Blacks kill Whites a lot, and hurt and kill cops a lot

Ok. I have had it. I want my T.V. back. Stop it. Stop agitating for a race war. Stop wanting our guns. Blacks kill Whites a lot Yes. They Do. American Thinker gives us a breakdown in the last couple of weeks of what they have done to cops. Then I give you the crime of the Century. Blacks kill and torture a wonderful white couple. Here we go:

The reason for the demonstration was simple and beyond pushback:

White cops shoot black people all over the country, all the time, for no reason whatsoever.

Everybody knows that. So sad.

Some took it to the next level: The head of a black group called Dallas Action said the killings were a wake up call to let people know how cops are picking on black people.

All the time.

For no reason whatsoever.  The local Fox reporter in Dallas took the comments in stride, quickly changing the topic to all the pretty lights on nearby police cars.

Not one reporter at any point even hinted at how black violence is wildly out of proportion.

Not one reporter talked to any cop willing to tell the truth about how police are relentless victims of black hostility and violence and murder — all over the country.

And how black on cop violence and defiance are now the default response.

American Thinker takes us on “A brief magical mystery tour of black on cop violence over the last few weeks” over at the American Thinker: Read more: American Thinker

And you want to know the case of the century? 4 Blacks Torture, Rape, Mutilate and Kill White Couple. Go to link for original post.

Why wasn’t this Knoxville story, “4 blacks kill white couple” on the TV  network news for months? How does the media decide which murders to  sensationalize? 

“Christian and Newsom were leaving an apartment together to go to a friend’s  party when they were abducted from the apartment complex parking lot.

According to the testimony of the Knox County Acting Medical Examiner Dr.  Darinka Mileusnic-Polchan at the subsequent trial of Eric Boyd, Newsom was  repeatedly sodomized with an object and then blindfolded, gagged, arms and feet  bound and his head covered. Barefoot, he was dragged outside the house to a set  of nearby railroad tracks. He was sexually mutilated, shot in the back of his  head, neck and back and his body was then set on fire.

WARNING: Deeply disturbing and graphic description by Michael Savage

Joe Manchin: ‘Due Process is what’s killing us now’

Joe Manchin is supposedly on Hillary Clinton’s short list for VP. He ought to fit right in with the agenda of saying to hell with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. No Joe, its Islamic Terrorists that are killing us.

America 1776 — 2016: We had a good run. “Let’s just throw out the Bill of Rights.” Oh, that pesky Due Process. What. The. Hell. Here’s Senator Joe Manchin on “Morning Joe” Thursday having a sad over those pesky “due process” rights keeping Americans off of secret government lists designed to curtail their Constitutional rights. When Sen. Manchin was sworn in as a Senator, he took an oath to support and defend the Constitution, or did he forget about that? Damn Bill of Rights get in the way of Leftist Activists all the time.

 

FBI Director Comey – Just who is he?

Yesterday I had my tin foil out in fine style and suggested that the FBI use of informants particularly in terrorism cases was often not what it appeared in the post Was the Orlando terrorist Mateen an FBI informant?

Setting aside my screed, let me offer another point of view of FBI director Comey who almost universally is depicted as a white hat in shining armor, at this very moment holding the future of the Democrat party in his hands. We are apparently in the process of giving up due process in order to achieve a modicum of gun control. The new NDAA is soon up for a vote. Just who will be looking over our shoulder?Just who is FBI Director Comfey?James B. Comey, new F.B.I. nominee is not what you think 

What you will not hear from the Obama-friendly media, and our somnolent members of Congress, is this: Not only was the Patriot Act expanded under the supervision of Comey, Mueller and Ashcroft, when Comey left the AG’s office in 2005 he went to work as the top lawyer for…wait for it…”Big Brother” himself – Lockheed Martin.

As the Chief Legal Officer at Lockheed Martin, James Comey earned a total compensation of $6,113,797.00 in 2009. That’s right. Six million bucks. In one year.

When most people hear Lockheed Martin they think military contracts. Well, welcome to 1984. “Big Brother” is another name for Lockheed Martin, and security and surveillance is their game. They’ve been working closely with the National Security Agency (AKA: NSA, as in No Such Agency) for many years.

So ask yourself: Why would the Obama regime appoint a new FBI Director who works for a prime contractor that sells NSA the technology to spy on Americans? Would PETA hire a fur coat distributor?

Oh, by the way, where’s John Ashcroft today? Why he’s on the Board of Directors of Blackwater USA,which now goes by the harmless sounding name – Academi – conjuring up images of ivy-covered buildings and lounging intellectuals.

So in the days ahead, when the media and politicians tell you that James B. Comey will stand up for your civil liberties as FBI Director (citing a hospital room performance over the Patriot Act), remember: If Comey didn’t support spying on Americans, why would he work for a leading company that sells the government the tools to spy on Americans?

Are the manufacturers of hunting rifles against hunting?

Comey and Ashcroft – Lockheed Martin and Blackwater: Defenders of our civil liberties?

And just to round out what the FBI is about, let’s hear from the previous director.

FBI Director: I have to check to see if Obama can kill citizens on U.S. soil January 26, 2013

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “three criteria” for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.
Pressed by House lawmakers about a recent speech in which Holder described the legal justification for assassination, Mueller, who was attending a hearing on his agency’s budget, did not say without qualification that the three criteria could not be applied inside the U.S.
“I have to go back. Uh, I’m not certain whether that was addressed or not,” Mueller said when asked by Rep. Tom Graves, R-Ga., about a distinction between domestic and foreign targeting. Graves followed up asking whether “from a historical perspective,” the federal government has “the ability to kill a U.S. citizen on United States soil or just overseas.”
“I’m going to defer.

Clinton: If the FBI is watching you, you shouldn’t be able to ‘just go buy a gun’

This is why this absurd woman should not even be allowed to run for the Presidency. How about if the Border patrol rounds you up shouldn’t be able to remain in the USA?

What if the FBI is investigating you for breaking the law and exposing classified info? Should you be able to run for President?

clinton a

Clinton won’t say if guns are a constitutional right

Hillary thinks our Second Amendment can be nuanced? Really? As disgusting as this creature is, the statement “If it is a constitutional right… and it is Judge Scalia’s fault that it lost it “nuance?” takes it over the top. I thought it was a majority opinion. She goes on to support lawsuits against gun manufacturers. Of course, all the better to put them out of business as they are forced to defend endless lawsuits. Here goes:

Hillary Clinton couldn’t definitively say Sunday that the Second Amendment of the Constitution guaranteed the right to bear arms during an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos.

Republican rival Donald Trump has charged that Clinton wants to abolish the amendment. While Stephanopoulos said he knew that wasn’t true, he pressed her on her gun views that have increasingly gone to the left.

“Do you believe that an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right, that it’s not linked to service in a militia?” he asked.

“I think that for most of our history, there was a nuanced reading of the Second Amendment until the decision by the late Justice Scalia, and there was no argument until then that localities and states and the federal government had a right, as we do with every amendment, to impose reasonable regulations,” she said. “So I believe we can have common-sense gun safety measures consistent with the Second Amendment.”

Clinton then went into her gun control platform, but Stephanopoulos hit her for dodging his question, noting the D.C. vs. Heller decision that protected an individual’s right to have a firearm for lawful purposes.

“And the Heller decision also does say there can be some restrictions, but that’s not what I asked,” he said. “I said, do you believe that their conclusion that an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right?”

“If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulations, and what people have done with that decision is to take it as far as they possibly can and reject what has been our history from the very beginning of the republic, where some of the earliest laws that were passed were about firearms,” Clinton said.

More at Free Beacon

Obama wants to take your guns if you visit the wrong websites

When scouting out the internet, best not to have a fat finger and hit the wrong website. Fortunately, Obama will be gone in a few months. Just in time. First we had shelter in place. Americans apparently will willingly huddle in their homes. Now the next effort will be to restrict one’s gun rights if one visits the wrong website. Is this really where we want to go? Both sound like this is good for us doesn’t it? By the way, Mr. President, the reason that we are buying guns like crazy is because we know you want our guns.

President Obama suggested the equivalent of a no-fly list for guns on Wednesday, saying that people who are suspected of being terrorist sympathizers should be denied the right to bear arms even if they are not convicted or accused of a crime.

“We’ve got people who we know have been on ISIL websites living here in the United States, U.S. citizens,” Obama said during a PBS NewsHour appearance, using an acronym for the Islamic State terror group. “And we’re allowed to put them on the no-fly list when it comes to airlines, but because of the National Rifle Association I cannot prohibit them from buying a gun.”

When asked why he wants to restrict gun access for all owners, rather than just bad actors, President Barack Obama said, “It’s just not true. …There have been more guns sold since I’ve been president than just about any time in U.S. history.”

He spoke at a town hall in Elkhart, Indiana, in June. President Barack Obama’s statement came in response to an audience member who asked why he supported policies to restrict firearm access for law-abiding citizens.

“Why then do you and Hillary want to control and restrict and limit gun manufacturers, gun owners, and the responsible use of guns and ammunition to the rest of us, the good guys, instead of holding the bad guys responsible for their actions?” the man asked.

The man pointed out that Chicago, Obama’s former home town, has some of the highest levels of gun violence in the nation despite its stringent gun laws.

More Free Beacon

Obama to go after guns of those on Social Security disability

While Paul Ryan is having his hissy fit over Trump because “I don’t really know him” and takes a day out of the House’s overworked schedule to have his ego massaged, he does nothing to put together a bill to stop this nonsense. No you don’t have to be a threat to yourself or others, and there is no adjudication. No way of refuting the taking of your Second Amendment. Is this what we have come to?

The Social Security Administration has announced the details of a new rule that would bar many receiving federal disability payments from owning firearms.

“The Social Security Administration’s proposal doesn’t require an individual to be adjudicated mentally defective or to pose a risk to himself or others,” Lars Dalesiede, a NRA spokesman, said. “Instead they are set to strip away your constitutional rights just because you meet a set of criteria established by a group of faceless bureaucrats you’ll never meet. That puts thousands of Americans in the terrible position of choosing whether to pay their bills or give up their constitutional rights.”

The group called the president’s push for the new rule “embarrassing and shameful.”

The proposed rule is part of President Obama’s push to tighten gun laws while bypassing Congress. News of the plan to add some Social Security recipients to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS, was first uncovered by the Los Angeles Times last summer and has faced fierce opposition from gun rights groups ever since. (There are additional targets.)

President Obama announced in January that he was officially ordering the Social Security Administration to start the process for implementing the rule.

Though Social Security’s rule limits the scope of those banned from owning firearms compared to the VA it would still potentially target a larger group of people. Tens or hundreds of thousands of Americans could be affected.

Keep reading…

Bonus for you Paul Ryan. Our gal Hillary Clinton on guns. Maybe you would like to have her as President?

“I’m going to speak out, I’m going to do everything I can to rally people against this pernicious, corrupting influence of the NRA and we’re going to do whatever we can,” she said.

Clinton argued that the NRA has “so intimidated elected members of Congress and other legislative bodies that these people are passing the most absurd laws.”

“The idea that you can have an open carry permit with an AK-47 over your shoulder walking up and down the aisles of a supermarket is just despicable,” she said.

Audio here Sound Cloud

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,392 other followers

%d bloggers like this: