One Citizen Speaking... |
- MICHAEL BROWN'S FAMILY IS DISAPPOINTED THAT OFFICER WILSON WAS NOT INDICTED -- OR ARE THEY UNHAPPY BECAUSE THERE WILL BE NO BIG PAYDAY?
- THE FERGUSON GRAND JURY DECISION: NO INDICTMENT
- IS THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION STARTING TO DESTROY RECORDS BEFORE A GOP TAKEOVER OF CONGRESS?
- SECDEF CHUCK HAGEL OUT -- OBAMA POWER PLAY?
- CAN DARREN WILSON TRUST THE PROGRESSIVE MAINSTREAM MEDIA FOR AN UNBIASED INTERVIEW?
- WHO WILL HOLD THE POLITICIANS ACCOUNTABLE FOR POLITICAL WASTE, FRAUD, AND ABUSE?
Posted: 24 Nov 2014 10:27 PM PST I find it deeply disturbing that the parents of a thug who lost his life challenging a police officer still believes that the officer did not face the consequences of his actions. The police officer certainly has faced the consequences of his actions: seeing hardship befall him and his innocent family that was forced to abandon their home and seek shelter in a safe and secure setting; probably losing his job and any chances for a career in law enforcement. And, he committed no crime other than to uphold the law and perform his sworn duty when confronting a thug. Brown’s parents want police officers to wear body cameras – do they not realize that the camera would have condemned their son as an out-of-control thug attacking a police officer? Or are they unmindful that a convenience store surveillance camera caught their son red-handed in a strong-arm robbery minutes before the police confrontation? The parents of Michael Brown released a statement after the Grand Jury found insufficient evidence to charge Police Officer Darren William with the death Michael Brown …
And, why I believe that is all about the money … Surrounded by attorneys and advisors, one can hardly wait for the Michael Brown foundation to pop up – allowing the family to solicit public money and use it to fund their lifestyle – that is if other high-profile cases serve as the blueprint.
What? Do they believe their thug son is some kind of a hero?
The family has scheduled a press conference … as if what they have to say about their thug son, the legal process, or anything else is important. Perhaps some reporter should ask the stepfather about his alleged comments above. Bottom line … The progressive socialist democrats are all about an alternative universe that supports free money and self-licking lollipops. Where up is down, black is white, and evil is good. Where people fight for a thug’s civil rights and demand that the civil rights of a police officer be ignored. We are sure to see this “victim” meme continue to play out no matter what the forensic evidence and sworn testimony indicates. Show me where stealing cell phones, groceries, cosmetics, and liquor is a civil rights protest? Show me where a thug is more important that a police officer keeping his city safe? No wonder why the activists do not want police officers dressed in tactical gear or using armored vehicles. Time to call a spade a spade – rioters and looters are criminals and should be prosecuted. -- steve  | |
THE FERGUSON GRAND JURY DECISION: NO INDICTMENT Posted: 24 Nov 2014 06:25 PM PST The Ferguson Grand Jury has reviewed the forensic evidence, heard testimony of witnesses, and deliberated over whether or not to indict Police Officer Darren Wilson for the death of Michael Brown. Their findings have resulted in NO INDICTMENT! The announcement …
Activists and Agitators … As with the exploitation of Trayvon Martin’s death, no matter which way you slice it, activists and agitators ginned-up a local news story to national importance to pursue their own political agenda. The facts seem relatively clear. Michael Brown, a 6’4” 292-pound black man, fresh from committing a video-taped strong-arm theft of cigars from a convenience store, decided to violently confront a white police officer who had asked Brown and his companion to cease walking down the middle of the street and get on the curb. Had Michael Brown, under the influence of drugs, simply obeyed that advice, there would be no story, no riots, no loss of life, and no destruction of private and public property. Unfortunately, Michael Brown engaged in a physical altercation with the police officer that lead to his death. A justifiable shooting based on the forensic evidence and testimony before the Ferguson Grand Jury. Money as a motivator … In cases of this type, we have seen big-money settlements by the police and other government entities – sometimes using taxpayer money to resolve nuisance lawsuits or eliminate a closer scrutiny of the matter. We know what drives the agitators and attorneys, but it was unexpected to see Michael Brown’s mother was accused of beating up Michael Brown’s grandmother over selling Michael Brown memorabilia on the street.
Bottom line … That communist and separatist activists and agitators – along with a complicit progressive mainstream media – sought to seek media attention and funding by exploiting the situation says more about the community and its tolerance for outside interlopers than it says about the two men involved. We should respect the Ferguson Grand Jury who literally put their lives on hold and on the line to do their duty as citizens. I am not sure than anyone of us would welcome the amount of scrutiny or fall-out that might accompany any decision. As for protests anywhere else in the Country other than Ferguson, Missouri, you are looking at socialist, communist, anarchist agitators pursuing their own political agenda using unfortunate incidents to fundraise and raise their media presence. Something that should be avoided and condemned by decent folk everywhere. When considering media report, remember that there are agitators, protesters, and spectators in the crowd – and they may not be of the same mind and motivation. -- steve  | |
IS THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION STARTING TO DESTROY RECORDS BEFORE A GOP TAKEOVER OF CONGRESS? Posted: 24 Nov 2014 09:39 PM PST I am asking myself if a corrupt, lawless Administration might destroy critical documents prior to a GOP takeover of Congress and an enhanced ability to hold politicians and bureaucrats accountable for their past actions? As we have seen, Hillary Clinton’s top aids have been accused of purging documents on Benghazi prior to a document turnover to the ARB (Accountability Review Board) that was so incompetent as to never interview Hillary Clinton herself about her actions relating to Benghazi, the video story, and the alleged cover-up. Now we are seeing that the Department of Homeland Defense is preparing to destroy a large number of documents that should be preserved and vetted by the personnel at the National Archives. Considering that the DHS and other government agencies are under scrutiny for a multiplicity of scandals involving the White House, the timing of this effort is suspicious. Especially if the destruction will give rise to the “accidental” destruction of “other” records that were not supposed to be purged. From NextGov.com …
Bottom line … As we have seen in the past few years, the Obama Administration plays fast and loose with documents – especially those that were legally subpoenaed by Congressional oversight committees. It is prima facie evidence of wrongdoing that documents were not provided to Congress, but were provided to the Courts. Add President Obama’s false claim of “Presidential Privilege” and you see a pattern of document handling that is highly suspicious. Not that the prominent progressive socialist democrats have not been caught red-handed stealing classified documents and stuffing them in their underwear. -- steve  | |
SECDEF CHUCK HAGEL OUT -- OBAMA POWER PLAY? Posted: 25 Nov 2014 12:09 AM PST My cynical self believes that Chuck Hagel's ouster was timed to coincide with Secretary of State's John Kerry failing to secure an Iranian nuclear deal -- thus proving either Kerry's incompetence or advancing Obama's plan to allow Iran to go nuclear to disadvantage Israel. President Obama can accept incompetence, cluelessness, but cannot accept criticism ... It appears that the Obamacons forced the 24th Secretary of Defense, Chuck Hagel, to resign … possibly over comments that were contradictory to the message put forth by President Obama and his cadre of progressive socialist democrats that ISIS was not the JV team and represented a far greater threat to America than what Obama was saying. It also appears that the timing is suspect because Obama has a closing window of opportunity before the Senate’s leadership reverts to the Republicans and any Obama nominee might be used as a bargaining chip to roll-back the President’s domestic policies. Now that a nuclear agreement with Iran is fast coming to an inflection point, it would not surprise me if President Obama was seeking a Secretary of Defense that could be controlled by the White House and used to disadvantage an Israeli attack on Iran should Iran blow-off enrichment curtailment discussions. There was never any doubt that President Obama and his cadre of progressive socialist democrats in the inner circle wanted to consolidate command and control over the entire government from the White House where actions were dictated rather than discussed and deliberated by a wider group of participants. The truth is that Hagel never quite cracked Obama's inner circle and bided his time providing advice to the President directly. It appears that much of his advisory role was subverted by General Martin Dempsey, the compliant head of the Military's Joint Chiefs of Staff. What may have happened … It appears that the British and French came to the Department of Defense and refused to bomb ISIS in Syria because it made no sense. They wanted to bomb ISIS in Iraq to drive them out of Iraq into Syria. Instead the military genius of Valerie Jarrett and her cohorts demanded that ISIS be bombed everywhere because it sounded cool. When Chuck Hagel pressed the point with the White House he sowed the seeds of his own departure. Also, Hagel was not big on releasing enemy combatants from Guantanamo and having them return to the battlefield killing Americans. A position that runs counter to Obama’s campaign promises. Of course, the consequences will be that Barack Obama will probably announce, in January or February, that 10,000 to 20,000 ground troops will be introduced into Iraq for a short-term engagement against ISIL and then half will rotate out, leaving about 10,000 troops as should have been done two years ago. Bottom line … Already the corrupt Obamacons are leaking that Chuck Hagel "wasn't quite up to the job." Which is maybe overstating the obvious because Hagel appeared to be coping with the inter-service rivalries, the entrenched DOD bureaucracy, and the industrial-military complex with its lobbyists and paid-for politicians. This looks like a Valerie Jarrett and Susan Rice intervention in military matters ... especially in the face of an incoherent foreign policy on Syria. What Hagel did not apparently do was to stay on Obama's message that he was a superb Commander-in-Chief and that he was taking appropriate actions. When all is considered, Chuck Hagel was blessed to leave the Administration before the rats leave the ship and the ship founders. Obama reminds me of Nixon who praised Haldeman and Erlichman effusively and then fired them. It is a shame when you cannot trust the President of the United States or his nominees to uphold, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States or to keep America or Americans safe from aggression, both foreign and domestic. -- steve  | |
CAN DARREN WILSON TRUST THE PROGRESSIVE MAINSTREAM MEDIA FOR AN UNBIASED INTERVIEW? Posted: 24 Nov 2014 06:54 PM PST Update: ABC's George Stephanopoulos first-in-line for Darren Wilson interview!
If progressive media reports are to be believed, Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson and his advisors may have been speaking with television personalities who are eager to conduct the first interview with the officer. According to CNN, Officer Wilson has been conducting secret, off-the-record meetings with such anchors as “Matt Lauer of NBC, George Stephanopoulos of ABC, Scott Pelley of CBS, and Anderson Cooper and Don Lemon of CNN.” The CNN report also suggested that other anchors, perhaps at Fox, may have been involved. My question, why would a straight-up police officer trust his first media interview with a progressive mainstream media anchor that has repeatedly supported those who promoted the idea of Michael Brown’s innocence and police malfeasance? Or anyone who gave substantial coverage to the race-baiter Al Sharpton? Most of the major networks pay for these interviews by providing luxe accommodations and licensing photos and other material from the interview subject. Bottom line … It may very well be in Officer Wilson’s best interest to wait until any furor over the decision of the Ferguson Grand Jury plays out and that the subject matter of the interview does not play into a civil case or a federal civil rights prosecution for political purposes. Other than that, I would hope that Wilson and his advisors are smart enough to select a straight-up anchor like Fox’s Bret Baier or Greta van Susteren rather than a progressive socialist democrat turned journalist like Stephanopoulos, a committed progressive ideologue like Scott Pelley, or a progressive glory hound like Matt Lauer or Anderson Cooper. -- steve  | |
WHO WILL HOLD THE POLITICIANS ACCOUNTABLE FOR POLITICAL WASTE, FRAUD, AND ABUSE? Posted: 23 Nov 2014 09:43 PM PST I was, once again, angry at our nation’s politicians – both parties, and at all levels: local, state, and federal – who speak about raising taxes and never about the government waste, fraud, and abuse that occurs when repairing and replacing our nation’s decaying infrastructure. Look at how the story is being spun by the mainstream media, typified by these excerpts from the televised news magazine 60 Minutes [my comments in blue italic] …
Bottom line … There are plenty of good-paying jobs on repairing, replacing, or building out infrastructure. Unfortunately, it requires political leadership and a demonstrable benefit for the public – not like the multi-billion dollar crazy train in California that is a boon to special interests and the unions, but a boondoggle to anyone expecting cost-effective transportation between two points of real interest. We can no longer tolerate corrupt politicians, corrupt unions, and the corrupt special interests who are plundering our communal treasury as if it were a piggy bank to purchase political influence. I say we reduce the size of government, increase transparency and accountability, and control waste, fraud, and abuse – oh wait! – isn’t that what every succeeding political generation tells us? It is time to take action. Forget the corrupt political parties and vote for the person – preferably not a professional politician who has grown rich sucking on the public teat – but a businessman who will serve for one or two terms and then return to his life. As for those who tell you that we need long terms to retain expertise, might I remind you that the only expertise they have is staying in office by plundering the public’s funds. -- steve |
