The week’s news that wasn’t
Rebutting, uncloaking and discrediting the flakiest, kookiest and most irksome
fakeries in the week’s fake news.
The investigation isn’t, really
It’s probably not even fair to go to The Washington Post for a search for fake
news, given that The Washington Post is the CIA/Deep State mouthpiece and
everything it publishes is anti-Donald Trump fiction from fabricated sources,
but this one was too good to pass up.
Despite The Post’s repeated assertions over the last weeks and months, Trump
is not under investigation for obstruction of justice. Trump attorney Jay
Sekulow argued this point vociferously with Faux News’ Chris Wallace:
“Let me be clear: the president is not under investigation as James Comey
stated in his testimony, that the president was not the target of investigation
on three different occasions,” Sekulow said Sunday. “The president is not a
subject or target of an investigation.”
And ABC’s Pierre Thomas reported the same thing on Sunday:
“Now, my sources are telling me he’s begun some preliminary planning,”
Pierre Thomas, the ABC News senior justice correspondent, said of Mueller
on ABC’s “This Week.” “Plans to talk to some people in the administration.
But he’s not yet made that momentous decision to go for a full-scale
investigation.”
Mueller doesn’t rhyme with Bueller
“First of all you can never go too far. Second of all, if I’m going to be caught,
it’s not gonna be by a guy like that!” – Matthew Broderick as Ferris Bueller in
Ferris Bueller’s Day Off
The choice of Robert Mueller as special counsel to lead the investigation into
the non-existent ties between Trump and Russia was hailed by leaders of both
parties because he was seen as “credible and independent.” But that’s hardly
the case.
Mueller and fired FBI Director Comey have a close relationship. They’ve worked
together for years in various government positions, and one followed the other
at the FBI. It’s so close, in fact, that The Washingtonian wrote an entire article
about it in 2013. That relationship should force Mueller to step aside in his
investigation of Trump, according to the People’s Pundit Daily.
That’s because Mueller has a conflict of interest under the Department of Justice
regulations on government ethics. Section II(c) of the ethics outline states:
No DOJ employee may participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution
if he has a personal or political relationship with any person or organization
substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation
or prosecution, or who would be directly affected by the outcome.
28 CFR 45.2Political relationship means a close identification with an elected official,
candidate, political party or campaign organization arising from service as a
principal advisor or official; personal relationship means a close and
substantial
connection of the type normally viewed as likely to induce partiality.
How can Trump get caught by a guy like that? If Mueller were truly “credible
and
independent,” he would step aside due to his relationship with Comey. I expec
t lawsuits aplenty if he doesn’t.
That’s your plan?
In the wake of last week’s attack on Republican congressmen by a white,
abusive, alcoholic, Bernie Sanders-loving communist nut-job, a dubiously
half-black race-baiting plagiarist opined that he knows the way to reduce
shootings in America: Ban white people.
That’s right. Shaun King, the almost black-looking “senior justice writer” for
the New York Daily News and leader of the Black Lives Matter terrorist
organization that has called for the murder of police officers and white people,
used Twitter to posit his brilliant scheme.
In a series of tweets on the shooting, King remarked:
“7. But I continue to say that if America wanted to drastically reduce mass
shootings by way of a human ban, white men must be banned first,” which
means he’s stated this ludicrous fakery before.
1. I'd like to take a quick second to break something down regarding this awful shooting in Alexandria, Virginia.
He followed it with:
“8. Of course, I am against banning any group of people, but factually
speaking, banning white men would drastically reduce mass shootings.”
1. I'd like to take a quick second to break something down regarding this awful shooting in Alexandria, Virginia.
So how “fake” is King’s statement? According to the 2015 FBI crime statistics,
in homicides in which the race of the offender is known, in 53.3 percent of the
instances the offender is black or African American. This despite the fact that
blacks make up only 13.2 percent of the population.
Beyond that, according to liberal anti-gun rag Mother Jones’ “A Guide to Mass
Shootings in America,” which is purported to be the most accurate compilation
of mass shooting data available, there have been at least 90 public mass
shootings in the U.S. since 1982 (not counting last Wednesday’s). Forty-four
of the perpetrators were white men.
I realize math is hard, Shaun, but 44 is less than half of 90 (and 45 – when you
add James Hodkinson’s attack last week — is less than half of 91), meaning
more than half of all mass shootings were carried out by someone who is not
a white male.
NY Times reprints a long-debunked fake story
You may recall that in the wake of the shooting of then-Representative
Gabrielle Giffords by the obsessed and deranged Jared Loughner in 2011,
the mainstream media initially tried to pin blame for Loughner’s shooting
spree on a Sarah Palin-linked advertisement that placed crosshairs on an
electoral map showing which elections the GOP needed to win in 2012. But
that link was severed quickly and resoundingly when investigators determined
that Loughner had been pining for Giffords for at least three years prior to the
shooting and he had demonstrated that he was granny-in-the-attic crazy since
his high school days.
Nevertheless, while pontificating about the shooting of Representative Steve
Scalise by the deranged Sanders supporter mentioned above, The New York
Times opinion pages, in an editorial titled, “America’s Lethal Policies,”
rebranded that debunked calumnious falsity in an effort to pin the blame on
conservatives and draw attention away from the fact that shooter James
Hodgkinson was a Sanders-supporting anti-Trumper and former Occupy
Wall Street protester.
The Times wrote:
In 2011, Jared Lee Loughner opened fire in a supermarket parking lot,
grievously wounding Representative Gabby Giffords and killing six people,
including a 9-year-old girl. At the time, we and others were sharply critical
of the heated political rhetoric on the right. Before the shooting, Sarah
Palin’s political action committee circulated a map that showed the
targeted electoral districts of Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under
stylized cross hairs.
After tweeting about the story, The Times was gobsmacked by leftists like
CNN’s Jake Tapper, MSNBC’s Chris Hay’s and Mother Jones’ Ben Dreyfuss,
among others.
Several hours later, The Times corrected its opinion piece, adding the following:
Correction: June 16, 2017An editorial on Thursday about the shooting of Representative Steve Scalise incorrectly stated that a link existed between political rhetoric and the 2011 shooting of Representative Gabby Giffords. In fact, no such link was established. The editorial also incorrectly described a map distributed by a political action committee before that shooting. It depicted electoral districts, not individual Democratic lawmakers, beneath stylized cross hairs.
The truth is, not only was “no such link” ever established, none, whatsoever,
existed. Nor is there any evidence Loughner was remotely aware of the
advertisement at all.
