Posts Tagged → weird
Racist fake “journalist” attacks Trump in broad daylight
President Trump stepped onto the stage of the National Association of Black Journalists (what if there were a National Association of White Journalists…? Are white journalists not allowed to join the same group as black journalists? Isn’t that exclusionary racism? This whole racial skin color division thing eludes me) the other day, and patiently rebuffed a blatantly racist attack by the openly hostile host, Rachel Scott of ABC “news“, whose unprofessional, disrespectful and confrontational attitude is why the establishment media has lost the American people.
So-called “journalist” Rachel Scott behaved so poorly from the get-go that she left no question in anyone’s mind if she is a politically partisan activist. She is. She is also a white-hating racist. She rapidfire threw lie- bomb after lie-bomb at Trump, and then harshly interrupted her guest whenever he tried to answer her.
To put Rachel Scott’s aggressive behavior in perspective, had the skin colors been reversed, she would have been immediately drummed out of whatever atoms remain of journalism as a recognizable profession. Her hostility was palpable, his disrespect was measurable, and there is no other way to ascribe this unprofessional conduct than sheer hatred. If it would be unacceptable for a white person to treat a black person as Rachel Scott did, then the reverse is also true.
Racism is bad, it is un-American, and it cannot be allowed in polite society. What an embarrassment this event was for the National Association of Black Journalists. Not a professional group, evidently.
For his part, President Trump was incredible. He patiently responded to his vicious antagonist, and quite personally addressed her points head-on. Speaking of skin color, one of the intriguing things that President Trump brought up is how Kamala Harris never identifed as “black” before. As Harris is descended from Asians, whites, and possibly American Indians, with maybe some black Africans in the distant past, and her one ancestor owned the most slaves on Jamaica out of every other slave holder in that island’s history, it surprised Trump to hear the political activist ABC fake news person Rachel Scott call Harris “black.”
And he said so.
Kudos to Trump for being forthright and honest. And he also spoke the truth about having been the best president for American blacks since President Lincoln. When Rachel Scott yet again interjected that it was Lyndon Johnson who signed the Voting Rights Act, Trump was too much of a gentleman to point out that President Lyndon Johnson was a notorious southern racist, and his policies were openly designed to keep American blacks enslaved on the Democrat Plantation for generations to come. Which they have. And it was the Republicans who voted then for civil rights and voting rights for American blacks, while the Democrats voted against them.
What interests me about President Trump’s appearance on enemy territory is how the vast majority of Americans do not give a fig about skin color. I myself have loved women with brown skin, black skin, red skin, white skin, and olive skin, and I have to say that all of my friends feel the way I do – skin color is the least useful indicator of anything important. And yet, racists like Rachel Scott keep trying to whip up racial animus between Americans, all of whom simply want to live in harmony with one another.
Similarly, other racist “journalists” (Democrat Party activists who work in the news business) have accused Trump’s VP nominee JD Vance of being a racist, despite his wife having brown skin and their kids looking quite brown.
It’s weird, to borrow a word from Kacklin’ Kamala, how liberals and Democrats are always racists at heart, and how they just cannot tell the truth.
Thank God America has Donald Trump to say the facts as they are!
US Supreme Court decides straight forward case with weird outcomes
Fernandez v. California was decided yesterday by the US Supreme Court. Everything about it is just…weird.
In a holding that is enraging advocates of private property rights, limited government, and citizen privacy, the Court’s conservatives were joined by two liberals to allow the police to enter a private home without a warrant, even if one resident says they cannot enter, because another resident said they could enter.
In other words, if the police get a resident of a home to grant permission to enter that home for the purpose of searching for something illegal, which the police now do not have to specify in writing, the police may enter. What they are looking for could be unknown, or undocumented. Maybe they are on a fishing expedition, just looking for anything they could use against the person who said they did not want the police to enter. It seems like planting evidence would be a lot easier, now. In any event, your home is no longer your castle, if a pissed off teenager inside decides to take out their misplaced teenage aggression against their loving parents.
Seems like a recipe for disaster.
Justice Ginsburg wrote a dissent, noting the obvious erosion in Fourth Amendment rights against illegal searches and seizures that result from holdings like this. Ginsburg is the court’s most liberal member, an extremist who has spoken out against the US Constitution she is sworn to uphold, and an authoritarian statist who otherwise just loves, loves, loves state power over citizens.
And here’s the really weird stuff: The facts involve “illegal guns,” which in California is anything down to and including a Daisy BB gun, and documented domestic violence.
The person blocking the police from entering the home to search it was the Mr. Wife-Beating Fernandez, a scumbag who held his cringing wife prisoner under brutal circumstances. After he was momentarily out of the picture and not a direct threat, she allowed the police to search the house, where they found the illegal guns (let’s be clear – California is on the path to making all gun ownership illegal, except by the police, which is otherwise known as a police state, a separate topic).
Thus did Mr. Macho Wife Beater get into even more and more serious trouble with the legal system, and thus did he subsequently attempt to suppress the evidence the police found, which really put him away behind bars for a while.
Ginsburg and other liberals typically trumpet the rights of domestic abuse victims, but here they are clearly ranking them beneath the rights of the gun-owning wife beater. Weird.
Conservatives like Alito typically champion the rights of gun owners and are split 50/50 on privacy rights. But here they are so obviously opening up the flood gates of potential abuse by police. No warrant? No documentation for probable cause? Husbands and wives typically cannot testify against each other, but here they are now allowed to defy one another in the family ‘castle’ so the state apparatus may enter at will.
Seems like a pretty huge detonation of American citizens’ privacy rights. Weird.