Patterico's Pontifications

4/12/2019

Trump Blamed for “Incitement” for Criticism of Idiotic Comment By Ilhan Omar

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 10:21 pm



So Rep. Ilhan Omar described the events of 9/11 as follows: “some people did something.” This is one of those things where people say it’s taken out of context, so you go look up the context and learn that the context is exactly what it appeared to be. Our President let loose with some Twitter criticism:

To hear the Democrat commentariat, you’d think he had just shot Rep. Omar on Fifth Avenue.

Oh, please. Criticizing someone for saying something stupid is not incitement to violence. Dan Crenshaw speaks the truth here:

Indeed. Claiming that Trump’s criticism is “incitement” is just trying to protect Rep. Omar from criticism. To heck with that. And by the way, as John Sexton asks:

But it just goes to show you: radical leftists gonna radical leftist. Oh, hey, speaking of which:

The roughly 1,200-word op-ed that appeared on the Boston Globe’s website Wednesday began with the author looking back on one of his “biggest regrets” in life — “not pissing in Bill Kristol’s salmon.”

“I was waiting on the disgraced neoconservative pundit and chief Iraq War cheerleader about 10 years ago at a restaurant in Cambridge and to my eternal dismay, some combination of professionalism and pusillanimity prevented me from appropriately seasoning his entree,” wrote Luke O’Neil, a Boston-based freelance journalist and regular contributor to the Globe’s opinions section. (O’Neil has also contributed to The Washington Post.)

. . . .

“As for the waiters out there, I’m not saying you should tamper with anyone’s food, as that could get you into trouble,” O’Neil wrote. “You might lose your serving job. But you’d be serving America. And you won’t have any regrets years later.”

It was so bad, the Boston Globe actually took it down. That’s how bad it was.

[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]

128 Responses to “Trump Blamed for “Incitement” for Criticism of Idiotic Comment By Ilhan Omar”

  1. So they want to silence their opponents and say legitimate criticism is out of bounds. Where have we seen that before?

    NJRob (4d595c)

  2. So I watched the speech. Given the community that she was talking to, I can’t imagine that any of them were under the illusion that the 9/11 terrorists weren’t Muslim. And later in the speech she talks about the importance of not just criticizing people who are not members of their community, but to criticize people who are members of their community, countries that are Muslim countries.

    Given the beginning of the speech, she could certainly be avoiding including the 9/11 terrorists as part of the Muslim community or just mentally avoiding thinking of them as Muslim, but given the latter part it could be that she was verbally exiling them. IDK.

    My grandmother used to do a thing where she would say “Those people. Those people (did whatever).” We knew who “Those people” were, but my grandmother was essentially verbally shunning them. They weren’t “Bob and Mary” they weren’t “The couple down the street.” They were Those People.

    I know it’s no fun, but either interpretation is possible.

    As for everyone else, the whole tweet thread is silly and over the top. The President is being over the top and so is everyone responding to him. I can’t speak to AOC’s comment. There are probably still first responders and people who experienced 9/11 up close who still have PTSD, but it’s also been 17 years and you can’t trigger-warn for something forever.

    Nic (896fdf)

  3. You know what’s missing — adult supervision all around.

    The imaginary Oprah tweet: ‘Enough. All of you. Turn off your toys, get into to your jammies and into bed. NOW.’ #yesdamnitIammgoingtohavetorun

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  4. This is so stupid it’s hard to watch. It actually makes Trump look like the adult in the room, it’s that stupid.

    I am waiting for the debates when the GOP candidate says “All lives matter!” and asks the Democrat nominee to say the same thing.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  5. BTW, am I missing something where Trump said to string her up or something? Are the Democrats now going to toss 9/11 down the memory hole and pretend it was some unavoidable natural disaster?

    I don’t get this. It seems like the Democrats have made a bet that they can get fewer votes than McGovern.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  6. ‘@4. It actually makes Trump look like the adult in the room.’

    A man spanked by a rolled up copy of Forbes w/his picture on it?!

    No.

    No it doesn’t.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  7. ilhan omar would be more useful as a martyr to the left. waving the bloody hijab. a prominent lefty hasn’t been murdered in a while so one is needed for 2020 election. you can’t just go up to a conservative giving a lecture on collage campus and off him for being politically incorrect. a martyred ilhan omar would be useful for this purpose. also for a fox news conservative or conservative radio talk show host.

    lany (75ef82)

  8. 5 better democrats do that then investigating bush administration for alowing 9-11 to happen because they needed a second pearl harbor before they could invade iraq. progress for new american century (1998) democrats who voted for iraq war pelosi clinton biden et.al. alowed the 9-11 white wash commission so they wouldn’t have to explain their iraq war vote. new poster out has twin towers crashing as the napalmed little vietnamese girl runs down the road in front of them. caption: what goes around comes around.

    lany (75ef82)

  9. these women are vile and should be ridiculed until they leave office or die.

    mg (8cbc69)

  10. Her job’s in Washington, but her heart’s in Mecca.

    nk (dbc370)

  11. Hmm. That could be a song.

    nk (dbc370)

  12. Does anyone actually think she supports/feels sympathy for/accepts/doesn’t condemn/hates the terrorists involved in the 9/11 attacks?

    Because “some people did something” is being promoted to be suggesting that. And that’s a problem.

    Nathan (5efffe)

  13. Missing from all the brouhaha is the fact she flat-out lied that CAIR was created to counter Islamaphobia created when somebody did something (aka mass murders) on 9/11. It was created in June, 1994.

    Btw – google her name and 9/11 and all the news referrals are stories defending her comments and blaming Trump, Crenshaw etc for inciting violence. Welcome to the new normal folks.

    harkin (e15868)

  14. Written by Calypso Louie?

    mg (8cbc69)

  15. We need these vile women to continue the un American statements . Perhaps when they demand hijab wearing at the Kentucky Derby things will change. Please keep up the Hate America rhetoric. May your disgusting legacy stay with you.

    mg (8cbc69)

  16. Omar is a cair girl, their first appearance was in 94 at my alma mater, after aq first attempt in Mogadishu to kill soldiers who were safeguarding relief supplies the commanders of that operation were the late aref and the live adel.

