Kerik recalled, “I was scheduled to be on CNN. We were supposed to talk about the investigation and seizure of these devices, and right in the beginning of the set, they suspended us and they went to John Brennan, who was somewhere speaking … and then he went on a 10-minute rant about the president.”Shocker: Democrats Blame Trump’s Rhetoric For Spate Of Suspected Bombs
"Not a single Democrat has spoken out against the mobs accosting Republicans in public."
Andrew Cuomo jumps up and suggests he too got a bomb, even though he didn't "Did Andrew Cuomo actually want to get a bomb from some unknown criminal or terrorist delivered to him?
"If there was political hay to be made, sure looks like it.
"How else to explain this rather absurd farce? According to Vice News:
Though New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo said Wednesday that an explosive device had been sent to his office after a spate of bombs targeting at least six high-profile liberal figures, the NYPD says he wasn't a target.“A device has been sent to my office in Manhattan, which we were just informed about,” Cuomo said at a joint press conference Wednesday outside CNN headquarters, where a bomb was found. “That device is also being handled.”In a subsequent statement, the NYPD denied that Cuomo or his office had been targeted.
"So, first Cuomo said he never got a bomb, at a time when other prominent Democrats had gotten them from some unknown criminal or terrorist. Then Cuomo said that, oh, actually he had also gotten one, a "suspicious package" to be precise, apparently wanting to be placed on the list of leading Democrats with enough clout to enrage some package bomber. The weasel words 'suspicious package' of course, could cover him for anything.
. . .
"Then the New York PD smacked him down and said that nope, he wasn't part of this, he never got a bomb. The best he got was some lawyer briefs about group that gets into fights with antifa leftists called 'Proud Boys.' According to the Syracuse News-Standard:
In a subsequent statement, the NYPD denied that Cuomo or his office had been targeted.
"The whole idiocy sounds like he wanted to join the bigs and make himself seem important. Or that he would anything to get his name in the news, given that the bomb incidents were the nation's top news story." . . .
Pipe bombs scare: Here's what we know
Some insight on this: What are these pre-election mail bombs?
"The Democrats could use a flood of electoral sympathy at this point. What a coincidence."
Why no one trusts the media to get the bombing story right . . . "But there is no "reflection" on news broadcasts today or on newspaper websites. Events are reported and commented on in real time. There's no time to assemble facts. There's no time for anything except reaction by the reporter - augmented by talking heads and "experts." That reaction is almost always, by necessity, full of a reporter's biased assumptions of "what it all means."
Pipe bombs scare: Here's what we know
Some insight on this: What are these pre-election mail bombs?
"The Democrats could use a flood of electoral sympathy at this point. What a coincidence."
Why no one trusts the media to get the bombing story right . . . "But there is no "reflection" on news broadcasts today or on newspaper websites. Events are reported and commented on in real time. There's no time to assemble facts. There's no time for anything except reaction by the reporter - augmented by talking heads and "experts." That reaction is almost always, by necessity, full of a reporter's biased assumptions of "what it all means."
"Even after some of the facts have been revealed, the reporter tries to fit those facts into the "narrative" that has already been established. Hence, the first blush reporting of a major story - a terrorist attack or an attempted bombing - becomes nearly set in stone. Try altering the narrative once the facts have been carefully placed to "prove" various assumptions and you're usually labeled a conspiracy nut.
"There's no solution to this problem. We just have to relearn how to be a good news consumer. What for the facts. Try to divorce the facts from the narrative and form your own opinion about what those facts actually mean." . . .