, even though the company’s own data show it is the only reason his name was ever searched.

  13. …NO NANCY the RAT …. WTP R PAST DONE with your sorry AZZ!
    ‘I’m done with him’: Nancy Pelosi reacts to Donald Trump’s comments she is ‘nasty … horrible person’ ….BOY O’ BOY …does the TRUTH HURT U?

  14. ….. June 12, 2019
    John Dean >> Blows H O L E < …in Democrats' Impeachment Push

    John Dean, notorious from the Watergate scandals of the Nixon Administration, blew a hole in the bottom of the Democrats’ boat in his
    much-anticipated testimony on June 10, 2019.

    John Dean described at 6:11 PM how B-4 election day on November 8, 2016, Dean had a PIT Twisting in his stomach when he saw election polls showing that then-candidate Donald Trump might win the Presidency.

    So John Dean admitted to opposing Donald Trump before Trump was even elected. And Dean described his level of disgust as doubling him over with pain in his stomach at the thought of a President Donald Trump.

    So Dean let the CAT out of the Bag. This has nothing to do with anything that Trump did after becoming President. Dean was already desperate to stop Trump from becoming President. This has nothing to do with the law, impeachment, obstruction of justice or anything else that Trump did. It is
    …………A……………L……………L…….. BOUT…. his way….shame SHAME ….ha’ sucker PUNCH YA BACK<<<

    The "Mueller Manifesto" written for Congress failed to deliver any grounds
    for legal action against President Trump, his campaign leadership, or his children. The public has mostly moved on and decided that the witch-hunt
    is over.

    Therefore, the Democrats — desperate to make the voters care — hauled in John Dean to do a "dramatic reading" of parts of the Mueller report.
    (A "table read.")
    Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

  15. ~ shortandsassy88
    As President Trump puts it, this has been NOTHING BUT A WITCH HUNT!

  16. ????? Biden Promises to ‘cure cancer’ if people elect him president
    CAN’T & WON’T KEEP “THAT” promise BUT LIE’s slide off his TONGUE

    Is there anything Joe Biden can’t do? ….WOW JOEY’ BOY …..
    your SUCH a …. “BIG – man”???
    Joe B told an audience in Ottumwa, Iowa Tuesday that his White House would “CURE” Cancer Should HE …. Beat President Trump in 2020…
    THEN PART the….BLUE SEA’s?

    First he’s teaching Detroit’s illiterate single moms the easy-peasy art of computer coding, WOW joey U did THAT? .. U DIDN’T BUILD that DID U ?now he’s Promising to conquer cancer. Apparently, there’s nothing that can’t be done IF…… ha’ voters put Joe Biden on the job. Why didn’t we think of it earlier?

    “I’ve worked so hard in my career, ?REALLY JOE WTP PAIDED DEARLY ….ha’ 4 WHAT??? that I promise you, if I’m elected president you’re gonna see single most important thing that changes America, we’re gonna cure cancer,” Biden said to applause.
    First he’s teaching Detroit’s illiterate single moms the easy-peasy art of computer coding, now he’s promising to conquer cancer. Good thing we have Old Joe, otherwise cancer might never be cured.

    Apparently, there’s nothing that can’t be done if voters put Joe Biden on the job. Why didn’t we think of it earlier?

    And speaking of jobs, Joe Biden actually has been put on the job of curing cancer, as President Obama’s cancer ‘moonshot’ guru, as well as in leading a FOUND’-ation in a Private Capacity.
    According to the Washington Examiner: ……
    Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

    • He has to out do Gore, I suppose. And Barry, who promised to stop the sea from rising.

      • YEP .. OLD ….HOT – AIR … RemembeR THAT 1 … 07/30/2008
        Candidate claims oil savings would equal new production plans

        …. Obama at Missouri campaign event
        WASHINGTON – If you think there isn’t urgency to getting Congress to drop its bans on offshore drilling & development of the ANWR oil reserves, listen to what Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama had to say in Missouri yesterday.

        “There are things U can DO individually, though, to save Energy,” O’ said. “Making sure your tires are properly inflated – simple thing. But we could save ALL the Oil that they’re talking about getting off drilling – if everybody was just inflating their tires? And getting regular tune-ups? You’d actually save just as much!”
        That’s H I S …. energy plan? Inflate your tires? Get more tune-ups?

  17. YEP !!! ….JUST BOOK-UM ….. empty ….dick head fool’

    • It’s likely true and also true that, thanks to Barry’s policies and the liberal judges who somehow “rule” that these policies are set in stone and immutable (even more so than the constitution), these same potentially deadly disease carriers are set loose in our communities. No doubt there’s some progressive rule or policy that makes it “illegal” to test them because THAT would be racial profiling. Or something. YOUR LIFE must be sacrificed on the altar of political correctness. Again, when will people WAKE UP? We’re ALL being slowly boiled alive like the proverbial frogs in a pot of hot water.

    • Read that story carefully and you’ll discover the REAL REASON why there’s a measles epidemic. There’s a huge one in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and they’re sending illegal immigrants to our border. BUT the progressive media and social media, which is making a show of banning disinformation, would prefer you to blame religious minorities and conspiracy theorists in our country for the measles epidemic here. iow, people who don’t believe in vaccinating their children for religious reasons or because they fear their children will have adverse reactions. The big distraction is FROM potential blame being cast on the correct source–ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. It’s not just measles, though. Many other hitherto defeated diseases are making a comeback in the U.S. because they’re being brought back in by illegal aliens. THIS IS FACT, but the progressive media MUST suppress it and blame someone or something else. THAT’S THE EPITOME OF FAKE NEWS.

      Consider the irony. The government won’t test or vaccinate illegal aliens and yet in some places AMERICAN CITIZENS are being FORCED to vaccinate their children. Where? New York, for one place:

      WHY? Because the epidemics caused by illegal aliens won’t be as bad IF they can force all Americans to vaccinate their children. Problem solved. Violate the civil rights of CITIZENS in order to protect the “right” of diseased aliens to enter our country illegally and remain here, courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer. Citizens’ religious freedoms MUST BE curtailed because the progressive left prefers to elevate ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION above the well being or the civil and constitutional rights of citizens. They rank according to their preferred policies and ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION is at the top of the list. NOTHING can be allowed to stand in the way of illegal immigration–not even your religious freedoms or your rights as a parent or even the health and lives of the entire population.

      The TRUTH is that these outbreaks of measles, mumps, hand and mouth disease, TB, Chagas, etc., are caused by the entry into our country of illegal aliens. That’s the TRUTH that the left must deflect from. Thus, the narrative that the epidemics result from religious people or conspiracy theorists (science deniers).

    • At what point will people in these “progressive” oppressive cities actually wake up? Or are they all proverbial frogs being slowly boiled alive?

  18. & WHAT ABOUT WTP? OJ .. U super FLY? LIE your way 2 hell …OK!

    double-dick 4 sure.. sad BUTT’ TRUE & all that COVERED his AZZ ~ 24/7


    Consider the implications of this story. NOT ONLY did the FBI NOT examine (or subpoena or confiscate or impound) the DNC server but they also DID NOT EVEN SEE the so-called technical evidence within the DNC bought-and-paid-for reports written by their own handpicked contractor that allegedly “proved” that the Russians done it!

    The reports they got from the DNC’s private contractor (iow, a biased source with no reason to tell the truth but plenty to spin the story in favor of the DNC) were redacted and the FBI NEVER SAW what was redacted, which included the so-called steps the contractor took to secure the server, fix the hack, and, I assume, identify the culprits.

    The FBI took the tainted “evidence” and used it to smear the POTUS and blame the Russians without one shred of actual evidence. It’s NOT EVIDENCE unless there’s a provenance. Not only isn’t there ANY evidence, the entire provenance of the non-evidence is suspect because it’s completely POLITICAL. This is an outrage and if nothing else this alone PROVES THAT THE FBI AND THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY UNDER OBAMA WERE POLITICIZED.

    No real unbiased investigator can take “evidence” from a third-party on the third-party’s say so without any proof or provenance. This is like serving Al Capone with a search warrant but letting Al hire his own capo to do the search for the FBI and then write a redacted report to give them!

    Would Pelosi and Nadler let Trump hire someone to write a redacted report to give them concerning his tax returns? Well, we already know the answer because they won’t even accept the LEGALLY redacted Mueller report and they’re basically the party that commissioned it and hand-picked the investigator.

  20. ponder ON as your LIFE depends ON IT! ..WAKE your AZZ UP PEOPLE

Leave a Reply to Zenway Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s