    Narciso (3d7315)

  17. Robert Burns.

    My heart’s in Mecca, my heart is not here
    My heart’s in Mecca, a-stoning the q**ers
    A-stoning the q***ers, and wearing the niqab
    My heart’s in Mecca wherever my job.

    nk (dbc370)

  18. Ah molly the grand daughter of a commie hack and a sex addict, that bulwinkle is top notch. She defends the Taliban al shahaab probably even boko haram Its not a bug

    Narciso (3d7315)

  19. Applaud things like this if you don’t want Democrats to win elections.

    PS to NJRob – Trump and 43% of Republicans?

    DRJ (15874d)

  20. I take her seriously as an enemy propagandist un the long war, same with her bff ocasio cortez.

    Narciso (3d7315)

  21. Teh tanned ashley judd
    rancida tilapia
    donkey chompers blow

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  22. Take ’em to the station
    And put ’em on a train
    They got no expectations
    To pass through here again

    Once they were just wee girls but
    Now they ain’t no more
    Their rancid speech and actions mean it’s
    Time they’re shown the door

    Our hearts are like some diamonds
    We throw our pearls at swine
    And as we watch ’em leaving here
    We’ll win some peace of mind

    Our time is like the water
    That splashes on a stone
    Our patience like our resolve
    It’s here, and then it’s gone

    So take ’em to the airport
    And put ’em on a plane
    They got no expectations
    To pass through here again

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  23. If this is what political discourse has been reduced to, then we have a serious problem as a culture and a nation. But then this is what happens when a total fraud is elected to office.

    Gawain's Ghost (b25cd1)

  24. Nancy Pelosi also weighed in:

    The memory of 9/11 is sacred ground, and any discussion of it must be done with reverence. The President shouldn’t use the painful images of 9/11 for a political attack. It is wrong for the President, as Commander-in-Chief, to fan the flames to make anyone less safe.

    With regard to Ilhan Omar, she said that she looks forward to speaking with her in person:

    I call them in before I call them out.

    Dana (023079)

  25. “The real problem, in America, Britain, Canada, Oz, NZ, is not the left, who know what they want and are serious about getting it, but the pansy right. It’s easy to mock AOC and Justin and Jacinta Ardern, but all they’re doing is sailing full steam ahead for their desired utopia. The right, who profess to disdain the final destination, nevertheless follow along, albeit at a more desultory rate of knots.” — Mark Steyn

    JSkorcher (a37984)

  26. We get told an awful lot… by an awful lot.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  27. Swarthy, if you are not constrained by forms of poetry. Either way an inside-job candidate for one of lany’s wishes in #7 took himself out of the running at the big mall yesterday.

    urbanleftbehind (6a358f)

  28. “It is wrong for the President, as Commander-in-Chief, to fan the flames to make Democrats’ re-elections less safe.” — Nancy Pelosi

    FIFY, Madam Speaker.

    nk (dbc370)

  29. There’s been a dismal tide of negativity for well over two years now. It’s time they get called on their hoax, their lies and their anti-Americanism.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  30. Mg really internalized the Ashley Judd comparison…Kentucky Derby?

    urbanleftbehind (6a358f)

  31. WikiLeaks Release — 13/Apr/19

    From: t[redacted]dc[redacted]@g[redacted].com
    Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2019 at 21:19
    To: t[redacted]dc[redacted]@g[redacted].com
    Subject: Copy of transcript from meeting with the committee for journalist and politicians — Omar Issue

    […]

    So, in summary.

    The committee for the big lie recommends us and I quote ‘go big or go home’. No surprise there guys.

    The psyops sub-committee on gaslighting has reminded us to stick with general rule 3 ‘interpret everything in the light most favorable to the narrative’ so stick with incitement and out of context for a couple more cycles. I’d like to thank the ladies from psyops for bringing the snacks.

    The narrative committee gave us a good summary of our work so far to frame 9/11 as the work of disturbed and confused individuals. They suggested we switch to the ‘acted alone’ trope outright but everyone else agreed that we’ve been consistently using that negatively. So, no talk about the unfortunate events or the guys involved. Eyes on the prize guys, let’s not lose sight of our objectives.

    T[redacted]d voiced an objection over the incitement stuff being too close to calling for free speech restrictions while we’ve got the Assange issue running and so soon after Z called for censorship. On a personal note, T[redacted]d this is why you got pulled from all committees. You can keep these CVS receipts, we aren’t reimbursing you, just add this to your itemized deductions. You should have the gimp suit from the last meeting. Go get ready, we’re about to adjourn.

    […]

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  32. And had O’Neil the columnist walked the walk, he would probably be the main attraction at Red State or post-Levin buyout Blaze today.

    urbanleftbehind (6a358f)

  33. When she’s sitting there
    In her silk upholstered chair
    Placin’ bets on Kentucky Derby Day

    He’ll be in his basement room
    Drinkin’ Yoo Hoo playin’ Doom
    With another girl to take his pain away

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  34. Forget the salmon, serve that sailor some chocolate mousse!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  35. Have you seen a photo of Luke O’Neil? (Not to be confused with Biochemist and Immunologist Professor Luke A. J. O’Neill with two “l”s.) I wouldn’t eat at a restaurant that had him as a waiter. Well, to be honest, I don’t eat restaurants where I don’t know the people, in the first place. And I have no plans to ever travel to Boston.

    nk (dbc370)

  36. Elizabeth Warren‏ @ewarren
    The President is inciting violence against a sitting Congresswoman—and an entire group of Americans based on their religion.

    SO, is Elizabeth Warren saying that all Muslims attacked on 9/11
    or is Elizabeth Warren saying that all Muslims are terrorists .. ?

    Neo (d1c681)

  37. I’m waiting for Ted Lieu’s and Jarrold Nadler’s take before deciding which way to go on this.

    Munroe (284e94)

  38. Applaud things like this if you don’t want Democrats to win elections.

    PS to NJRob – Trump and 43% of Republicans?

    DRJ (15874d) — 4/13/2019 @ 6:51 am

    GIGO.

    Show me the metadata. I still expect most people responding to stuff like that are just blowing off steam and not responding seriously.

    Now, can we get a poll of the news media to ask them how many feel they should be allowed to shut down their critics, take their social media, and roust them from their jobs?

    That would be interesting.

    NJRob (4d595c)

  39. Furthermore DRJ,

    how do you feel about throwing the Wikileaks fool in jail for his acts of “journalism?” Isn’t that the same thing? How about what FDR did to the media? Is war an exception?

    NJRob (4d595c)

  40. GG: “If this is what political discourse has been reduced to, then we have a serious problem as a culture and a nation.”

    Yes, nothing serious here….yet another excuse to pledge fealty to the tribe. It’s all about personality now….and very little about policy progress. Yawn.

    AJ_Liberty (165d19)

  41. It’s not just the “some people did something” comment that she botched. CAIR wasn’t founded after 9/11 and it wasn’t founded in the wake of an actual militant Islamist attack. It was founded 1994 in part because of the movies True Lies, which was all about Schwarzenegger trying to stop a fictional terrorist.
    The other thing she was botched attending a CAIR-sponsored event in the first place, which is anti-Semitic and has its own ties to militant Islamists.

    However, federal Judge Jorge A. Solis denied CAIR’s request that its name be publicly striken from the list. He said that the government “has produced ample evidence” to establish the association of CAIR and other organizations with entities such as the Holy Land Foundation, the Islamic Association for Palestine and with the Hamas militant group. Solis acknowledged CAIR’s claim that evidence produced by the government “largely predates” the official designation of these groups as terror organizations but he said the “evidence is nonetheless sufficient to show the association of these entities with HLF, IAP, and Hamas.”

    The Jerusalem Post is more biased against CAIR, but they have a point about CAIR. And then there’s CAIR’s general credibility.

    Overall, we rate CAIR Right-Center biased based on conservative religious views (pseudoscience) that offset their left leaning civil rights positions. We also rate them Questionable based on use of poor or lack of sourcing, questionable funding from governments, and allegations of antisemitism and possible connections to terrorist organizations, though unproven.

    While CAIR claims that a majority of their contributions come from American Muslims, they received $1.2 million from six individuals from KSA and UAE and $405,000 from the government of Qatar. They also solicited funds from the likes of Gaddafi and Sudan’s President Bashir (link). Ms. Omar would benefit by choosing better company to associate with and not downtalking an atrocity that was done by religious extremists in the name of her God.

    Paul Montagu (7968e9)

  42. I wonder what it might look like applying the ‘interpret in the light most favorable’ tactic against Nancy.

    The memory of 9/11 is sacred ground, and any discussion of it must be done with reverence. [who else thinks this is sacred and revered? why is she legitimizing islamic fundamentalists?]

    The President shouldn’t use the painful images of 9/11 for a political attack. [let’s be very careful about who can use it for political attacks while you’re using it for a political attack]

    I’m too lazy to work up a fake tweet format from someone at CNN.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  43. She had an opportunity to at least feign concern for islamism, but like strangelove she cant stop the salute, yes cair was long in the works before true lies which was remarkably prescient aq unlike crimson jihad didnt have nukes handy.

    Narciso (3d7315)

  44. She further has called the kingdom and the uae islamophobic as per her new?? friend the sultan and the emir of qatar.

    Narciso (3d7315)

  45. True the future king of Saudi Arabia, probably had a hand in the formation of cair, something the son is trying to distance himself from. The pretender to the throne prince Ahmed would bring us back to the bad old days where the golden chair held the rains

    Narciso (3d7315)

  46. She’s awful. What she said is indefensible and she needs to go. I’m disgusted by Dems’ refusal to call her out. As for Trump, he should remember she is a member of Congress who has received death threats. He needs to go too. Disgusted with all of ’em.

    JRH (8f59ea)

  47. As in the UK with cage prisoners which argues for release of detainees like emwazi (the dead beatle) founded by moazzem begg who recruited the underwear bomber

    Narciso (3d7315)

  48. Scarborough, from narciso’s link @43:

    “We don’t want one of our first Muslim, women, Americans, to, to, to, to, blow up politically like this.”

    Snorfle.

    nk (dbc370)

  49. They pulled the same trick re the recruiter of the Barcelona hit in 2017, which might have taken down the sagrada cathedral there, the fellow fooled judge garzon

    Narciso (3d7315)

  50. For the sake of fair-and-balanced, after the WTC buildings came down, Trump bragged that his 40 Wall Street building went from 2nd tallest to tallest in NYC, which is also a lie: the Chrysler and Empire State buildings are taller in both height and floor. Once again with him, ego surpasses patriotism.

    Paul Montagu (7968e9)

  51. Another example of ‘in the light most favorable’ in action:

    “I know nothing about WikiLeaks. It’s not my thing,” Trump said in the Oval Office. “I know there is something having to do with Julian Assange.”

    Most favorable to the narrative: Liar, liar, pants on fire! You’ve already admitted you know about WikiLeaks. If you would have meant anything different you would have carefully parsed your answer and only used the exact phrasing I would be willing to accept.

    A possible alternative in the context of Assange’s arrest and the US charges: Not been involved in the US charges, don’t have anything to say about his arrest or possible extradition, has other things higher on his list of things to worry about.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  52. I listened to more of the speech, and her comments seem even worse. It is a blatant lie that CAIR was founded after 9/11 to protect Muslims who were losing their civil rights. It was formed way before that and she knows that. But it doesn’t fit the frame, so boom, there it goes. Even 9/11 is somehow unfair to Muslims. If you look at the advert for the dinner, it’s all about “fighting for our rights.”

    To all these refugees taken in by the US out of (misplaced) kindness, GTH.

    Patricia (3363ec)

  53. I suppose one could read it as whether he knew of the operation, anyways begg who was spring from a charge of forming an Islamic state cell, because he had an able attorney, so we have a layer of enabling organizations the counterpart to cage is levick partners who Lanny Davis quelle surprise was in charge of

    Narciso (3d7315)

  54. Self-hating, double dealing Lefties – like the poor – will always be among us.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  55. Isnt it striking coronello that his word is the only thing not allowed in the
    https://www.saulmontes-bradley.com/es-satty/

    Narciso (3d7315)

  56. “Self-hating, double dealing Lefties – like the poor – will always be among us”

    Yes. But do they still need apologists from the so-called right?

    JSkorcher (df402e)

  57. That’s a series of idiotic eff-ups, narciso. Collusion.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  58. They don’t need them, but they appreciate their assistance.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  59. “He needs to go too.”

    He’ll be on his way when the voters (or term limits) make that decision for him.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  60. Remember Twitter banned Montes Bradley, largely because he knows where ths bodies are buried, hes now on quod vorum. I met the father hes a very sharp fellow in Dodd

    Narciso (3d7315)

  61. (April 12, 2019 / JNS) “Imagine if there was a member of Congress who openly supported an anti-Semitic movement, issued multiple statements promoting traditional themes of Jew-hatred and then gave a speech at a fundraiser for an organization founded as a front group for terrorists in which the 9/11 attacks were described as merely as “some people did something.” And then imagine if the person who did all these things was embraced as a heroine and, more importantly, a victim of hate.

    That’s the enviable position that Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) finds herself in after doing all of the above in the space of just the three months since she was sworn in as a new member of Congress in January.

    Her latest surge of publicity involved a speech she gave for the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the pushback about her 9/11 comments, whereby many Democrats embraced her as the victim of a hate crime because The New York Post published a cover reminding her about the horror that “something” entailed.

    Omar has received death threats in recent months, and there is no excuse for that. No one should be threatened with hate or death for expressing their views, even when they are hateful as some of Omar’s have been. But what demands our attention here is not the contents of her CAIR speech or even the Post cover with its depiction of the iconic photograph of the World Trade Center towers in flames, but rather a curious process by which a person who has made a name for herself largely on the strength of anti-Semitic incitement has been transformed into a victim.

    In doing so, those who have rallied to her defense have resurrected the myth of a post-9/11 backlash against Muslims. That has shifted the narrative of that trauma from one of an Islamist terror war against the West into one that focused on the victimization of Muslims. But the ability of Omar and her defenders to use it to effectively deflect charges of anti-Semitism and to essentially legitimize her as a public figure is something that out to alarm everyone, no matter what your politics or religious beliefs.

    Omar, like her fellow controversial members of the Democrats’ freshman class, Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) have gotten far more publicity than they probably deserve for their meager accomplishments so far. Still, the trio of radicals have not only mesmerized the media, but also proven to have considerably more influence over their party than most political observers would have thought.

    Nothing demonstrated their unexpected power more than the way that Omar’s allies—led by the ubiquitous AOC—were able to prevent the House of Representatives from condemning her after she slandered supporters of Israel and Jews by claiming that they were buying Congress (“It’s all about the Benjamins baby”) and exhibiting “dual loyalty.”

    …In her speech to CAIR, Omar claimed that the group had been founded after 9/11 in order to defend Muslims against a backlash after the attacks. This is patently false. CAIR was founded in 1994 as a political front for the Holy Land Foundation, a group that raised funds for the Hamas terror group that was eventually shut down by the Treasury Department. Her support for CAIR is consistent with her backing for the anti-Semitic BDS movement.

    But the broader point to be made here is the way the effort to shift the discussion about 9/11 from a seminal moment in the long struggle against Islamist terror to a mere excuse to discriminate against Muslims is now being used to downplay Omar’s anti-Semitism.

    The debate about this mythical backlash has been going on for a decade, especially during the controversy over an abortive attempt to build an Islamic center within the shadow of the fallen World Trade Center towers. At that time, I wrote in Commentary magazine about the way false fears were being used to make Muslims appear to be the true victims of the slaughter. The mainstream media had accepted as truth the claims that Muslims had been the subjects of a wave of discrimination after 9/11, even though there was no objective proof to back up that assertion.

    To the contrary, the U.S. government, the mass media and American popular culture had bent over backwards to avoid stigmatizing Muslims. As FBI hate-crime statistics in the years after 2001 showed, there had been no discernable evidence of a backlash of hate. During those years and the following decade since the World Trade Center mosque debate, statistics consistently showed that Jews remained the prime focus of religious hate in this country with anti-Semitic attacks or incidents of any kind far outnumbering those against Muslims.

    While all forms of bias are despicable, the backlash narrative was, as I noted in 2010, a successful effort to “redirect, redefine and rewrite the unambiguous meaning of an unambiguous event” in order to defame the United States. But it’s now being weaponized again to portray an unapologetic anti-Semite like Omar as a victim. The point of this campaign is to protect her and all others who seek to delegitimize Jews and supporters of Israel with an impenetrable cloak of immunity that belongs to victims.

    Decent persons—Jewish and non-Jewish, Republican or Democrat—cannot allow this big lie to stand unopposed.”

    https://www.jns.org/opinion/why-is-ilhan-omars-islamophobia-dodge-working/?fbclid=IwAR1B2lPChrYGdiUuBqdC-UANo1NujUuSNAVD2ZBIwnzfJAnTCJ-yiZ1f50Y

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  62. Yeah, Haiku. Tell it to lany. Bush let 9/11 happen because something something garden gnome underpants get back at Sadam Hussein. He said it all up there at #8 and Unless I missed it, which is possible because I am enjoying my weekend otherwise and not totally living on this thread, there was no pushback from anyone here. But hey, he was civil about the way he trashed the Bushes (of whom I’m no great fan) so whatever. See my Styne quote at #23 again. None of these words matter because they lack the courage of conviction, which only comes with a spine that does not wilt nor get the vapors when questioned harshly.

    JSkorcher (df402e)

  63. @10. Her job’s in Washington, but her heart’s in Mecca.

    OTOH:

    His job’s in Washington, but his heart’s in Moscow.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  64. JSkorcher… they out themselves with their own words. Often no children of their own, thus no skin in the game. Lunatic fringe.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  65. JSkorcher (df402e) — 4/13/2019 @ 10:54 am

    Lany is a leftist troll. If most of the commenters here are like me, we don’t even read it…hence no pushback.
    Just like you don’t pushback at junk mail. You just throw it in the trash unopened.

    Kishnevi (125429)

  66. lany formerly known as perry (or Perry) is for entertainment purposes only, JSkorcher.

    nk (dbc370)

  67. An oldie but an evergreen goodie! https://youtu.be/h2yppzb-Lpo

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  68. Furthermore DRJ,

    how do you feel about throwing the Wikileaks fool in jail for his acts of “journalism?” Isn’t that the same thing? How about what FDR did to the media? Is war an exception?

    NJRob (4d595c) — 4/13/2019 @ 8:29 am

    If I responded to you the way you talk to me, then I would reply this is garbage. (“GIGO” and What-about-ism — Really? This is not useful.)

    Instead, I will helpfully explain that Assange is not being indicted for publishing the information so this is not a First Amendment issue. He has been indicted for conspiring with Manning to illegally obtain the information.

    DRJ (15874d)

  69. ‘…Venn der Trump he tweets, dumb dictates every day;
    Vee go ‘Heil! ‘Heil!’, und follow anyway…’

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  70. @39 That’s really interesting information.

    @60 It’s possible for several things to be true at once. It can be true there are more people directly anti-semetic than anti-islamic and that there are people who are both and that there are still people who are anti-islamic even if there are more people who are anti-semetic. It can be true, especially given ongoing conflicts in the middle east, that some Islamic people do not like Jewish people and that some Jewish people do not like Islamic people and that in both cases it can be because of the political/religious conflicts. None of these things are exclusionary of the others.

    Nic (896fdf)

  71. “His job’s in Washington, but his heart’s in Moscow.”

    Yes, the Scotch-Germans have traditionally loved Russia and Trump owes the rise of his businesses to the Yuge Russian population in NYC. This isn’t an eyerollingly stupid or inane comment at all.

    Ilhan Omar was, on the other hand, a Somali elected by a Minnesota Somali district, and has all the very obvious and stereotypical sympathies and excuse-making thereof:

    https://dailycaller.com/2019/02/18/ilhan-omar-district-terror/

    “In the past, Omar has shown her strong affinity for the Somali community in her district, as well as abroad. In one case in 2016, Omar — who at the time was only a state rep. in Minnesota — defended a group of nine Somalis who had attempted to cross the border into Mexico in a plan to reach Syria, “planning to join ISIS,””

    “When they were arrested, she wrote a letter to the judge who oversaw their case asking him to have “compassion” for the wannabe terrorist and to take a “restorative approach to justice.”

    Omar wrote to the Judge:

    Such punitive measures not only lack efficacy, they inevitably create an environment in which extremism can flourish, aligning with the presupposition of terrorist recruitment. . . . The best deterrent to fanaticism is a system of compassion. We must alter our attitude and approach; if we truly want to affect change, we should refocus our efforts on inclusion and rehabilitation.”

    “In reference to the 2013 bombing of a Kenyan mall by Somalia-based terrorist organization, Al-Shabab, Omar placed the blame on the United States and its past foreign policy in the region for the attack: [b]“For us, it’s always ‘I must have not done anything. Why is it happening to me?’ Nobody wants to take accountability of how these are byproducts of the actions of our involvement in other people’s affairs,”[/b]”

    “According to Jeanine Brudenell, who served as the Somali liaison for the Minneapolis Police Department, the uptick in extremism that has occurred in recent years can be linked to efforts to crack down on street gangs throughout the city.

    “In trying to lead youth away from joining gangs, many parents were taking their children to the mosques,” she said.”

    Let Ilhan Omar, like lany, keep digging her own grave with her words, and eventually we may even get the Muslim ban that such people show us has always been urgently needed, as ‘gratitude toward the country who took you in and a willingness to serve its interests first’ seems foreign to the majority of Muslim arrivistes.

    Chin-po (1cf653)

  72. “The party of Trump, through and through” calls out and disciplines Steve King, but the Dems can’t even give a sideways look at Omar.

    Munroe (67b0fc)

  73. “His job’s in Washington, but his heart’s in Moscow.”

    Yes, the Scotch-Germans have traditionally loved Russia and Trump owes the rise of his businesses to the Yuge Russian population in NYC. This isn’t an eyerollingly stupid or inane comment at all.

    Ah, a commenter with some backbone. Wonder how long Chin-po will last.

    JSkorcher (df402e)

  74. Insults = Backbone ?

    DRJ (15874d)

  75. Well his wallet certainly is in Moscow. Is his heart in his wallet? That could be the question, but is it really?

    Nic (896fdf)

  76. I would never insult someone, as that is against the terms of service. I’m sure DCSCA will regale us with stories about NYC’s shadowy Russian underground that are sourced by reputable individuals, happened exactly as described, and explain things better than the preponderance of publicly available evidence.

    We’re all paragons of virtue here and we owe it to our host to remain entirely within the letter of the law.

    Chin-po (1d0e77)

  77. “Well his wallet certainly is in Moscow. Is his heart in his wallet? That could be the question, but is it really?”

    When I think of the country that has money to burn, powerful public influence operations in America and worldwide, and a history of openly and covertly bribing public officials and having themselves and their getting away with it with slaps on the wrist and near-zero pushback from both political parties, I remain laser-focused on the threat of Siberian Candidates.

    Chin-po (75cbb8)

  78. @72.He certainly owes somebody- after American bankers cratered his credit, it’s mostly likely laundered Rooskie rubles through Deutche Bank. But only the Tax Man knows for sure… 😉

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  79. We’re all paragons of virtue here and we owe it to our host to remain entirely within the letter of the law.

    Especially when we’ve been banned as Jerrod and a couple of dozen other noms and come back as Chin-po by way of VPN.

    nk (dbc370)

  80. For the record, I said you had backbone. I didn’t say nor imply that such was an insult. Though you appear to be new here…or perhaps just been sleeping. Either way, the future’s not ours to see. Que sera, sera.

    JSkorcher (df402e)

  81. @75. ‘… NYC’s shadowy Russian underground…’

    NYC? Big ‘Finnish': Helsinki.

    Thanks for playing. Whadda we have for him, Johnny…

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  82. The best way to resolve this is to follow Obama’s example. Trump should invite here over to the whitehouse for some bbq and beer.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  83. @76 I mean, if you want to talk about China or Saudi Arabia, we can do that too. But generally speaking, Russia seems to have been far more significantly involved in the Trump finances than the others.

    Nic (896fdf)

  84. Really he has much bigger business in the gulf states in India in south america, Russia was almost an oversight

    Cair and other instruments of the salafi outrage industry are basically all of political speech re islam

    Narciso (8f145e)

  85. @81. BBQ & beer?? Maybe Quarter Pounders w/cheese and Diet Coke.

    But then, Halal.

    Maybe just a cheese pizza; Domino’s delivers- and for deficit hawks– 30 minutes or less and it’s free! Always a joy watching our dapper, man-of-the-people-Captain eating pizza w/a fork.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  86. @83 His outward business is more elsewhere. The backing money though, isn’t. https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/12/21/how-russian-money-helped-save-trumps-business/

    Nic (896fdf)

  87. I feel like my last post was culturally insensitive. I’m projecting my regional privilege. Trump should invite her to a cookout with beer and hotdogs. Beer and hotdogs are common to NY and MN right?

    frosty48 (e4b4d6)

  88. @83. “Follow the money.”

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  89. Follow teh bullschiff…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  90. “I’m reading ‘How to Resist Validating President Trump’s View of Sanctuary Cities’.
    By Masha Gessen in The New Yorker. Her idea is that the right response to Trump is not what Nancy Pelosi said (through a spokesperson):

    Pelosi’s spokeswoman Ashley Etienne issued a standard statement: “The extent of this administration’s cynicism and cruelty cannot be overstated. Using human beings—including little children—as pawns in their warped game to perpetuate fear and demonize immigrants is despicable.” Like the media, Pelosi, whose district covers the sanctuary city of San Francisco, didn’t directly challenge the unspoken but clear premise that something terrible would happen to these cities if immigrants came to them.

    Such is the framing of the issue by the White House, and the framing of the story by the media, that no one had the one right response to this idea: “But this is the very point of a sanctuary city! Immigrants, regardless of status, are safe in them. Bring them here! They are welcome.”

    That’s how the piece ends, and I found it a little hard to understand, but I think Gessen is seeing that the responses to Trump are reinforcing what he’s saying, that it’s bad to have a sudden big influx of economically needy immigrants. Trump wins if he gets the sanctuary city proponents to show that they were just posing as immigrant friendly. He called their bluff. Why did they fold so quickly? They should have kept bluffing: Bring them here! They are welcome!
    I think that’s what Gessen is really saying, but she’s kind of hiding it, because she’s part of the bluff. She thinks Trump is bluffing too. If Trump won’t really dump the immigrants in San Francisco and those other virtue-signaling places, then they can continue to virtue-signal, and they should, so he doesn’t win.

    It’s also possible that Gessen really believes that San Francisco should follow through on this conception of virtue and welcome a sudden big influx of economically needy immigrants. In that view, Bring them here! They are welcome! is not a bluff, but an authentic heartfelt wish for the future of the genuinely good places that have declared themselves a sanctuary.

    Maybe my reading skills are off and I’m missing something. Help me out. I know I’m reading The New Yorker, so I’m not even considering the possibility that Gessen might mean that Trump has cleverly boxed in his antagonists.”

    https://althouse.blogspot.com/2019/04/im-reading-how-to-resist-validating.html

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  91. Dont forget to invite Justice Kavanaugh,but tell him the wieners are for cooking. And if she agrees to beef products only, your gonna have to invite Lyin Ted and the Pirate.

    urbanleftbehind (6a358f)

  92. Washington DC
    where teh cloacas run free
    and all can be bought

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  93. 86. I know you’re being sarcastic but imagine if we had a President who tried such things. No, I’m not joking. Invite Omar to the White House and explain her error ask her to apologize in person. Build a bridge. Instead we have a President who relishes and sows division and discord.

    JRH (8f59ea)

  94. 2020 is coming young budding aoc’s and ilian omar’s are getting ready for democrat primaries being recruited by justice democrats to take out corporate establishment stooges like pelosi. candidates with little money money but fiery passion and their supporters are already knocking on doors of democrats who will be voting in 2020 primaries. young aoc’s and omar’s are coming for corporate democrats.

    lany (9e6278)

  95. Gessen initially decided the Russia thing was bunk, he wrote that ridiculous book about the tsarnaevs who practically ignored their motivation, that was another great job by McCabe he was the one who was supposed to vet him he was promoted to deputy director.

    Narciso (8f145e)

  96. The point is to evade what she actually said:.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/BryanDeanWright/status/1117150131613130752

    Narciso (8f145e)

  97. @94. … imagine if we had President who tried such things…”

    Better still, imagine if we had a President who apologized, rather than one we constantly have to apologize for.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  98. As a famous and brilliant man with impeccably creased pants once said, “The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back.”

    Patricia (3363ec)

  99. what I was referring to earlier:

    http://hurryupharry.org/2010/02/09/moazzam-begg-taliban-supporter,

    and this was before the Islamic state cell, back in 2014?

    narciso (d1f714)

  100. 94 For any sort of explanation to work this would have to be a bug and not a feature. This is why members of her own party aren’t explaining it too her. As far as being given a chance to apologize, this isn’t the first time something like this has happened and she just doubles down or plays the race card. Donny Two Scoops has nothing to do with her jew hate.

    frosty48 (a7c554)

  101. 72. “… Ilhan Omar was, on the other hand, a Somali elected by a Minnesota Somali district, and has all the very obvious and stereotypical sympathies and excuse-making thereof…”

    Strongly suspect most American Muslims haven’t heard of this woman, but that most of the ones who have are increasingly dismayed by her self-defeating behavior.

    She’ll keep stepping on rakes until she is probably voted out of office.

    Then again, given the whimsical electorate which bequeathed unto us both the Era of Obama and the Age of Trump, who knows what the hell is going on any more.

    JP (d49613)

  102. Such is the framing of the issue by the White House, and the framing of the story by the media, that no one had the one right response to this idea: “But this is the very point of a sanctuary city! Immigrants, regardless of status, are safe in them. Bring them here! They are welcome.”

    One did. Mayor-elect Lori Lightfoot of Chicago. She done went and said that very same thing. Because she reads the very same #FakeNews Media which reported that ICE shot down the suggestion as soon as it was made because of the logistics. Lightfoot knows that ICE is not going to bus illegals 1,500 miles from El Paso to Chicago.

    nk (dbc370)

  103. If I responded to you the way you talk to me, then I would reply this is garbage. (“GIGO” and What-about-ism — Really? This is not useful.)

    Instead, I will helpfully explain that Assange is not being indicted for publishing the information so this is not a First Amendment issue. He has been indicted for conspiring with Manning to illegally obtain the information.

    DRJ (15874d) — 4/13/2019 @ 11:14 am

    DRJ,

    your post was what-about-ism. I focused on the left and their desire to silence people who disagree. You decided to remark about the right with a silly poll. Polls are GIGO. People don’t answer them honestly.

    You are avoiding my question by deflecting about the charge to Assange. Is the leak a problem or not? Does he have a 1st Amendment claim like the Times did when they spread confidential information? Conspiracy is whatever the government defines it.

    BTW, I think Assange is a nasty guy who just wants to harm the USA. He likes to watch the world burn.

    NJRob (4d595c)

  104. Rob,

    First, you asked a question and I answered it:

    So they want to silence their opponents and say legitimate criticism is out of bounds. Where have we seen that before?

    NJRob (4d595c) — 4/12/2019 @ 10:29 pm

    You may not like my answer and it may not be what you were thinking about, but it was not What-about-ism.

    Second, I.did not avoid your statement about Assange. I provided correct information about his charges.

    Third, I don’t care for the things Assange has done. I am glad they are charging him and are presumably trying to extradite him. But I also think charging him for publishing information would not be wise if he acquired it legally.

    DRJ (15874d)

  105. It is interesting that you are sure Republicans are not answering polls honestly.

    DRJ (15874d)

  106. Does that mean you also think the polls are incorrect about Trump’s approval rating? Do you think he actually has more support than the polls show so it really is his Party?

    DRJ (15874d)

  107. The last sentence of my 105 should say “whether or not he acquired it legally” not “if he acquired it legally.” Sorry.

    DRJ (15874d)

  108. Yes, however I don’t think the law, really accommodates a publisher, one cannot ignore that this is aimed at other free lance clearing houses like the one behind the Panama and paradise papers.

    Narciso (a7d019)

  109. Otherwise the times and other papers would be on the hook, for the manning and Snowden data drops

    Narciso (a7d019)

  110. First Amendment law in the United States stopped being law a long time ago and became the whims of judges. There is no reason in logic or real jurisprudence why the receivers of illegally obtained information should be any less liable than the receivers of illegally obtained contents of bank accounts. The law already provides the defenses of exoneration and justification when it is done in the public interest, to protect the public or other innocent individuals, or to reveal or prevent a greater crime.

    nk (dbc370)

  111. That would be logical, but that’s not the law , the Richard Welch law for instance is binding on the leaker not the publisher.

    Narciso (2a7640)

  112. Did we forget the agrabah poll already?

    Narciso (2a7640)

  113. Does that mean you also think the polls are incorrect about Trump’s approval rating? Do you think he actually has more support than the polls show so it really is his Party?

    DRJ (15874d) — 4/13/2019 @ 5:12 pm

    I don’t pay attention to polls anywhere anymore. They are designed to shape opinion, not inform others about it.

    NJRob (4d595c)

  114. “BTW, I think Assange is a nasty guy who just wants to harm the USA. He likes to watch the world burn.”

    He also likes to play dress-up with his cat. A guy with those proclivities canNOT be trusted.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  115. @115./#104 ‘BTW, I think Assange is a nasty guy who just wants to harm the USA…’ ‘… A guy with those proclivities canNOT be trusted.’

    ROFLMAO:

    “WikiLeaks! I love WikiLeaks,” Trump said in Pennsylvania. “This WikiLeaks is a treasure trove,” said Trump said in Michigan. “Boy, I like reading WikiLeaks,’ said Trump in Ohio. All told, Trump extolled WikiLeaks more than 100 times, and a poster of Assange hung backstage at the Republican’s debate war room. -source: apnews.com

    Grand-Old-Party-on, Trumpsters… “a guy with those proclivities cannot be trusted.” 😉

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  116. There is no reason in logic or real jurisprudence why the receivers of illegally obtained information should be any less liable than the receivers of illegally obtained contents of bank accounts.

    I’m assuming by illegally obtained contents of bank accounts you mean money, i.e. someone hacked into a bank account and pulled money out. That’s consistent with hacking into a computer for information. If you mean something else please correct me.

    In the case of the bank, there are, most likely, four parties, the thief, the victim, the thief’s bank, and the victim’s bank. There may be only three parties if only one bank is used but I don’t think that impacts the conclusion. The victim’s bank has some duty to protect the victim’s account. The thief’s bank has no legal liability assuming they follow all reporting requirements, etc., and had no part in the theft. It’s possible the victim’s bank has more legal liability than the thief’s bank. If the thief is caught he is legally liable. Even though technically it’s coming out of his bank account the bank isn’t really liable or at fault. I’m not sure but I think the bank might even be able to keep any interest they made on the money while they were holding it and they’re probably able to keep fees, etc.

    In the case we’re talking about for information, there are probably three parties, the information source, the thief, and the publisher. There may be a four-party case but this isn’t it. Here we’re dealing with the US government who is responsible for the information and has a duty to protect it. They are like the victim’s bank. The publisher is like the thief’s bank. It has no legal liability assuming they follow the rules about how the information is obtained and had no part in the theft.

    The US case against Assange is that he had a part in stealing the information by helping Manning crack a password. He isn’t charged with receiving the information.

    It’s possible you mean WikiLeaks should be responsible for something like common law receipt of stolen property. I think this is closer to the intent of your post but that charge usually has an element where the receiver knows the property is stolen, which isn’t applied in these press/stolen info cases, and the receiver intends to deprive the true owner of the property which doesn’t apply at all. Maybe you are arguing that it should apply but this is a hard fit and this is already getting to be a long post. The important point is WikiLeaks isn’t being charged with that.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  117. Assume the numbers are true, it’s a tacit realization if what is actually happening by tech companies in alliance with cair and splc and the alliance headed by Kristol and general hayden.

    Narciso (2a7640)

  118. @111 and @118; are we discussing the Assange thing on the Omar thread? And it’s not just us.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  119. Why not? Do you think Congresswoman Ilhan Omar should have access to counter-terrorism or Israeli defense information?

    nk (dbc370)

  120. “Do you think Congresswoman Ilhan Omar should have access to counter-terrorism or Israeli defense information?”

    Come, come, now, nk, surely you should know by now that profiling of individuals is Un-American(TM) and Not Who We Are(TM) and Probably Racist(TM).

    This is America, and if someone says they’re a woman or a lover of Israel or a moderate Muslim, we should totally believe them until they say they’re something else.

    Chin-po (ce40d0)

  121. Given that I criticized our host for never writing anything positive about our 45th President, I should note that he has done so here.

    I wrote about the tweet from the Distinguished Gentleman from Vermont, asking whether it is possible for someone of Jewish heritage to be anti-Semitic.

    Spoiler: yes, apparently it is! Mr Sanders could have just kept his mouth shut, but no, he went on to defend a rabid anti-Semite in Ilhan Omar Hirsi.

    The apologetic Dana (10ea9e)

  122. Third, I don’t care for the things Assange has done. I am glad they are charging him and are presumably trying to extradite him. But I also think charging him for publishing information would not be wise if he acquired it legally.

    I agree with all this. My understanding is that he is alleged to have assisted with the hacking by offering assistance in cracking a password. That is what he should be held accountable for, if (as I believe, based on the detailed nature of the allegations) the Government can prove its case.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  123. Given that I criticized our host for never writing anything positive about our 45th President, I should note that he has done so here.

    Yes, I was puzzled by this comment of yours:

    But I do wish that he could separate out his personal distaste for the President and support those policies of Mr Trump’s with which he agrees.

    Do you believe that I don’t support policies with which I agree??? What does that even mean?

    Patterico (115b1f)

  124. There is no reason in logic or real jurisprudence why the receivers of illegally obtained information should be any less liable than the receivers of illegally obtained contents of bank accounts.

    Typically, people who innocently acquire stolen property are not criminally liable and, at most, have to return the stolen property. People who are not innocent receivers can be charged, but publishing information adds another legal wrinkle.

    However, in the case of information, it can be published and that raises First Amendment issues. Punishing Assange for publishing information treats him as if he is not entitled to First Amendment protection bease of who he is. I don’t want to go down the road where some people are recognized as authorized publishers (like the MSM) and some aren’t (like pundits at Internet websites). It is much better to identify and charge Assange with a specific wrongful act like trying to help Manning hack a password.

    DRJ (15874d)

  125. 5. Kevin M (21ca15) — 4/12/2019 @ 11:48 pm

    It seems like the Democrats have made a bet that they can get fewer votes than McGovern.

    I think the bet is that they can do and say things that repel voters more than anything McGovern did, but still get a higher percentage of the vote (or even win) because their opponent would be Donald Trump.

    Sammy Finkelman (30b6b6)

  126. 10, nk (dbc370) — 4/13/2019 @ 5:08 am

    Her job’s in Washington, but her heart’s in Mecca. </blockquote. Actually, it isn't. She's not wearing a hijab for religious reasons.

    Sammy Finkelman (30b6b6)

  127. Trump wins if he gets the sanctuary city proponents to show that they were just posing as immigrant friendly. He called their bluff. Why did they fold so quickly? They should have kept bluffing: Bring them here! They are welcome!

    . That’s exactly what some Democrats like the mayor of Seattle (not national ones) are saying and the question Chuck Todd put to some Democrat on the Meet the Press today.

    They should say to Trump: That’s a good idea, and they would agree on 3 conditions:

    1) Trump guarantees that everybody brought to a sanctuary city or state gets counted in the Census. And if Rhode Island wants people, you let them go there.

    2) Nobody goes to any place unless that’s where thry want to go.

    3) And if they want to move to another sanctuary city they can. (that would normaly be the law anyway, unless changed, but specifically agree to that.)

    And also 4) it should be enacted into law.

    And Trump should be told he should tell the Freedom Caucus that if they want Democrats to oppose immigration they’re going to have to make them live by the principles and it’s just like agovernment shutdown. Stephen Miller will sense that things won’t work out that way, but maybe Trump will overrule him. Maybe this can be played so it won’t look like Trump will lose. It all depends on who’s right about the oractical effects.

    And maybe this way we can get a compromise.

    Sammy Finkelman (30b6b6)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3696 secs.