Dr. Ben Carson: #BlackLivesMatter Focused On The Wrong Targets (Video)

GOP 2016 candidate Dr. Ben Carson was invited on to the Kelly File, Monday night to talk about his excellent USA Today oped criticizing Black Lives Matters.

Carson writes:

The idea that disrupting and protesting Bernie Sanders speeches will change what is wrong in America is lunacy. The “BlackLivesMatter” movement is focused on the wrong targets, to the detriment of blacks who would like to see real change and to the benefit of its powerful white liberal funders using the attacks on Sanders for political purposes that mean nothing for the problems that face our community.

The notion that some lives might matter less than others is meant to enrage. That anger is distracting us from what matters most. We’re right to be angry, but we have to stay smart.

Of course, the protesters are right that racial policing issues exist and some rotten policemen took actions that killed innocent people. Those actions were inexcusable and they should be prosecuted to deter such acts in the future.

He concluded by saying:

We should have a talk with the Democratic Party.  Let’s tell them, we don’t want to be clothed, fed and housed. We want honor and dignity.

We don’t want a plan to give us public housing in nice neighborhoods. We want an end to excuses for schools that leave us without the means to buy our own houses where we choose to live. We want the skills needed to compete, not a consolation prize of Section 8, Food Stamps and a lifetime of government paperwork.

Finally, we need to go over to the Republican Party. We need to tell them they have ignored us for too long. They need to invite us in and listen to us. We need to communicate and find a different way.

There are many things to be angry about when you are consumed by hopelessness. Bernie Sanders isn’t one of them.

“Whoa!” Way to lay it out,” Megyn Kelly gushed. we have been talking for months on this show about how

Some believe too few in the black community have turned and said Stop! Don’t act as victim. Don’t look squarely at the police. Start looking inward. It’s not that there’s nothing wrong with the police at all – it’s not that there’s no police brutality, but there is a major problem plaguing inner city America right now,  and in too many circles has been ignored.

The former pediatric neurosurgeon said there are a lot of folks in the black community who think like he does but they are afraid to speak out. “because you’ll be called a name. You’ll be scorned. That’s what the established progressive party wants. They don’t want anybody to speak out against this. They want to demonize anybody who does because they want to maintain their power,” he explained.

Dr. Carson said he wasn’t sure if the Democrat party would be able to maintain their grasp on the black community going into the future.

Howie Kurtz: Stephanopoulos Blunder “Severe”, “Unthinkable” (Video)

Megyn Kelly led off her show Thursday night with the George Stephanopoulos bombshell that the Washington Free Beacon (not Politico) broke.

As you surely know by now, Steppie neglected to disclose his Clinton Foundation donations even as he reported on the Clintons and their foundation/slushfund – a particularly egregious oversight –  considering  a hard-hitting interview he had with Peter Schweizer, who he aggressively grilled over “Clinton Cash” – the book Schweizer wrote about the Clinton Foundation.

Kelly and Marc Thiessen remarked upon the irony of Stephanopoulos (a Clinton insider who worked in the Clinton White House) questioning the partisan motivations of  former Bush speechwriter Peter Schweizer.

“George Stephanopoulos actually questioned whether Peter Schweixer had a partisan interest in his book because he had worked for four months in the Bush administration — when he was the communications director for the Clinton White House and the Communications Director for the 1992 Clinton Campaign, and is it fair to say maybe he has a partisan interest in defending Hillary Clinton?” Thiessen said.

Kelly cited Eric Wemple of the Washington Post media blog, who said; “A donation from Stephanopoulos to the Clinton Foundation in any amount constitutes a scandal and an immediate crisis for ABC News.”

Howard Kurtz remarked, “This blunder by Stephanopoulos is so severe that it really threatens to undo what he’s accomplished in his 18 years at ABC News.”

He added that for Steppie to given this money to the Clinton Foundation and not disclose the donations to his bosses or viewers is “unthinkable.”

Kelly asked why Stephanopoulos would be considered too partisan to moderate a debate, but not the entire 2016 campaign. ot so much conflict that he isn’t stepping out of 2016 coverage entirely.

Kurtz said he should have found “any other charity on earth to give it”

SEE ALSO:

WFB: ABC News Anchor George Stephanopoulos Donated $50,000 to Clinton Foundation

PJ Tatler: ABC News Should Be Ashamed
The underhanded way ABC rolled out a controversial news story about one of its anchors today is disgraceful.

While the contributions were publicly available information, the host had not disclosed the conflict of interest to ABC viewers – until he was caught by Andrew Stiles of the Washington Free Beacon.

Stiles asked ABC for a comment, and while they were waiting for a reply, ABC leaked the story to Dylan Byers of Politico, who titled his story “George Stephanopoulos discloses $50,000 contribution to Clinton Foundation” (as if the idea to disclose was all Stephanopoulos’s).

A half an hour after Politico’s story ran, ABC News sent a statement  to the Washington Free Beacon.

PJ Tatler: Republicans Revolt Over Stephanopoulos’s Conflict of Interest at ABC (Video)
Ed Driscoll: More Stephanopoulos Conflicts of Interest Emerge

Megyn Kelly: As America Caves on Free Speech… “the Jihadis are Officially Winning” (Video)

Megyn Kelly once again used her perch on Fox News, Wednesday night, to hammer the left (and some on the right) for their craven and cowardly stance on the terrorist attack that happened earlier this week in Garland Texas.

She opened her show by denouncing the “rush to condemn the event organizers” with “nary a mention of the radical Islamists who sought to murder them over a cartoon.”

Free speech is protected, Megyn said, “no matter how abhorrent.” She went on to point out that you don’t have to endorse it to defend it.

Kelly lamented the amount of focus there has been on scolding Pamela Geller’s group rather than the actual terrorists. “If this is where American sentiment stands on this, then the jihadis are officially winning,” she declared.

Kelly had Washington Post legal blogger, Eugene Volokh on to discuss the issue and got a few digs in on  CNN doofus Chris Cuomo, who made an ass of himself on Twitter, Wednesday.

No one in television media has been as solid as Megyn Kelly on the issue of free speech – with the possible exception of Sean Hannity.

Sean had Pamela Geller on with the infamous Muslim cleric Anjem Choudary to discuss whether Geller should be put to death for organizing a cartoon contest.

Yes, you read that correctly.

ISIS has of course, vowed to slaughter Geller and “everyone who houses her events,” and “gives her a platform to spill her filth.”
The New York Daily News reported Wednesday night that ISIS said in a posting on a message board that it was sending “all our Lions to achieve her slaughter.”

“Our aim was the khanzeer (swine) Pamela Geller and to show her that we don’t care what land she hides in or what sky shields her,” it said.

Interestingly, Geller told Hannity, the FBI and Homeland Security have not been in touch with her in the wake of these threats.

Choudary, who has been on Hannity’s show many times before, was asked point-blank, “Do you support this death threat against Pam Geller because she ran a free speech contest?”

Via Mediaite:

Choudary argued there’s a difference between cartoons of Mickey Mouse and cartoons of Muhammad, and said Geller went in “knowing full well” many Muslims consider blasphemy an issue worthy of the death penalty. Hannity went off and shouted, “You want her to de!”

Choudary said Geller should be put before a court and tried, and she would end up punished. Geller shot back, “To blame me and say that my cartoons are controversial… murdering cartoonists is controversial.”

Not surprisingly, they ended up getting in a huge shouting match:

(Geller told him to stop interrupting and at one point said “I know you’re used to stepping over women”), and Choudary told her she “knew the consequences.”

Pamela was having none of it – in fact, if looks could kill, Britain would have been one less Islamist asshole, Wednesday night.

Video: Megyn Kelly Blasts “Fundamentally Confused and Wrong” Lib On Free Speech

Watching Fox News’ resident liberal Richard Fowler flail around in search of a valid point is always painful to watch. But watching him attempt to debate Megyn Kelly on the issue of free speech, is downright mortifying.

In an epic clash with Kelly, he found himself agreeing with Bill O’Reilly’s craven take on the issue – a take Kelly blasted as “fundamentally confused and wrong.”

“The relevant question is not ‘did those under attack say something offensive,'” Kelly declared. The relevant question is, “what do we want to do about a group that wants to kill us for exercising our constitutional rights.”

“Freedom of speech is an enumerated right that also comes with the freedom of religion, the freedom of press and the freedom of association,” Fowler intoned. “Muslims should be free to worship just like Christians are free to worship.”

“They are,” Megyn replied, non-plussed. “This group didn’t step on that.”

“Freedom of speech comes with limits and this is a clear limit,” Fowler argued in search of a point.

“No it isn’t!” Megyn countered. “You are fundamentally confused and wrong and the Supreme Court has been very clear on this.”

She cited the Westboro Baptist Church case in which the court upheld their right to picket funerals of fallen soldiers in an 8-1 decision.

Fowler countered, “this is not about case law – this is about common sense,” totally contradicting his earlier “point” that some speech should be limited – which the always razor sharp Megyn called him out on.

“It doesn’t make any sense,” Fowler simpered. ” Why would you paint a picture of someone else’s God and laugh at it and expect them not to respond?”

Setting aside the fact that Fowler just made it obvious he doesn’t have the first clue what Muslims believe about Mohammed (hint – he’s not their God!) He also exposed himself as the craven hypocrite he is for piously pretending that he believes religion should never be made fun of. Can you see Richard Fowler passionately defending Catholics when The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgenceperform their blasphemous shtick?

A troupe of anti-clerical gay provocateurs who cross-dress as bizarre nuns to insult the church and conventional morality of all sorts, stage a “Hunky Jesus” competition in San Franscisco.

You know what? I know a lot of people who are offended by this.  Should we insist that they cease and desist or face {{{the consequences}}}?

Nuns-with-Guns-2

And what do you suppose Fowler’s take on the “vulgar and tasteless” Book of Mormon on Broadway is?

Here’s what a reviewer at Syracuse.com said of the musical:

Let’s start by being clear that the show is offensive in the traditional sense of the word: Four-letter words; sex jokes; sacrilege. But it’s only offensive because it wants to offend you. Ultimately, it drops a dose of vulgar, ugly and comically juxtaposed reality on the absurdity of musical theater and the incongruities of one particular religion: Mormonism.

The two-and-a-half hour show is saddled with the schoolyard humor we’ve come to expect from the men who thought up Eric Cartman. It’s riddled with profanity and even manages to make “baptism” a dirty word. It’s not for pearl-clutchers or do-gooders.

Well, we’ll just have to add Richard Fowler to the ranks of pearl-clutchers and do-gooders, I guess. Because it doesn’t make sense!!!11!! Why would someone make fun of someone else’s God and laugh at it? Whoever heard of such a thing?!

But of course – Fowler is silent about these insults because the offended parties don’t threaten to murder people who insult them. This is a craven, despicable and unsupportable position to have – which is certainly to be expected among those on the left because they are consistently craven, despicable and wrong about everything.  Bill O’Reilly should be ashamed and embarrassed to be on their  side on such a basic and fundamental issue.

Kelly concluded by saying, “I’m concerned about the America you would have us live in,” but Fowler whimpered in response,”I would live in an America where everybody accepts everybody and we don’t make fun of their respective gods…”

When Megyn suggested he “explain that to the jihadis,” the clearly delusional Fowler blurted out, “how we beat terrorism is with love, not hate.”

Good lord.

Megyn Kelly Blisters Harry Reid For Lying About Mitt Romney’s Taxes (Video)

I know that headline looks dated – after all, it was back in 2012 that Dingy Harry shamelessly lied about Romney’s taxes to help Obama win reelection.

But Megyn Kelly saw the interview Dingy did with CNN’s Dana Bash, today and was infuriated to hear him claim he has no regrets about his past “McCarthyite” behavior -(no offense to Joseph McCarthy who doesn’t deserve the comparison.)

“Well, they can call it whatever they want,” Dingy simpered. “Um…Romney didn’t win, did he?”

Oh boy. Megyn Kelly didn’t cotton to that at all.

“That’s his response?” Megyn seethed.  “The Senate (now) Minority Leader says it doesn’t matter that he lied to the country repeatedly and the stakes were a presidential election? All that matters is that Romney lost. Think about that. And the response from our other officials .. has been crickets! After one of our top elected leaders shares with us his complete lack of integrity, complete lack of honesty – never mind respect for the American people! And none of his peers have so far seen fit to be at least a little bit ashamed? What does this say about Washington? About America? About our politics these days?”

Megyn’s guest, Dana Loesch said Harry Reid is “one of the most insufferable people in the history of the Congressional body” and should be censured for his “ends justify the means” dirty politics.

You can stop watching after Dana’s segment is over because liberal Democrat Richard Fowler has nothing to add to the conversation but his weak and pathetic talking points. Seriously, skip it – you don’t have time for his dumb inanities.

Earlier this month, Megyn Kelly slammed the media for not correcting the record on Ferguson, and she got results. Both the Washington Post and NYTs issued retractions.

Now it’s Congress’s turn to be shamed into action. At the very least they should censure the son of a bitch.

SEE ALSO:

AoSHQ: What the Hell Really Happened to Harry Reid?

Reporters are just accepting the claim that he was attacked by an ornery exercise band, huh?

John Hindraker of Powerline wonders about what really might have happened.

When a guy shows up at a Las Vegas emergency room on New Year’s Day with severe facial injuries and broken ribs, and gives as an explanation the functional equivalent of “I walked into a doorknob,” it isn’t hard to guess that he ran afoul of mobsters. Yet the national press has studiously averted its eyes from Reid’s condition, and has refused to investigate the cause of his injuries. To my knowledge, every Washington reporter has at least pretended to believe Reid’s story, and none, as far as I can tell, has inquired further.

So he was working out late on New Years Eve, huh?

Let’s consider what would really happen if someone where hit this badly by an exercise band.

I work out with exercise bands. I am in fact often afraid that they will either snap or, more likely, slip free of where they’re anchored, and hit me in the face.

I don’t know if this is a real possibility or not. I do know the possibility of a face hit by an exercise band has occurred to me.

But here’s why I don’t believe it in the case of Harry Reid:

Why isn’t he warning people about this being a real possibility?

I’ll tell you what, if this happened to me, believe me, I’d be on the blog telling you about it, and warning you to be very careful with these bands. In fact, if an exercise band took my right eye away from me, I’d be telling you to wear goggles at all times when using them.

Actually I think I’d tell you to join a gym — it’s safer.

Gowdy: We Learned The Day Before the NYTs Article Broke That Hillary Didn’t Have an Official Email Acct (Video)

Judge Andrew Napolitano and Congressman Trey Gowdy both appeared on The Kelly File Monday night to talk about Hillary Clinton’s email scandal.

Megyn Kelly asked Napolitano to weigh in on Obama’s take on the controversy.

“I’m glad that Hillary’s instructed that those emails that had to do with official business need to be disclosed,” Obama told CBS News’ Bill Plante over the weekend.

“Apparently the president has the same misunderstanding of federal law that his former secretary of state does,” Napolitano quipped.

He went on to explain the federal statute that says documents and records by high-ranking officials belong to the government. “A former official can ask the government for personal documents back, but Clinton did the opposite,” Napolitano said.

“She retained and concealed 100 percent of the documents with which she dealt while she was secretary of state in 48 months. She decided what was governmental and kept what she didn’t want to reveal,” he continued.

Kelly announced that Hillary will be addressing the email scandal within the next 48 hours. The forum has yet to be disclosed, but it is a safe bet that it will be hermetically sealed event with only friendly reporters allowed in with pre-approved questions.

Congressman Trey Gowdy, Chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi came on next to talk about the State Department’s unimpressive reaction to HillaryGate.

“They’re not going to go back and look for responsive documents to subpoenas, to litigation inquiries, to FOIA requests, Kelly noted, after showing a clip of State Dept. Deputy Press Sec. Marie Harf telling a reporter that they have no plans to find documents that have been requested retroactively. “If you asked prior to the date Hillary’s 55,000 pages were turned over – a week ago, or two weeks ago – you’re out of luck.”

“Well, the State Department is not going to get to be the final arbiter of that,” Gowdy drawled. “I have lost confidence for a myriad of reasons – not the least of which  – they missed every single opportunity over the past six months to tell us that not only did she not have an official email account. They didn’t even have her records.  You would think that that would come up in all the conversations that we had with the State Department. Which is precisely why they are not the neutral, third-party arbiter that I would recommend.”

Gowdy then went on to describe the run-around he got from State, Hillary, and her lawyer, last summer when it was first disclosed that some of her emails were on her personal account. Gowdy was stonewalled for months as he kept pressing for the rest of them. It wasn’t until the day before the NYTs story broke that he found out that  she did not have an official email account.

Gowdy wants a neutral arbiter – “a federal judge, archiver, or inspector general” to take charge of getting the info he seeks from her server.

UPDATE: 

Via Mediaite: Hillary Clinton to Hold Press Conference Today on Email Story:

Hillary Clinton will hold a press conference Tuesday afternoon to address the revelation of her exclusive use of a personal email account and private server to conduct State Department business while Secretary of State.

MSNBC’s Clinton beat reporter Alex Seitz-Wald confirmed the presser. The start time is unknown, but Mediaite will link to a livestream when it becomes available: