Gutfeld: Maddow falls for Trump’s baited trap – video

This is one of the more hilarious pieces Gutfeld from “The Five” has put together. It takes a lot for my funny bone to get tickled, but for anyone who endured Madcow’s great reveal, I am sure will enjoy this.

When the left lose their minds, the president wins. Greg Gutfeld, Eric Bolling, Dana Perino, Kimberly Guilfoyle, Juan Williams.
Fox News: The Five.

Roman Polanski – the real truth, a child rapist

Hollyweird is all abuzz that their pal Polanski may find his way back to the USA. So happy to have another pervert back here. He says if the judge says its all clear, he is on his way. Lets take a look, with a link to the court transcript.

“If I had killed somebody, it wouldn’t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But… f—ing, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f— young girls. Juries want to f— young girls. Everyone wants to f— young girls!”this quote from an interview Polanski gave to Martin Amis in 1979 in which the director made his finest remarks.

Not much remorse there, eh? Perhaps Polanski regrets this remark and is a changed man with a rather greater perspective on his crimes. But this interview suggests that, in 1979 at least, he didn’t seem to think he’d committed a crime at all.  

It seems like a good time to publish the official court transcript of the film director’s guilty plea to having sex with an underage California girl.

On August 8, 1977 Polanski appeared in Los Angeles Superior Court and copped to a felony count of unlawful sexual intercourse. As seen in this transcript, he acknowledged being aware that the victim was 13 at the time of their March 1977 encounter in a Mulholland Drive home owned by actor Jack Nicholson. Polanski, now 77, fled the country before being sentenced, fearful that he would be imprisoned by Judge Laurence Rittenband, the jurist before whom he entered his guilty plea.

Smoking Gun – Plea deal

Once again, the  powerful and famous seem to reside in a universe above the common man. Had anyone else fled the country at the time of sentencing, no one would have blinked an eye about retrieving him, no matter how long it was.     Of  course, through the years he was given a wink and a nod. No matter that his victim forgave him, Perhaps years of therapy brought her to that point of healing. Either the law is the law, or not. The issue is not her forgiveness but rather are we to remain a country of laws?  The question isn’t why now, but rather why not before.

The idea that Polanski didn’t know of the victim’s true age doesn’t hold up to scrutiny, since he had to get her mother’s permission for the photo shoot.   Applebaum, from the Washington Post,  neglects to mention that Polanski drugged her with a Quaalude and champagne, forcibly had sexual intercourse, and then sodomized her afterward.  Polanski negotiated the charge down to statutory rape rather than actual rape, but the actual facts show that this was not a case of an older man with poor eyesight and judgment.

Polanski raped and sodomized a 13-year-old girl.  The only thing outrageous about his arrest is that it came 32 years after he fled, not from “irrational” punishment, but from justice for his own actions.  It’s outrageous that Polanski’s fans continue to support him even after knowing the facts of the case.  As for Applebaum’s final argument — “If he weren’t famous, I bet no one would bother with him at all” — it’s very clear that if Polanski hadn’t been famous, no one would have bothered to hide him for the last 32 years, and he would have done his jail time decades ago.  That’s completely unworthy of Applebaum report, from the Washington Post, and patently ridiculous.

More  :Arresting a child rapist outrageous

Breaking- Polanski gets bail from Swiss court

Polanski starts his grand ski vacation

The Hills are alive with, well, you know

This is the best I could come up with for a Saturday. I caught this over on twitter. Have a great day!

Have I lost my mind and woken up in an alternative universe or are Dems really talking about ? You can’t make this stuff up.

 

bs

Next Women’s March has terrorists heading it up

Do the women have any idea what and who they are involved with? The first so called Women’s march had the Featured Women’s March speaker kidnapped murdered raped tortured man. Here we go with the next bright idea:

Instead of milling around Washington, organizers have in mind a “general strike” called the Day without a Woman. In a manifesto published in The Guardian on Feb. 6, the brains behind the movement are calling for a “new wave of militant feminist struggle.” That’s right: militant, not peaceful. According to the Post:

According to The Guardian piece, women should spend their day “blocking roads, bridges, and squares, abstaining from domestic, care and sex work” and “boycotting” pro-Trump businesses. Also every woman is supposed to wear red in solidarity.

The “manifesto” document was co-authored by, among others, Rasmea Yousef Odeh, a convicted terrorist. Odeh, a Palestinian, was convicted in Israel in 1970 for her part in two terrorist bombings, one of which killed two students while they were shopping for groceries. She spent 10 years in prison for her crimes. She then managed to become a US citizen in 2004 by lying about her past (great detective work, INS: Next time, use Google) but was subsequently convicted, in 2014, of immigration fraud for the falsehoods. However, she won the right to a new trial (set for this spring) by claiming she had been suffering from PTSD at the time she lied on her application. Oh, and in her time as a citizen, she worked for a while as an ObamaCare navigator.

Rasmea Yousef Odeh spent 10 years in prison for her part in two terrorist bombings.AP

You can see why she’s a hero to the left. Another co-author, Angela Davis, is a Stalinist professor and longtime supporter of the Black Panthers. Davis is best known for being acquitted in a 1972 trial after three guns she bought were used in a courtroom shootout that resulted in the death of a judge. She celebrated by going to Cuba.

A third co-author, Tithi Bhattacharya, praised Maoism in an essay for the International Socialist Review, noting that Maoists are “on the terrorist list of the US State Department, Canada, and the European Union,” which she called an indication that “Maoists are back in the news and by all accounts they are fighting against all the right people.” You know you’re dealing with extremism when someone admits to hating Canada. More at NY Post:

MSNBC: ‘Slob’ Bannon Looks ‘Homeless,’ Like ‘Dirty Old Man’

Who is the real snob?? Oh how the elites are convulsing. Deconstruction?

Federal Judge: ‘Fort Collins cannot order women not to go topless’

 

“Free the nipple.” Otherwise known as going topless. Another present given to us by Obama. Obama nominated Federal Judge R. Brooke Jackson in 2010, and renominated him in January when the new congress convened. He has decided it is sexist to expect women to wear clothes. A bit brisk in Fort Collins right now to be going around topless I would say.

fort-collins

FORT COLLINS, Colo. — A federal judge has ordered the city of Fort Collins to stop enforcing a policy that bans women from showing their breasts in public.

It started with one woman asking, “If men can go topless, why can’t women?”

“It’s sexist because it specifically discriminates against female breasts,” Brittiany Hoagland said in 2015.

Hoagland, Samantha Six and a group called Free the Nipple — Fort Collins made headlines across the country when they protested on the corner of College Avenue and Mulberry Street with nothing but “opaque dressings” covering their nipples.

The Fort Collins City Council asked for public input but ended up voting to keep the topless ban for women in place.

After the decision, Hoagland, Six and Free the Nipple — Fort Collins filed a civil lawsuit against the city, claiming the policy violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

On Wednesday, Federal Judge R. Brooke Jackson ordered an injunction preventing police and the city from enforcing the ban.

“The court essentially agreed that any statute containing the concept that ‘Women are prohibited from …’ is likely unconstitutional,” attorney David Lane said in a statement.

In his ruling, Jackson disagreed with the argument that topless females might distract drivers and cause traffic issues that disrupt public order.

“[I]t appears that underlying Fort Collins’ belief that topless females are uniquely disruptive of public order is [a] negative stereotype … that society considers female breasts primarily as objects of sexual desire whereas male breasts are not,” Jackson said.

The judge cited a researcher as stating that sexual objectification of the female breast leads to negative cognitive, behavioral, and emotional outcomes and contributes to higher rates of sexual assault and violence. More at 

Mika Brzezinski Our Job Is to Control Exactly What People Think

Watching Morning Joe is the same as having a double expresso. I take about 15 minutes here and there just to get the blood moving. I happened to catch these minutes yesterday.

%d bloggers like this: