"This is part one, about the “Okay To Slander” chumps. There aren’t a lot of these to choose from because the people liberals don’t like rarely fight with the police." ... "DON’T LIKE: law enforcement officers, gun enthusiasts, and right-wing protesters. LIKE: criminals and left-wing protesters." . . .
"When is it okay to “slander” the victim of a police shooting? It all depends on the politics of the victim.
"Ever since Renee Good and Alex Pretti got themselves killed by interfering with federal law enforcement while in possession of deadly weapons, the media have been in a fit about the Trump administration’s plan to investigate the agitators’ ties to anti-ICE activist groups.
"The federal government is facing a militarized, highly disciplined, violent left-wing operation that will do anything to prevent a single illegal alien from being deported. This includes road-blocking, screaming, blowing whistles, face-to-face confrontations, arson, vandalism, even assassination.
"But for wanting to gather information on these two troublemakers, The Hill newspaper thundered at the administration: “the expectation is straightforward: you investigate the use of deadly force,” NOT the victims of the deadly force.
"Hennepin County Prosecutor Mary Moriarty says the Trump administration’s interest in finding out more about Good and Pretti is “galling.” (Moriarty is such a left-wing lunatic that the other lunatics, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison, had to take a murder case away from her, after she offered the perps a two-year sentence in a juvenile facility. This earned her a 6X daily spot on MS-NOW.)
"Obama administration veteran Juliette N. Kayyem claims that “Kill and Slander” is official government policy. “Kill and Slander,” she said, is the “terminology that is part of their M.O. right now.”
"What liberals mean by “slander” is “to reveal unflattering facts about a person.”
"Divulging anything vaguely negative about a victim whom liberals like is abhorrent, beyond the bounds of decency -- even if the information is true, relevant and important. On the other hand, if liberals don’t like you, the worst thing you ever did in your life will be front-page news the day after the government kills you. The nastier and more irrelevant, the better." . . .
. . . "Immediately after her death, the media were fairly bristling with Babbitt’s flaky beliefs, tweets, arrests (no convictions) -- even a confrontation with her husband’s ex-girlfriend, despite its sublime irrelevance to whether Byrd was justified in shooting her. The day after her death, The New York Times ran this headline: “Woman Killed in Capitol Embraced Trump and QAnon; After 14 years in the military, Ashli Babbitt bought a pool supply company and delved into far-right politics.' ” . . .
The Pretti Case Exposes a Dangerous Lie; Walter Hudson's 'Closing Argument' "Everyone keeps repeating the same two claims about the Pretti shooting:
“He had a right to carry.” “He had a right to film.” Both statements are true. And both are meaningless without context. In this episode, I explain why focusing on abstract rights while ignoring real-world behavior leads to bad conclusions — and dangerous lessons. Carrying a firearm doesn’t make you more entitled to confrontation. It makes you more responsible for avoiding it." . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment