Ferguson Follies Continued: ‘What Is Wrong With This Country?!’

congress-members-hands

For the second day in a row, an incensed Joe Scarborough excoriated left-wing race-baiters for using the ‘hands up’ gesture to protest the Grand Jury decision on the Michael Brown shooting.  On the Tuesday broadcast of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” the frustrated host said, “that’s cool to suggest that St. Louis police officers in the town – probably a lot who go to the games and watch the games  – that’s cool for them to suggest that St. Louis cops shoot young black men who had their hands up in the air, when we know that that was a lie?” It’s a lie. And what was that gesture on Capitol Hill? More people like going, ‘It doesn’t matter whether it’s the truth or not, I’m going to suggest cops shoot people with their hands up in the air.’ What is wrong with this country? What is wrong with these people? What is wrong with these elected officials? They know it’s a lie. They know the cops didn’t shoot him with his hands in the air. They know it’s a lie and they are doing this on that Capitol floor?”

Scarborough took heat from the left for his rant, yesterday, via Twitchy:  Tweeters angry at MSNBC’s ‘stupida*s’ Joe Scarobrough over ‘racist rant’ at Ferguson protesters, media 

Get the popcorn. On yesterday’s “Morning Joe,” host Joe Scarborough went off on Michael Brown supporters and the media covering the protests declaring, “I have sat here quietly and listened to BS being spewed all over this network and all over other networks. I can’t take it anymore.”

But it’s this quote from his segment, via Business Insider, that’s the most interesting as Scarborough is accusing his guests of hypocrisy by saying one thing about the protests, ruling on air and another in private:

“You know what pisses me off too is I have people around this set all the time. They let me say what I say on set and they sit and stare at me, slack-jawed,” he said. “They’re afraid to say anything on the air, even though they know it’s BS. People [are] saying one thing when the camera’s on and then saying something completely different when the camera gets turned off, because they’re somehow afraid they’ll be called racist if they tell the truth.”

One of those people might be Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson, who wouldn’t admit that Michael Brown didn’t have his arms up no matter how hard Scarborough tried to pry the truth out of him.

Mediaite: MSNBC ‘Hands Up’ Segment with Eugene Robinson Gets Awkward:

“I don’t believe there’s anything in the record, certainly not in the forensic evidence, that precludes the possibility that he had his hands up at some point when he was approaching the officer,” Robinson said.

“That’s an awfully low standard,” cohost Joe Scarborough replied. “There’s also no evidence that doesn’t suggest a flying saucer from Venus swooped over all of them. There’s no evidence that it’s precluded, Gene. I’m not being difficult. I’m just saying the truth actually does matter.”

Gateway Pundit: Update: 20,000 Support Boycott Rams Page After ‘Hands Up, Don’t Shoot’ Stunt:

On Monday a Boycott the Rams Facebook page was launched.
The page now has 20,000 supporters.

The Missouri Torch: Nixon’s Failure to Lead a “Deep, Deep Disgrace”:

Inquiring minds want to know: why were the National Guard not deployed to Ferguson, Missouri in the wake of the Grand Jury decision not to indict Officer Wilson? Where was Governor Nixon while the town burned? There are no good answers.

Moral of the story: Democrats can not be trusted to handle any crisis competently.

Gateway Pundit: Local Officials Are Investigating if Mike Brown’s Step-Father Incited Riot:

At least 18 businesses were torched to the ground and several more were looting and vandalized.

Now authorities are investigating whether to indict Louis Head for inciting a riot.
CNN reported:

Authorities are investigating whether Michael Brown’s stepfather intended to incite a riot last week when he urged a crowd in Ferguson, Missouri, to “Burn this bitch down” after the grand jury’s decision was announced, the city’s police chief said Tuesday.

No charges have been filed against Louis Head in the incident, but police have interviewed people who know Head and who were with him November 24, the day a prosecutor announced that Officer Darren Wilson (who has since resigned) would not be indicted in the August 9 shooting of Michael Brown, Police Chief Tom Jackson said.

The Conversation: Eyewitness: Before St. Louis Hammer Attack, ‘Black People’ Ran Up And Down Street Yelling, ‘Kill The White People’

At the beginning of the one minute video, the woman who recorded the scene, expressed her profound and at times profane disgust with what had just happened in her neighborhood.

“Arrest them all,” she sneered. “F*ck this sh*t.”

At the 45-second mark, she said, “And, of course, it’s a white kid, right after black people running up and down the street saying, ‘Eff the white people, kill the white people.’ This is what we have.”

Conservative Treehouse: Saint Louis Officials Blame Victim Zemir Begic For His Own Brutal Murder: “We think it was wrong place, wrong time”…

In response to the attack, a spokesperson for the Saint Louis police department released the following statement:

“We think it was wrong place, wrong time,” police spokeswoman Schron Jackson said.

Whoa, apparently, there are rules for safe transit in Saint Louis which both victims, Mr Dzananovic and Mr. Begic, violated.  Hence, they subjected themselves to the “wrong place, wrong time” murder justification explanation.

The RightScoop: Newt on Ferguson: “Obama should be saying to people, ‘don’t rob stores and don’t disobey police'”:

Newt told Wolf Blitzer today that Obama shouldn’t go meet with the Michael Brown family and that he’s not being honest about what happened to Michael Brown in Ferguson. He says that what Obama should be telling people is not to rob stores, not to push around store clerks have your size and not to disobey police.

Minister’s Explosive Video On Ferguson Resurface Amid Latest Protests:

It’s disgusting, the Minister told Neil Cavuto. “What we’re doing is glorifying ignorance.”

 

 

Jeanine Pirro: “This President Doesn’t Know The Difference Between Good and Evil” (Video)

“This president doesn’t know the difference between Good and evil,” Judge Jeanine charged in her opening statement, Saturday night. “Or maybe he does,” she added ominously..

Addressing Obama directly, she said, “your liberal delusions are putting Americans in danger, and instead of reversing course, you dig your heels in deeper. And that’s you’re biggest weakness – refusing to admit mistakes and refusing to change.”

“Your job Mr. President  is to fight evil. Your job is to protect the American people,” she continued. “And if you want to engage in Kumbaya politics – do it on your own time!”

She had former Attorney General Michael Mukasey on to discuss the president’s feckless foreign policies.

Pirro also had on former US Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton on to talk about Obama’s collapsing foreign policies.

Amnesty Begins: Regime Prepares For Millions of New Immigrant IDs

It is said that a leader who is a malignant narcissist will be at his most tyrannical and dangerous when his popularity is on the decline. A large component of Obama’s fundamental transformation of America requires an huge influx of immigrants from the third world to become clients of the State, adding to the Democrat voting base. It should not come as a surprise that Obama means to reach that goal before he leaves office even as his serial executive overreaches repel the American people. His plan to grant up to 9 million illegal immigrants amnesty without the approval of Congress represents an abuse of power so extreme, and audacious it’s almost beyond comprehension. To call it a coup d’Etat is not hyperbole.

Via Jonathan Strong, Breitbart News:

Despite no official action from the president ahead of the election, the Obama administration has quietly begun preparing to issue millions of work authorization permits, suggesting the implementation of a large-scale executive amnesty may have already begun.
Unnoticed until now, a draft solicitation for bids issued by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Oct. 6 says potential vendors must be capable of handling a “surge” scenario of 9 million id cards in one year “to support possible future immigration reform initiative requirements.”

The request for proposals says the agency will need a minimum of four million cards per year. In the “surge,” scenario in 2016, the agency would need an additional five million cards – more than double the baseline annual amount for a total of 9 million.

“The guaranteed minimum for each ordering period is 4,000,000 cards. The estimated maximum for the entire contract is 34,000,000 cards,” the document says.

The agency is buying the materials need to construct both Permanent Residency Cards (PRC), commonly known as green cards, as well as Employment Authorization Documentation (EAD) cards which have been used to implement President Obama’s “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals” (DACA) program. The RFP does not specify how many of each type of card would be issued.

Jessica Vaughan, an immigration expert at the Center for Immigration Studies and former State Department official, said the document suggests a new program of remarkable breadth.

People who wonder what the Regime was doing while ISIS gathered strength in the Middle East and Ebola went from a few cases in a village in Guinea to the largest outbreak of the disease to date, have their answer. Obama is not as idle as people make him out to be, and has been putting his particular skill set to good use. It’s just that his particular skill-set –  community organizing – doesn’t lend itself well to terror threats and plagues.

It’s not clear that Republicans have an aggressive plan to respond to Obama’s scheme to grant  amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, but last August there was talk of a restraining order or injunction to stop him if he tries it.

At a recent event at the Heritage Foundation entitled “An Imperial Presidency,” headlined by Congressman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, remedies like an “emergency injunction” and “power of the purse” were discussed.

Via Immigration Reform:

However, he said, should the President follow up in the near future with additional “major” abuses of power, one of which would be the “dramatic expansion” of unlawful and unilateral amnesties, that would call for an “immediate response.” He suggested that this response might take the form of going to Court and asking for an emergency injunction to stop the unilateral amnesty. He acknowledged, however, that the Courts could drag out the process of hearing until past the end of the President’s term, meaning it would not be an effective way of addressing the issue.  While he mentioned that the “Enforce the Law Act” expedites the legal process to a few months, of course, that bill is not currently law, leaving the prospect of litigation as a way to curb the President’s executive overreach quite murky.

Given the difficulties a lawsuit would present at holding the President accountable, I asked if stopping the President through appropriations and not just a lawsuit is also on the table.  In response, Goodlatte said that the power of the purse is “always” on the table. However, he implied that if one chamber of Congress refuses to use the power of the purse to rein in the Executive branch, it is difficult for the other to do so alone.  If the Republicans should take the Senate, appropriations would therefore be a more likely option for the Republicans to pursue, he hinted.

They’d better get moving if they really want to stop him, because the president is already way ahead of them.

 SEE ALSO:

Matthew Boyle, Breitbart: Exclusive — Jeff Sessions: Obama’s Immigration Policies Hammer Black Workers

Senate Budget Committee ranking member Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) told Breitbart News that black workers across America should be wary of supporting Democrats because of President Obama and other Democrats’ support for immigration policies that displace them economically.

Is Obama Micromanaging Airstrikes In Syria? – If So – Why Is He Allowing The Slaughter Of Kurds?

kobane

The carnage continues in Kobane, and although most civilians have made it across the border into Turkey – an estimated 700 mostly elderly civilians remain in the city’s center. Approximately 12,000 in all remain in or near Kobane and will likely be slaughtered if ISIS takes the town.

The ISIS mutants reportedly overran the Kurdish headquarters in Kobane, and attempted to advance to the center of town, but were beaten back by Kurdish fighters..

Via Business Insider:

The IS assault sparked 90 minutes of heavy fighting with the town’s Kurdish defenders before the jihadists fell back, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.

US-led coalition warplanes also carried out two air strikes on IS targets south and east of the town early Saturday, according to the Britain-based monitoring group, which has a wide network of sources inside Syria.

Small groups of Kurdish fighters were trying to harry the encircling jihadists with operations across the front line, Observatory director Rami Abdel Rahman told AFP.

A UN envoy warned Friday that the 12,000 or so civilians still in or near Kobane “will most likely be massacred” by IS if the town falls.

Kobane was “literally surrounded” except for one narrow entry and exit point to the Turkish border, de Mistura said.

Stuart Varney on Fox asked Col. Ralph Peters the question on everyone’s minds – why didn’t US jet fighters  bomb ISIS when they were exposed in the desert as the descended upon the town.

Peters, being overly generous, said, “in his heart of hearts” Obama is a “sincere pacifist” who “doesn’t want a body count even of terrorists.”

He continued, “So we see these minimalist air-strikes – and do you know what the ultimate effect is? —  not only the misery of the Kurds –it allows the Islamic State to determine the narrative and say, see? America can’t stop us. America can’t stop us. It’s a great a recruiting tool.

Erdogan is playing a double game. He’s letting the Islamic State slaughter the Kurdish fighters then after that’s done, he’ll turn on the Islamic State and create a buffer zone.”

The conversation then moves on to Chinese hackers.

Peters doesn’t say it, but I will. I think there’s more to Obama’s reticence than merely “pacifism.” That certainly didn’t stop him from initiating military misadventures  in Libya and Pakistan where his droning campaign has killed untold numbers of civilians.

I think Obama is in on Erdogan’s plan.

On September 26, he called the Turkish president from board Air Force One.

Obama once described Erdogan as one of his best friends on the world stage and until recently was in regular contact with him. But because of Erdogan’s shocking and virulently anti-Semitic position on Israel, Obama had to politically distance himself .

Via USA Today:

But with the threat posed by Islamic State militants, the on-again, off-again relationship between Obama and Erdogan is clearly on again. Turkey occupies a strategic position along Syria’s northern border, and U.S. officials hope the NATO ally could play a key role in stopping the flow of money and foreign fighters to the group also known as ISIS.

“It’s fairly straightforward: The administration is pulling every lever to encourage Turkey to do more to counter ISIS,” said Steven Cook, a Turkish expert at the Council on Foreign Relations.

According to a White House summary of Thursday’s call, Obama “praised the work Turkish authorities” and others in caring for the influx of Syrian refugees into Turkey. The two leaders talked about the threat posed by the Islamic State and agreed to “consult closely” in the future, the White House said.

Shortly thereafter, Vice President Biden met with Erdogan in person at the Peninsula Hotel in New York, where world leaders are meeting this week for the opening of the United Nations General Assembly.

“Congratulations on the election, old friend,” Biden said, smiling broadly and commending Erdogan on being elevated from prime minister. They posed for a photo op, after which they met privately.

People have been asking over and over again – why didn’t we bomb ISIS in any kind of effective manner as they advanced on the Kurdish town?

State Department spokeswomen Jen Psaki admitted a few days ago that she has been fielding these questions day after day. And she has no coherent answer to them, making it clear that the military strategy doesn’t include protecting Kurds from being slaughtered.

Via John Hayward of Human Events, a Kurdish reporter asked, “over the past 24 hours, we’ve seen only one strike, according to the Central Command, around Kobani. I don’t really understand why there hasn’t been more attacks while large numbers of ISIS fighters are closing in on Kobani. And according to CNN and some other American media reports, they have raised the American flag – the – sorry, Islamic flag over some buildings inside Kobani. Why hasn’t been there more strikes?”

MS. PSAKI: Well, I know we have this exchange kind of every single day, which is absolutely fine, but you’re talking about one strike in the last 24 hours. That was the update, you’re right, that came from CENTCOM. There were – that strike destroyed two ISIL fighting positions south of Kobani. Other recent strikes have hit two modular oil refineries, an ISIL training camp, an ISIL-occupied building. So this is an ongoing effort.

QUESTION: They’re not around Kobani, those refineries.

MS. PSAKI: It’s an ongoing effort around – in the same part of the country. I would refer you to DOD for more about their military strategy, but obviously this is something where we’ve long said from the beginning that this would take some time. We’re working closely to do everything we can to help push back ISIL in this part of the country, but again, I don’t have any other military updates from here.

QUESTION: When I talked to – on a daily basis I talk to Kurdish people, Kurdish rebels even, Kurdish politicians on the ground in Syria. They have a different perspective. They say, well, Turkey is now trying to do America’s bid in the country when it comes to ISIS attacks on Kobani, and Turkey yesterday invited Salih Muslim, who is the leader of the Kurdish party, to reach some sort of deal with Turkish intelligence. So are you waiting for Turkey to reach a deal with the Kurdish rebels? That’s why you’re not –

MS. PSAKI: I think we haven’t – clearly we haven’t held back from our own military airstrikes in this regard. There are a range of other countries who have also participated in the last couple of days in strikes in Syria. I don’t have any other update for you.

(No, that’s not clear at all – as a spokesperson for this Regime we know nothing you say can be trusted – and the other countries are following our lead.)

QUESTION: Just one more thing, Jen. It’s clearly, like, obvious that – I mean, President Obama on the eve of 9/11 said the strategy was to degrade and ultimately destroy ISIS. We’ve seen ISIS been degraded in Iraq, but we’ve seen ISIS advancing in Syria. Can we say there are flaws in President Obama’s strategy?

MS. PSAKI: I would not say that. You’re right that the Iraqi Security Forces have certainly pushed back and they have been able to hold and even regain some areas. The efforts that have been underway in Syria have been not – have not been happening as long. I think DOD has addressed some of our strategy, so let me reiterate some of what they’ve said – that the initial round of strikes in Syria had fixed targets, such as command and control nodes, finance centers, training camps and oil refineries. Those kind of strikes will continue. Targeting in Syria is also evolving beyond fixed facilities and also includes more dynamic targeting of a tactical nature, such as vehicles, armored vehicles, convoys.

So obviously there’s certainly a strategy that’s being implemented by our Defense Department.

The ineffective strategy is being implemented by the Defense Department, but who’s directing it? Is Obama micromanaging the airstrikes in Syria?

Daniel Greenfield of  FrontPageMagazine, asks,  who is running the war? Is it the military or the usual White House mix of staffers?

Kurds had hoped that US airstrikes in Syria would save them. But as of late Tuesday, airstrikes appeared to be too little too late. Some suspect that’s partly because every target must be vetted by lawyers in Washington, a process meant to assure that strikes are legally justified but is nevertheless cumbersome in practice.

That’s from a Boston Globe editorial, not exactly a right wing paper. So how cumbersome is the approval process?

The Wall Street Journal ran a story, last month claiming that Obama would seek approval of every air strike.

The U.S. military campaign against Islamist militants in Syria is being designed to allow President Barack Obama to exert a high degree of personal control, going so far as to require that the military obtain presidential signoff for strikes in Syrian territory, officials said.

The requirements for strikes in Syria against the extremist group Islamic State will be far more stringent than those targeting it in Iraq, at least at first. U.S. officials say it is an attempt to limit the threat the U.S. could be dragged more deeply into the Syrian civil war.

Defense officials said that the strikes in Syria are more likely to look like a targeted counterterrorism campaign than a classic military campaign, in which a combatant commander picks targets within the parameters set by the commander in chief.

In Syria, officials said the administration wants to ensure that any strikes didn’t resemble the “shock-and-awe” campaign that kicked off the 2003 Iraq war and instead be kept more like the low-intensity, occasional strikes conducted in Somalia or Yemen.

I bet the residents of Kobane wouldn’t mind some “shock and awe” right now.

Via  CBS News, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel disputed the WSJ report that President Obama would personally sign off on every airstrike against ISIS  inside Syria, saying military leaders would make those decisions.

“I was sitting next to the president yesterday when this entire issue was being discussed and he was very clear with General [Lloyd] Austin, once he makes decisions, he gives General Austin and our military leaders the authority to carry out those policies,” Hagel told members of the House Armed Services Committee Thursday, where he was testifying.

That’s an non-denial denial. Obama makes the decisions – the military carries them out.

Charles Krauthammer commented last month, “Lyndon Johnson, who had a lot more experience, was also the one who directed air strikes… and there was universal agreement that it was a catastrophe. And Obama, with zero experience, having now gone against his secretary of defense and generals on Iraq and on Syria — to a disastrous effect — is going to be in charge of the air campaign? That’s really scary stuff.”

If Obama made a deal with Erdogan to hold back on ISIS so they could slaughter his Kurdish rivals and allow Turkey to create a buffer zone – that is very scary stuff indeed.

SEE ALSO:

The Daily Beast: Air Force Pilots Say They’re Flying Blind Against ISIS:

Obama’s no-boots-on-the-ground pledge is keeping America from fighting an effective air campaign in Iraq and Syria.
Within the U.S. Air Force, there’s mounting frustration that the air campaign against ISIS in Syria and Iraq is moving far more slowly than expected. Instead of a fast-moving operation with hundreds of sorties flown in a single day—the kind favored by many in the air service—American warplanes are hitting small numbers of targets after a painstaking and cumbersome process.

The single biggest problem, current and former Air Force officers say, is the so-called kill-chain of properly identifying and making sure the right target is being attacked. At the moment, that process is very complicated and painfully slow.

“The kill-chain is very convoluted,” one combat-experienced Air Force A-10 Warthog pilot told The Daily Beast. “Nobody really has the control in the tactical environment.”

WND: Source: Secret deal could doom 160,000 to ISIS:

A secret decision apparently has been made by the United States, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and even Iran to let the strategic Syrian Kurdish town of Kobani on the Turkish-Syrian border fall to ISIS fighters, jeopardizing the lives of some 160,000 Syrian Kurds, WND has been told by a well-placed Middle East expert.

In letting Kobani fall to ISIS, the source said, there was agreement “to deal with ISIS later.”

The apparent decision aims to diminish the influence of the Kurds in Syria and weaken the prospect of creating a sovereign Kurdistan, which is sought by the Kurds not only in Syria, but in Turkey, Iran and Iraq..

“It is a real set up behind the backs of everyone,” the well-placed source told WND.

 

 

 

House Authorizes Obama’s Plan To Arm and Train Syrian Rebels

al-qaeda-usaid

I really really want to be wrong about thinking this is a huge mistake, but I have a very bad feeling about arming people with values and loyalties so antithetical to ours with American weapons. My greatest fear is that these weapons will eventually be turned on American soldiers, and will lead to more Christians and ethnic minorities being slaughtered in the Middle East.

Why on earth do we think this is a good idea?

Via USA Today:

A wary Congress voted Wednesday to authorize President Obama’s mission to arm and train Syrian rebel forces as part of the administration’s effort to dismantle the threat posed by the Islamic State militant group.

The bipartisan 273-156 vote came after days of debate in which lawmakers across the political spectrum expressed doubts about the scope and merits of the mission but conceded that the potential threat to the U.S. is too great to ignore.

Roll call of the votes, here.

The authorization is limited in scope to training up to 5,000 members of the Syrian opposition in Saudi Arabia. It provides no new funding and requires the administration to provide status reports to Congress. The Obama administration said the mission may be funded by international contributions, but the resolution authorizes the Pentagon to shift funds from other accounts if necessary.

Lawmakers expressed doubts about the ability to vet the Syrian rebel forces and warned that the arms provided to them could ultimately land in enemy hands. “We don’t know if somehow down the line they will turn our guns right back on us,” said Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif., a member of the House Armed Services Committee, who opposed the resolution.

Sanchez also said there was not enough of an international coalition behind a strategy that is still being formed. “I’d like to know who our coalition is, and what they’re going to do before I vote for any plan,” she said.

For once I agree with Loretta Sanchez.

SEE ALSO:

Gateway Pundit: Rand Paul Blasts Vote to Arm Syrian Rebels: “I’m Not For Arming Radical Jihadists in Syria” (Video)

Krauthammer: “The Reason It’s A Coalition of the Unwilling Is Because Obama Is Unwilling” (Video)

Charles Krauthammer offered his take on the Regime’s pathetic failure to gather a broad, international coalition - unlike George W. Bush who was able to gather a coalition of 49 nations to provide material military support including troops, intelligence cooperation, material, logistics, ground facilities, and financial assistance” for the Iraq War in 2003.

“The reason it’s a coalition of the unwilling is because Obama is unwilling,” Dr. K said. “And everyone knows it. He telegraphed it in his speech, they all understand he’s ambivalent, They’ve all looked at what he did in Afghanistan and Libya, and they say that if the leader of this coalition is ambivalent and reluctant, why should we join?”

Via NRO:

SEE ALSO:

Twitchy: ‘I wish you’d get this snippy with our enemies': Marie Harf chides Daily Beast correspondent

My latest at The Conversation:

Josh Earnest: ‘The Coalition Is Coming Together Very Nicely’

In his weekly address, Saturday, President Obama once again tried to separate himself from the “previous administration” by telling the American people he would avoid making “the mistakes of the past” and crowing that he is “leading the right way” so “more nations are joining our coalition.”  He said this despite reports his counter-terrorism effort is receiving only tepid support from even our staunchest allies.Sep 14, 2014 3:36 PM PT

Judge Jeanine Pirro Reams Obama: “You Messed Up Big Time!”

Just as sure as the sun rises in the East and Obama golfs on weekends, Judge Jeanine Pirro takes him to the woodshed Saturday nights for an intense verbal smackdown.

In this week’s opening statement, she castigated him for his weak stance on ISIS (or ISIL as Obama obstinately calls them) and general incompetence in handling foreign policy.

“Your strategy has been feckless since day one – you messed up big time!” she said.

She went on to completely trash his nonsensical claim that “ISIL (ISIS) is not Islamic”.

Pirro had Frank Gaffney on to discuss the vulnerable power grid situation – as topic she’s covered in the past.