|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 7, 2020 19:41:13 GMT -6
Nancy Pelosi attacks the President, while our troops are being attacked: www.breitbart.com/national-security/2020/01/07/nancy-pelosi-blames-trump-for-iran-attack-as-u-s-troops-under-fire/Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) blamed President Donald Trump for Iranian missile launches against U.S. bases in Iraq on Tuesday evening, and suggested that America was unwilling and unable to fight back. In a tweet posted Tuesday evening, just minutes after news reports that over a dozen missiles fired from Iran had hit bases where U.S. troops are housed, and before military officials had assessed the battle damage: Pelosi accused the Trump administration of “needless provocations” and declared that America “cannot afford war” with Iran:
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 7, 2020 21:01:07 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Jan 8, 2020 6:40:36 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/disaster-dems-consider-changes-to-ny-bail-reform-just-one-week-after-implementationDISASTER: Dems Consider Changes To NY ‘Bail Reform’ Just One Week After Implementation After an onslaught of bad press over the disastrous first week of Democrat-implemented “bail reform” in New York, Democrats are considering changes to the legislation. “Democrats are opening the door to changes on New York’s bail reform law as the legislative session begins this week,” a News 10 NBC report outlined on Tuesday. Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo “says he will consider adding hate crimes to the list of offenses for which judges can set bail.” The blue state’s criminal justice reform package has come under fire from even liberals, as noted by The Daily Wire. Bail reform, which was reportedly implemented early in New York City by Mayor Bill de Blasio, led to a woman charged with an anti-Semitic attack to be arrested and released three times in five days. Harris “was nabbed for allegedly slugging three Jewish women and yelling ‘F-U, Jews!’ but let go Saturday with no bail, despite an open assault case. Last month, she got no jail for a felony in another incident,” The New York Post reported. “Nabbed again Sunday in a new attack, she was once more freed, on no bail, Monday. In another case, a man charged with second degree manslaughter in connection to the murder of a 29-year-old Albany woman was released from jail after the judge overseeing the case reportedly claimed Democrats’ new “bail reform” legislation no longer allows her to keep the charged party in custody, The Daily Wire reported Thursday. “Happening now: Paul Barbaritano is being released on his own recognizance,” Spectrum News Albany’s Jaclyn Cangro reported. “He is charged with 2nd degree manslaughter in connection to the death of Nicole Jennings.” “Barbaritano was being held at the Albany County Jail. The DA’s Office argued he made admissions that he ’caused’ Jennings’ death,” Cangro noted. The judge “repeatedly said that’s no longer the burden for bail,” the reporter added. “A city man charged with second-degree manslaughter in the strangulation-and-stabbing death of a woman was released from jail Thursday under the new bail reforms that eliminated bail for that charge and most other felonies,” the Times-Union echoed. Last Tuesday, a man with a conviction for shooting an upstate New York police officer under his belt was released without bail for new drug offenses, Rochester First reported: Tyquan Rivera, the man convicted of shooting Rochester Police officer Anthony DiPonzio in 2009, was released from custody without bail Thursday. Rivera is facing two new counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree after being arrested in December. According to court paperwork, Rivera sold Fentanyl in 60 envelopes to two undercover officers in two separate sales. Assistant District Attorney Matt Schwartz said Rivera’s release is the result of the newly-enacted bail reform laws in New York state “Law enforcement officials and Republicans have spent months raising red flags on the changes, but their criticism caught more fervor in the last week as courts across the state have released people who would have remained behind bars under the old rules,” News 10 NBC highlighted. “We are done laying down and taking it,” warned New York Republican Chairman Nick Langworthy. “We are going to fight back and fight back with authority as Republicans.” Hmmm... The one woman is released after assaulting three people. Then she promptly goes out and assaults someone else. Then once released again guess what? Good job, NY.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 9, 2020 18:12:38 GMT -6
www.judicialwatch.org/corruption-chronicles/in-2019-over-90-of-illegal-aliens-arrested-in-u-s-had-criminal-convictions-pending-charges/In 2019 Over 90% of Illegal Aliens Arrested in U.S. Had Criminal Convictions, Pending Charges
More than 90% of illegal immigrants arrested by federal agents in the United States last year had criminal convictions or pending criminal charges, including 56,000 assaults and thousands of sex crimes, robberies, homicides and kidnappings. Many had “extensive criminal histories with multiple convictions,” according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) year-end report. The 123,128 illegal aliens arrested by the agency’s Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) in 2019 had 489,063 criminal convictions and pending charges, representing an average of four crimes per alien, highlighting the “recidivist nature” of the arrested aliens, the agency writes, noting that sanctuary cities nationwide greatly impeded its public safety efforts. The Dallas ICE field office, which covers north Texas and Oklahoma, led the way with 16,900 arrests in fiscal year 2019. The overwhelming majority,12,578, were convicted of crimes and 3,499 had pending criminal charges. The Atlanta field office, which is responsible for enforcing immigration law in Georgia as well as South and North Carolina, ranked second with 13,247 arrests, 8,009 of them convicted for state crimes. Another 3,943 illegal aliens had pending criminal charges. Atlanta field office leadership has repeatedly blasted local law enforcement officials within its jurisdiction for releasing droves of illegal immigrant criminals back onto the streets after being jailed for serious state crimes, accusing the sanctuary jurisdictions of creating a “serious public safety threat.” In North Carolina alone, hundreds of violent criminals were released by local authorities last year to honor measures that offer illegal immigrants sanctuary. Among them were illegal aliens charged with serious violations such as homicide, kidnapping, arson and sex offenses. Mecklenburg County, the state’s largest, was among the biggest offenders, releasing numerous violent criminals rather than turn them over to federal authorities for removal. Among them was a previously deported Honduran charged with rape and child sex crimes. The perpetrator, 33-year-old Oscar Pacheco-Leonardo, was freed by the county sheriff, who has kept his campaign promise to protect illegal immigrants from the feds. In Buncombe County, North Carolina the elected sheriff recently freed a child sex offender to keep with his county’s sanctuary policy. The Salvadoran national, a registered sex offender charged with four felony counts of statutory sex with an 11-year-old girl, had been in ICE’s radar for years. The Tar Heel State is hardly alone in making ICE’s enforcement duties more difficult by protecting the most violent of illegal immigrants. Police nationwide are contributing to the crisis, refusing to participate in a local-federal partnership known as 287(g) that notifies ICE of jail inmates in the country illegally so they can be deported after serving time for state crimes. Instead, a growing number of law enforcement agencies are releasing the illegal aliens——many with serious convictions such as child sex offenses, rape and murder—rather than turn them over to federal authorities for removal. In California various police departments released 16 illegal immigrants with criminal records during a three-month period, some arrested and released multiple times by the same agency. Offenders include Mexican, Honduran and Salvadoran nationals charged with murder, rape, assault with a deadly weapon, spousal abuse, driving under the influence of alcohol, possession of illegal drugs and other serious crimes. ICE still managed to deport some after scooping them up in targeted operations. Last year ICE removed 5,497 known or suspected gang members and 58 known or suspected terrorists. Just this month, ICE arrested a previously deported illegal immigrant released by local authorities in a fatal hit and run that killed a 35-year-old woman on Christmas eve. The Mexican national, 27-year-old Jorge Flores-Villalba, was arrested and released by Stony Point Town Police in New York. ICE’s New York Field Office Director, Thomas Decker, blasted Stony Point officials in a statement. “Creating laws and policies that prevent cooperation between law enforcement agencies just to promote their political agenda, places the safety of the public in danger,” he said. “Due to the hard work of our officers, we were able to find and arrest this accused criminal, but there are countless others who are released without ICE even knowing, or whom it may take a great amount of resources to find for arrest.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 9, 2020 18:40:27 GMT -6
Ivanka Trump did the key not address at the recent CES & right on cue, the left were outraged: www.engadget.com/2020/01/08/ivanka-trump-ces-keynote-women-tech/Ivanka Trump disrupted the conversation about women in tech While saying nothing about them. Decades of CES speaker pages and Las Vegas ballroom stages have been populated by men, some years exclusively. In 2018, CES ended up with an all-male keynote roster for the second year in a row, and the CTA faced so much backlash from tech leaders and equality groups that organizers added two female panelists at the last minute. But at CES 2020, the Consumer Technology Association is catching shade for inviting a woman to deliver a keynote address. A particular woman: Ivanka Trump, advisor to President Donald Trump. The criticism is grounded in surprise and confusion -- after all, Trump doesn't have direct ties to the technology industry. If her keynote session is an attempt to include female tech leaders in CES, organizers have missed the mark. Trump was interviewed on stage by CTA chief Gary Shapiro yesterday in a talk titled, "The Path to the Future of Work." They discussed job creation, apprenticeship programs and skills training in the United States, tying it all back to Trump's role as co-chair of the National Council for the American Worker. Of course, Trump's position as a policy influencer makes the keynote feel distinctly political, not just ill-suited. It's presidential election season in the United States, following half a decade of exponentially divisive, at times violent, disagreements between conservative and liberal voters. Political tensions are higher than they've been in a decade, and any mention of "Trump" -- Ivanka, Donald or otherwise -- can spark heated emotions in an instant. In this climate, the CTA's invitation to Trump feels like a pointed message. Many business leaders in the technology sector blasted the CTA's decision to host Trump long before she took the stage. On the tweet announcing her appearance this year, responses ranged from surprise to full-on trip cancelations. Female tech workers were particularly vocal, offering suggestions of other, ostensibly more qualified, women who submitted panels and speaker proposals, but were rejected by the CTA. One of these women was Heather Delaney, a startup mentor and founder of consulting agency Gallium Ventures. "It's incredibly disappointing CES hasn't taken keynote speakers from its exceptional pool of women in tech." - Heather Delaney "I simply don't understand why CES has made the decision to have Ivanka speaking at the show instead of the many women who have built their careers in the technology industry," Delaney told Engadget. "It's incredibly disappointing CES hasn't taken keynote speakers from its exceptional pool of women in tech, who fully understand the future of work within the industry." Delaney pitched a panel for CES 2020 highlighting female founders and technology companies building products for women. The CTA rejected it and didn't provide a reason. "Innovation is a net job producer. Jobs will be created in industries that don't even exist today because of innovation," Trump said during her keynote. Ivanka Trump at CES 2020 "There were many overly qualified women working in technology who also had their talks turned down," Delaney said. "Although, yes, Ivanka is a woman, it was disappointing to hear CES had decided to bring in a female speaker who has limited links to the industry compared to many of those wanting to discuss upcoming developments in software, AI, wearable technology and even sex tech." "There were many overly qualified women working in technology who also had their talks turned down." - Heather Delaney Sex tech is intrinsically tied to the fight for gender equality at CES. At last year's show, the Osé -- a female-focused, hands-free orgasm device from startup Lora DiCarlo -- won a CES Innovation Award. And then the CTA revoked that honor, arguing the Osé was disqualified from consideration because it was "immoral, obscene, indecent, profane or not in keeping with CTA's image." Meanwhile, the CTA allowed a VR porn exhibit from Naughty America to set up in one of CES' main halls, and the show has historically featured sex robots including RealDoll and Solana. The main difference between Osé and these items, Lora DiCarlo founder Lora Haddock argued, was their intended market. Gadgets designed for women's health and pleasure were categorized as "immoral," while those for men were acceptable. Haddock's disagreement with the CTA went viral and kickstarted a public debate about gender bias in the technology industry. Eventually, the CTA reversed its decision and re-granted the Osé its Innovation Award. "CTA did not handle this award properly," read a statement from the organization. "This prompted some important conversations internally and with external advisors, and we look forward to taking these learnings to continue to improve the show." The CTA opened up CES 2020 to sex tech companies on a one-year trial basis. This move gave tech and business consultant Cindy Gallop hope that CES would accept her talk, "Why Sex Tech Is the Next Trillion Dollar Category in Tech." The CTA turned her down. For years, CES has rejected speaker pitches from women on the basis that their talks didn't focus enough on tech, their credentials in the industry were too thin, they didn't meet the rigid requirements set by the CTA. Gallop's name has been brought up multiple times as a clearly missed opportunity for a qualified, female tech leader to speak at the show. "CES' response to criticism of their lack of female keynote speakers historically has been that their standards are extremely rigorous, that they simply haven't been able to find women who deliver the same level of technological seniority, experience, credibility and gravitas as the many white men who populate their speaking stage," Gallop said. "And that they have no intention of putting any woman on stage who does not live up to their extremely high standards regarding a demonstrably, highly impressive track record in tech and business." And then the CTA invited Ivanka Trump, a person with no direct ties to the industry, to CES to talk about jobs, a category that's only tangentially aligned with the show's goals. Around halfway through a circuitous response to a question about internship programs, Trump said, "I view most manufacturing as high-tech manufacturing these days. In America, manufacturing is high-tech manufacturing. Actually if you talk to a lot of manufacturers, they get very upset with Silicon Valley because they say, 'Hey, we're the original high tech.'" For many female tech leaders who have tried for years to earn a speaking spot at CES, it all feels like hypocrisy. Here's the CTA's full statement defending its decision to invite Trump to CES: CES welcomes the world to Las Vegas to celebrate innovation. Policy discussions are a critical part of CES, and we will host almost 200 policymakers from around the world. CTA invites officials from every White House – both Republicans and Democrats – to participate in and speak at CES. The future of work is a critical policy topic for the technology sector. Life-changing tech innovations – from artificial intelligence to drones to self-driving vehicles – will create countless new jobs, and our industry has a responsibility to prepare American workers for the jobs of the future. Advisor to the President Ivanka Trump leads the White House efforts on job creation and economic growth through workforce development, skills training and entrepreneurship – and she will address them directly at CES 2020. She successfully spearheaded the effort to get major companies to commit to reskilling American workers for new jobs. For many women in the tech sector, this justification isn't enough. Cindy Chin is the founder of Women on the Block, a group that advocates for women in technology. She told The Guardian last week, "It would be better if the background of the keynote speaker actually fit the industry it is serving and inspirational, rather than talking heads and political." Most years, the CTA comes under fire for excluding women from its keynote lineups at CES. This year, CES is hosting 15 keynote speakers, and five are women. However, the decision to invite Trump to the show has ensured the conversation focuses on just one. ............................................................... www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/jan/07/ivanka-trump-ces-technology-las-vegas'Extreme privilege': Ivanka Trump faces backlash over keynote speech at CES Decision to have president’s daughter deliver keynote invited scathing criticism, especially from women in the tech industry Ivanka Trump’s appearance at a major technology conference in Las Vegas has been met with a backlash from industry figures, who denounced her “privilege” and lack of tech qualifications. Trump spoke in a keynote session on Tuesday afternoon at CES, a consumer electronics trade show, on “the path to the future of work”. In an interview with Gary Shapiro, the CEO of the Consumer Technology Association (CTA), which organizes the show, she addressed technology’s role in creating and enabling the workforce of the future. The annual CES gathering has long taken criticism over diversity issues. In recent years the CTA has invited more women to speak and sought to curb some of the show’s more sexist aspects, such as scantily clad “booth babes” hired to draw the attention of the mostly male attendees. In 2017, there were zero female keynote speakers scheduled for the second year in a row. CES faced intense criticism in 2019 for revoking an innovation award given to a sex toy company led by a female founder, who criticized the decision as sexist. The conference ultimately reinstated the award and apologized. It also instated new rules in 2020 to improve the environment at CES, including enforcing a dress code banning booth personnel from wearing clothing that is “sexually revealing or that could be interpreted as undergarments”, regardless of gender. But for critics and activists who have long pushed for broader recognition of the less-heralded women, the inclusion of Donald Trump’s daughter, who is also a White House adviser, sends exactly the wrong message. “Ivanka is not a woman in tech,” tweeted Brianna Wu, a video game developer who is running for Congress in Massachusetts. “She’s not a CEO. She has no background. It’s a lazy attempt to emulate diversity but like all emulation it’s not quite the real thing.” The Women Who Tech group on Facebook also expressed displeasure. The investor Elisabeth Fullerton wrote: “This is an insult to women in technology. We did hard times in university, engineering, math, and applied sciences. This is what extreme privilege and entitlement get you. It’s not what you know it’s who you know I guess”. The conference organizers have defended inviting the first daughter, saying she leads the White House’s efforts on job creation and economic growth through workforce development, skills training and entrepreneurship. 'What an insult': CES names Ivanka Trump as keynote speaker Read more In a statement issued by the White House on Tuesday, Trump said she was pleased to see CES discussing the critical issue of workforce development. “Our current and future workforce rely on the efforts of industry, academia and government to fill our workforce needs and I’m excited to discuss how the Trump administration is championing these shared goals.” During the discussion, Trump said a White House council that she co-leads will launch a nationwide advertising campaign to encourage all pathways to jobs, including apprenticeships, and not just a college degree. “We need to raise awareness about many options that exist,” she told the audience. Trump also touted her father’s jobs record and claimed that with 7m job vacancies “every American who wants to work can secure employment”. She noted the positive effects of technological innovation on the workforce. “I believe innovation is a net job-producer,” she said. “Innovation will allow for more inclusive growth.” Despite the first daughter’s attempts to strike a positive note, the appearance left women in the tech industry dispirited. The tech analyst Carolina Milanesi wrote in an op-ed published in Forbes: “The reason for my upset is rooted in the fact that there are many more women who are in tech and are entrepreneurs who could run circles around Trump on how technology will impact the future of work.” The hashtag #BoycottCES was seen picking up on Twitter following the speech.
|
|
|
Post by wishboned on Jan 10, 2020 6:27:06 GMT -6
I went to an info security conference in November. Magic Johnson was the keynote speaker. His talk had nothing to do about info security, it was about putting in the work to be the best. Conferences like big names to draw crowds.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 10, 2020 20:44:55 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/party-of-five-relaunch-fueled-by-trump-derangement-syndromeParty Of Five’ Relaunch Fueled By Trump Derangement Syndrome The minds behind the Fox series “Party of Five” didn’t want to revive the show for the usual reasons. Nostalgia sells, of course, and new versions of “Will & Grace,” “Veronica Mars,” and “Roseanne” scored (again) with audiences. Amy Lippman, who created the ’90s hit “Party of Five” with Chris Keyser, told the TV’s Top 5 Podcast that she needed a better reason to bring the story back to primetime TV. The nation’s immigration crisis, and a hearty case of Trump Derangement, gave her team all the rocket fuel required. “Party of Five,” debuting Jan. 8 on Freeform, doesn’t feature five children whose parents die in a car crash as in the original version. This family’s children are separated from their illegal immigrant parents when ICE agents deport them back to Mexico. Lippman broke down the show’s creative process, vowing that the series wouldn’t be as political as it sounds. Her own words clashed with that description throughout the interview. She said the genesis of the project began before President Trump’s shocking 2016 election day victory. In the early stages, the story morphed from the car accident leaving the kids without parents to an immigration-based drama. That gave the reboot a fresh coat of creative paint. Still, she worried the show wouldn’t get on-air quickly enough to mirror reality. “We kept saying, ‘lets get going on it because the situation may resolve itself in some way that means we’re sort of writing after the fact, we’re behind on it.’ And we wanted to be relevant,” Lippman says. “I don’t think any of us anticipated we would find ourselves debuting the show right in the middle of this crisis,” she says of the current immigration battle. Lippman concedes the show has a strong viewpoint on illegal immigration, but reveals the president won’t be part of the conversation, at least not directly. That, she confirms, was by design. “We don’t mention the president or the administration throughout the [first] season,” she says, a measure taken as an ideological olive branch. “We’d like to reach everyone with the show because we think it has something to say regardless of where you are on the political spectrum.” “Obviously we’re on the side of families, and families staying together seems very important to us,” she says. Does that imply Americans who support border enforcement are anti-family? Lippman also described the diversity of her writer’s room, including one colleague who made a dramatic change following Trump’s victory. “After the election, one of the writers in our room went out and became a dual citizen of the country that her parents were born in,” Lippman explains. “I said, ‘why?’ I don’t understand. You’re an American. You have a passport. You’re not even a naturalized citizen. You were born in this country. Why would you do that?” “She said, ‘I don’t feel safe.’” Lippman continues the writer’s thoughts on the dual citizenship decision. “I feel like even though I’m completely here legitimately, in this climate it feels like it could all go away. Maybe people would begin to investigate how did my parents come over, or my grandparents? And that that could all unravel for me,” Lippman recalls. “And that feeling of insecurity, and a feeling that prejudice and bias against you, is not my experience,” Lippman says. “I couldn’t have done the show this season without being surrounded by people who had that perspective.” Early “Party of Five” reviews strain to describe the show as apolitical. That’s the line peddled by the liberal site Vulture.com. Until it doesn’t. Make no mistake: All of this is political. But Party of Five humanizes the political and makes the audience see the deeply personal impact that the decisions made by the administration have on the lives of young people who are trying their best to do the right thing every day. The Washington Post quotes lines from the first few episodes as preachy as a Michael Moore screed. Here’s what an ICE official says to the parents as they round them up for deportation. “You think the rules don’t apply to you? Things have changed, Mr. Acosta. I need to see your papers,” the man “growls.” Naturally, this critic frames the story as a welcome plea for open borders. The show gives “American viewers a solid, up close experience of how easily U.S. immigration policy (and its blunt enforcement) can tear apart a good, law-abiding family.” They broke the law by entering the country illegally, a point the critic clearly ignores. The WaPo critic also contends the show isn’t “overly political” … and then quotes the family saying the immigration officials “don’t care who we are.” Nothing political or incendiary there. Never mind that these officials are just doing their jobs and enforcing the law. Lippman’s podcast interview eventually gives away the game. She admits to wanting the show’s audience to care so deeply for the family in question that they reconsider their views on immigration “If you embrace the family, maybe that’s a path to understanding the political situation from a different perspective,” she says.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 10, 2020 20:46:31 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/cnn-racism-to-blame-for-meghan-markle-splitCNN: Racism To Blame For Meghan Markle Split The big narrative following Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s split from the Royal Family is that Britain’s racism played a role in their decision. Over at CNN, Lisa Respers France argued that Britons have been sending a message to Meghan Markle since the day she announced her engagement to Harry: “You aren’t one of us, and you aren’t welcome.” “Meghan, a biracial, divorced American actress, was far from what many envisioned as a fairy-tale match for a beloved member of the British royal family,” wrote Respers France. “While many in the UK welcomed her, the British tabloid media and a large swath of the Twitterverse were not kind. It became so bad that Kensington Palace released a statement scolding the press about its treatment of her.” Now that Meghan Markle has announced her exit, Respers France claimed that Britons have changed their questions about her from “Why are you here?” to “Where do you think you’re going.” Kehinde Andrews, an associate professor of sociology at Birmingham City University, said that Markle’s exit was partially inevitable. “It was never going to end well,” said Andrews. “The British royal family is one of the premiere symbols of whiteness in the world. She was never going to be fully accepted.” Likewise, Nsenga Burton, a professor at Emory University in Atlanta, said that criticism of Meghan Markle’s exit — which has now taken on a life of its own under the hashtag #Megxit — “reinforces the stereotype of black women being destructive, divisive, and unsatisfied.” “People are cool with black women as long as we go along to get along,” she said. “As soon as we start standing up for ourselves and saying, ‘This is not working for me,’ we become the problem.” Natasha Eubanks, founder and editor of TheYBF.com, echoed Burton’s sentiment, going further to argue that haters of Markle’s desire for “self-sovereignty” show tinges of sexism. “Having the audacity – because that’s what it is – to exhibit self-sovereignty has always been a privilege reserved for men, especially white men,” she told CNN. “Yet here is Meghan exhibiting this ‘audacity’ and it’s being … pushed forward by a white man who happens to be her husband.” The sight of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle splitting off especially “triggers people,” according to Eubank, because it places “a white Prince of royal blood and a black American woman commoner” on equal footing. “That sight doesn’t sit well with everyone due to how they’ve been conditioned to view women and people of color, whether they realize it or not,” she asserted. In response to the arguments, “Good Morning Britain” co-host Piers Morgan, who previously hosted “Piers Morgan Live” on CNN, roasted his former employer for using the British Royal Family drama for an escapade of “race-baiting,” arguing that Meghan Markle invited most of the bad press she received. “Disgraceful race-baiting by @cnn – this is such a lie,” Morgan said on Twitter. “Meghan’s had a LOT of very good press & some bad press when she has (mostly) deserved it. But I haven’t seen anything racist published or broadcast about her in the British media. It’s a lie.” Piers Morgan then shared images of British tabloids fawning over Meghan Markle since the beginning. “‘Nasty racist British press had it in for Meghan from the start,'” Morgan quipped.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 10, 2020 20:47:37 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/saved-by-the-bell-reboot-will-feature-trans-teen-in-lead-role-most-popular-girl-at-bayside‘Saved By The Bell’ Reboot Will Feature Trans Teen In Lead Role: ‘Most Popular Girl At Bayside’ As an apparent dig against Mario Lopez, the “Saved by the Bell” reboot will be featuring a transgender teen actor in the lead role. According to The Hollywood Reporter (THR), transgender actor Josie Totah – a biological male presenting himself as a woman – has been cast star alongside Mario Lopez and Elizabeth Berkley in the upcoming reboot to the beloved early-’90s sitcom. “Totah will star as Lexi, a beautiful, sharp-tongued cheerleader and the most popular girl at Bayside High who is both admired and feared by her fellow students,” reports THR. “The series is expected to launch this year on NBCUniversal’s forthcoming streamer Peacock. Totah will also be credited as a producer on the show.” The show will also delve into other social justice themes by featuring a plotline in which the character Zack Morris closes “too many low-income high schools” while serving as Governor of California. More from THR: Original stars Mario Lopez and Elizabeth Berkley will reprise their roles as A.C. Slater and Jessie Spano, respectively, in the single-camera comedy that explores what happens when California Gov. Zack Morris (Mark Gosselaar’s role) gets into hot water for closing too many low-income high schools and proposes the affected students be sent to the highest-performing schools in the state — including Bayside High. The new Saved by the Bell was picked up straight to series in September. The comedy hails from writer Wigfield and is produced by Universal Television, where the 30 Rock grad and Great News creator recently renewed her overall deal. Wigfield will serve as showrunner and executive produce alongside original series creator Peter Engel and Franco Bario (Great News). Lopez and Berkley will also produce. Totah came out as transgender in 2018 while starring on the show “Champions.” In an essay for TIME, Totah expressed fear that they would be rejected by their peers. “In the past, I’ve halfway corrected people by telling them I identify as LGBTQ,” the teen wrote at the time. “I wasn’t ready to be more specific. I was afraid I wouldn’t be accepted, that I would be embarrassed, that the fans who knew me from the time when I acted in a Disney show would be confused. But I realized over the past few years that hiding my true self is not healthy. I know now, more than ever, that I’m finally ready to take this step toward becoming myself. I’m ready to be free. So, listen up y’all: You can jump on or jump off. Either way this is where I’m heading.” Actor Mario Lopez faced a heated cancellation campaign last year when he told conservative commentator Candace Owens that it was “dangerous” for parents to allow children as young as three to choose their gender. “My God, if you’re three years old, I just think it’s dangerous as a parent to make this determination then,” Lopez said on the show. “It’s sort of alarming and my gosh, I just think about the repercussions later on.” After an intense public backlash and calls for “Access Hollywood” to terminate his employment, Mario Lopez ultimately apologized for offending the LGBTQ community. “The comments I made were ignorant and insensitive, and I now have a deeper understanding of how hurtful they were,” Lopez said. “I have been and always will be an ardent supporter of the LGBTQ community, and I am going to use this opportunity to better educate myself. Moving forward I will be more informed and thoughtful.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 10, 2020 20:53:50 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/10/democrats-nervous-as-profiles-in-corruption-book-looms/Top Democrats are signaling not-so-subtly that they are nervous as a forthcoming book from Peter Schweizer that will expose widespread corruption in the Democrat Party drops in just ten days. The cover of the soon-to-be-published book, Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America’s Progressive Elite, was revealed by Axios’s Mike Allen on Thursday: Exclusive: Peter Schweizer book, "Profiles in Corruption," out Jan. 21 t.co/Rj2r8LwmYd— Mike Allen (@mikeallen) January 9, 2020 The cover features photos of 2020 Democrat presidential frontrunners former Vice President Joe Biden, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), as well as fellow 2020 candidates Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Cory Booker (D-NJ), and former 2020 candidate Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA). Schweizer is a Breitbart News contributing editor and the president of the Government Accountability Institute (GAI). He has written multiple bestselling books exposing corruption in Washington. While little is known publicly about the book thus far, Allen quotes Schweizer as saying he spent a year and a half investigating for it, and that it is “a sweeping, detailed look at how the leading figures of progressivism have leveraged the power of their positions.” Allen reported that the book features chapters on each of them, as well as Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH). It has also been revealed that the book will expose the “Biden Five,” a group of Biden’s family members beyond son Hunter Biden who have siphoned tens of millions of dollars from taxpayers and from guaranteed loans. As Breitbart News reported, the Burisma Ukrainian natural gas company scandal surrounding Hunter Biden that was at the center of the House Democrats’ partisan impeachment push in Congress is just “the tip of the iceberg” when it comes to Biden corruption, and much more will be exposed in this book. Schweizer’s last two books were filled with explosive revelations about career politicians. Clinton Cash, his 2015 book, uncovered significant corruption swirling around the Clinton Foundation and Clinton Global Initiative and how the Clintons orchestrated a massive international pay-for-play political scheme. Secret Empires, his most recent book, uncovered much about Joe and Hunter Biden as well as other career politicians. Much of the revelations about Hunter Biden’s role with Burisma originated in Secret Empires. So it’s no surprise that since these initial revelations about the explosive Profiles in Corruption book out on Jan. 21, the book has rocketed near the top of Amazon’s bestseller list, and interest in it has spiked considerably. What’s new is that a spokesman for another top Democrat–former U.S. president Bill Clinton–is now formally denouncing the book. Angel Urena, the press secretary for former President Clinton, tweeted in response to Allen’s story announcing the book a claim that various investigations spawned in part by Clinton Cash have not been fruitful. In so doing, Urena urges the media and political class to not “aid” Schweizer in exposing the corruption of Biden, Harris, Warren, Sanders, Booker, Klobuchar, Garcetti, and other Democrats, but instead to just ignore it all: After a two year investigation, Trump’s DOJ has exonerated the @clintonfdn. Reminder that said investigation was based at least partly on allegations in Clinton Cash. Schweizer is fixing to lie again, question is will we – again – aid him in doing so. t.co/zO35UYi4cC— Angel Ureña (@angelurena) January 10, 2020 Urena earlier retweeted this from the Washington Post: Justice Dept. winds down Clinton-related inquiry once championed by Trump. It found nothing of consequence. t.co/iTchgpn046— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) January 10, 2020 The Washington Post story that Urena has been pushing announced that U.S. Attorney John Huber’s investigation into the Clinton Foundation has informally concluded. But the same Washington Post story says that Huber never interviewed many people he should have, and was more of a “nebulous” “reviewer” than an “investigator.” The Post wrote: Huber’s tasking was nebulous from the start. Some people involved in the matters he was said to be reviewing expressed surprise that they were not contacted by the U.S. attorney, and wondered privately what he was doing. Some in the Justice Department considered him more reviewer than investigator. He would get involved, people familiar with the matter said, only if other cases were not being handled properly. Urena’s insinuation that because Huber’s lackluster-at-best review of the matter that really was not much of an investigation after all per the same Washington Post story he’s pushing to try to claim his bosses the Clintons are in the clear means that Clinton Cash did not somehow live up to its hype is just not true. In fact, Clinton Foundation donations plummeted after Hillary Rodham Clinton–Bill’s wife and the 2016 Democrat presidential nominee–lost the election to President Donald Trump four years ago. What’s more, many independent investigations like stories in the New York Times by Jo Becker have upheld the key findings in the book surrounding the Clinton Foundation and the Uranium One scandal. Even the George Soros-funded Center for Responsive Politics admits in a news story that the Clinton Foundation’s backers seem to have lost interest in the organization in the wake of Clinton’s 2016 election loss. In November 2019, OpenSecrets News–the Center for Responsive Politics’ publication arm–published a piece detailing the sharp drop in donations to the Clinton Foundation under the headline: “Clinton Foundation cash flow continues to drop years after 2016 election loss.” The organization wrote: The Clinton Foundation’s $30.7 million revenue last year is less than half the $62.9 million it raised in 2016 as Clinton was at the height of her presidential campaign. Each of the two years since Clinton’s loss in the 2016 election has seen the organization’s revenue drop to record lows, raising less than any fiscal year in more than a decade — a sharp contrast to the $249 million raised during Clinton’s first year as secretary of state. What Urena’s tweets casting doubt on Schweizer’s forthcoming book more accurately demonstrate, however, is that the official channels of the highest levels of the Democrat Party–Urena is former President Bill Clinton’s press secretary–are worried about this Profiles in Corruption book and what it may reveal about top Democrats. And they’re so worried they’re already, ten days before its public release, publicly rebutting the book before they even see what’s in it.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 11, 2020 0:03:15 GMT -6
In case you were ever curious: www.businessinsider.com/goop-candle-this-smells-like-my-vagina-is-sold-out-2020-1According to the Goop website, the candle started as a joke between Paltrow and professional perfumer Douglas Little and has notes of geranium, citrusy bergamot, and cedar. The website says the candle is perfect for putting “fantasy, seduction, and a sophisticated warmth” into the atmosphere. Known for its vagina-themed antics, like vaginal jade eggs doctors strongly recommend against, the company has received criticism in the past for making false health claims about its products and spreading general medical misinformation. In fact, Twitter users were outraged earlier this week when Netflix announced the company and Paltrow will be producing an upcoming “holistic wellness” series called “The Goop Lab,” which will premiere January 24.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 11, 2020 0:10:49 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/sports/2020/01/10/megan-rapinoe-blasts-iocs-no-protest-policy-we-will-not-be-silenced/U.S. Women’s soccer star and outspoken Trump critic Megan Rapinoe, slammed the International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) decision to warning against political protests at the 2020 Olympics in Tokyo. In an Instagram posted on Friday, Rapinoe said that she and her fellow athlete protesters “will not be silenced.” “So much being done about the protests,” Rapinoe wrote. “So little being done about what we are protesting about. “We will not be silenced.” Rapinoe’s post comes after IOC President Thomas Bach made it clear that all participants and support staff at the games are banned from protesting on the field of play, at the opening or closing ceremonies, at the Olympic Village, or on the medal podium. “If this political neutrality is not respected, then the Olympic Games will divide, and not unite, the world,” Bach explained. The IOC is specifically outlawing kneeling, hand gestures, and signs, of a political nature. Much of the impetus for the new rule is due to a pair of incidents at the Pan American Games in Lima, Peru. In which, fencer Race Imboden knelt on the medal podium and hammer thrower Gwen Berry raised a fist. Both athletes were handed 12 month probationary punishments. Rapinoe is no stranger to protests on the field of play. She knelt during the playing of the national anthem before her National Women’s Soccer League games, and has a long track record of staunch opposition to President Trump.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Jan 13, 2020 9:32:34 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/cnn-racism-to-blame-for-meghan-markle-splitCNN: Racism To Blame For Meghan Markle Split The big narrative following Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s split from the Royal Family is that Britain’s racism played a role in their decision. Over at CNN, Lisa Respers France argued that Britons have been sending a message to Meghan Markle since the day she announced her engagement to Harry: “You aren’t one of us, and you aren’t welcome.” “Meghan, a biracial, divorced American actress, was far from what many envisioned as a fairy-tale match for a beloved member of the British royal family,” wrote Respers France. “While many in the UK welcomed her, the British tabloid media and a large swath of the Twitterverse were not kind. It became so bad that Kensington Palace released a statement scolding the press about its treatment of her.” Now that Meghan Markle has announced her exit, Respers France claimed that Britons have changed their questions about her from “Why are you here?” to “Where do you think you’re going.” Kehinde Andrews, an associate professor of sociology at Birmingham City University, said that Markle’s exit was partially inevitable. “It was never going to end well,” said Andrews. “The British royal family is one of the premiere symbols of whiteness in the world. She was never going to be fully accepted.” Likewise, Nsenga Burton, a professor at Emory University in Atlanta, said that criticism of Meghan Markle’s exit — which has now taken on a life of its own under the hashtag #Megxit — “reinforces the stereotype of black women being destructive, divisive, and unsatisfied.” “People are cool with black women as long as we go along to get along,” she said. “As soon as we start standing up for ourselves and saying, ‘This is not working for me,’ we become the problem.” Natasha Eubanks, founder and editor of TheYBF.com, echoed Burton’s sentiment, going further to argue that haters of Markle’s desire for “self-sovereignty” show tinges of sexism. “Having the audacity – because that’s what it is – to exhibit self-sovereignty has always been a privilege reserved for men, especially white men,” she told CNN. “Yet here is Meghan exhibiting this ‘audacity’ and it’s being … pushed forward by a white man who happens to be her husband.” The sight of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle splitting off especially “triggers people,” according to Eubank, because it places “a white Prince of royal blood and a black American woman commoner” on equal footing. “That sight doesn’t sit well with everyone due to how they’ve been conditioned to view women and people of color, whether they realize it or not,” she asserted. In response to the arguments, “Good Morning Britain” co-host Piers Morgan, who previously hosted “Piers Morgan Live” on CNN, roasted his former employer for using the British Royal Family drama for an escapade of “race-baiting,” arguing that Meghan Markle invited most of the bad press she received. “Disgraceful race-baiting by @cnn – this is such a lie,” Morgan said on Twitter. “Meghan’s had a LOT of very good press & some bad press when she has (mostly) deserved it. But I haven’t seen anything racist published or broadcast about her in the British media. It’s a lie.” Piers Morgan then shared images of British tabloids fawning over Meghan Markle since the beginning. “‘Nasty racist British press had it in for Meghan from the start,'” Morgan quipped. Of course it is. It has nothing to do with her telling a matchmaker/celeb/whatever that she wanted to meet a famous Brith=ish guy. I believe her first choice was a soccer player. She knew him six months before getting engaged. The Brits want a duchess to have babies, make appearances, and stay out of the way. Remember how much they were against Diana? Let alone an American actress with a trashy ass family.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 16, 2020 7:59:51 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/facing-intense-backlash-northam-praises-nra-members-nra-levels-him-in-responseFacing Intense Backlash, Northam Praises NRA Members. NRA Levels Him In Response. Virginia Democrat Governor Ralph Northam praised NRA members for being peaceful during a press conference on Wednesday as he continues to face intense backlash over his extreme anti-freedom agenda, which has included proposals to ban and confiscate firearms from law-abiding citizens. Northam made the remarks as he declared a state of emergency in anticipation of thousands of the thousands of Virginians that are going to be participating in the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) rally next Monday in Richmond, Virginia. “Virginia is always open for citizens of our state to meet with the elected leaders peacefully,” Northam began. “That remains the case this coming Monday. Hundreds of Virginians do this everyday.” “Most recently, earlier this week, the NRA hosted its annual lobby day. Hundreds of Virginians participated, and the day passed without incident. That is what peaceful events look like,” Northam continued. “I thank the NRA for hosting a peaceful event. Now, I call on the Virginia Citizens Defense League and its members to follow the NRA’s example, and make your event a peaceful display too as you have done in the past. Please do not dishonor Virginia or your cause.” The NRA responded to Northam’s remarks in a statement from Jason Ouimet, executive director, NRA Institute for Legislative Action: “If Virginia Gov. Northam sincerely respects the efforts of the NRA and its 5 million members, he can demonstrate that respect by not infringing our rights.” Backlash to Northam’s extreme anti-freedom agenda has surged across the state in recent weeks as the overwhelming majority of the state has declared resistance to Northam. “The grassroots resistance to Virginia Democrats’ extreme anti-Second Amendment agenda has exploded as nearly 90% of the counties in the state have declared themselves to be sanctuary cities in response to the Democrats’ anti-freedom agenda,” The Daily Wire reported in November. “More than 100 cities, towns, and counties have passed resolutions in preparation for Democrats taking over the state who had indicated a desire to confiscate semi-automatic firearms from law-abiding citizens.” Northam launched his all-out assault on Virginians’ Second Amendment rights in a seeming attempt to deflect from his racist scandal from last year in which a yearbook photo of him emerged that showed him either wearing blackface or a KKK hood. The racist photo was discovered after Northam advocated for infanticide, which is the post-birth killing of an infant, during an interview that instantly went viral. Northam made the remarks when he was asked during an interview if he supported legislation that would permit abortion for a woman in labor. He stated: This is why decisions such as this should be made by providers, physicians, and the mothers and fathers that are involved. When we talk about third-trimester abortions, these are done with the consent of the mother, with the consent of physicians, more than one physician by the way, and it’s done in cases where there may be severe deformities, there may be a fetus which is non-viable. So in this particular example, if the mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen, the infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if this is what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physician and the mother. “This is pure infanticide. It’s also an argument for eugenic murder (see his comments about deformities),” Daily Wire Editor in Chief Ben Shapiro responded. “Northam is specifically talking about delivering an infant alive and then asking the mother whether the infant should live or not. This is not an argument about the morning-after pill. It’s not an argument over whether a fetus feels pain. This is a statement that a fully-formed infant, born alive, ought to be murdered if the mother says the infant ought to be murdered. This is pure evil.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 16, 2020 8:14:51 GMT -6
thefederalist.com/2020/01/16/democrats-white-reporters-cant-inform-black-people-about-natural-disasters/Democrats: White Reporters Can’t Inform Black People About Natural Disasters The House Energy and Commerce committee held a hearing Wednesday to consider legislation aimed at promoting racism and sexism in the media industry. Tristan JusticeBy Tristan Justice JANUARY 16, 2020 The House Energy and Commerce committee held a hearing Wednesday to consider legislation aimed at promoting diversity in the media industry, particularly targeting ownership of broadcast stations. The hearing, titled “Lifting Voices: Legislation to Promote Media Marketplace Diversity” centered on three bills and a resolution that seeks to reaffirm the House’s “commitment to media diversity and pledging to work with media entities and diverse stakeholders to develop common ground solutions to eliminate barriers to media diversity.” At the start of the hearing, lawmakers and witnesses were sure to point out the “embarrassingly” low level of minority-owned broadcast television stations across the country, as one witness described, in proportion to their representation in the general population. According to committee research, only around 10 percent of commercial television and commercial FM radio stations were owned by women and minorities in 2015. The three laws discussed in the committee include bills aimed at diverting resources in the federal government to promote minority ownership of media broadcast stations. Lawmakers asked a panel of four witnesses questions about the “Expanding Broadcast Ownership Opportunities Act of 2019,” the “Enhancing Broadcaster DIVERSITY Data Act,” and the “MEDIA Diversity Act of 2020.” The set of laws would provide tax credits to companies being sold to minorities, devote resources to study minority representation in the media, and require the Federal Communications Commission to push financial investment in minority-owned stations. “This is a question of whether people like me get to serve the public,” Santa Clara Law School Professor Catherine Sandoval told lawmakers. In other words, she believes nobody would hire her based on her quality of work, and thus she and other nonwhite people need affirmative action programs outside education, housing, and government contracting. During the hearing, one California congressman asked Sandoval how government pushing affirmative action in media would help constituents who have suffered from natural disasters like widespread fires access critical information. “If we don’t do more to increase minority ownership of broadcasting stations, what would it mean during times of crisis for constituents in districts like mine?” Democratic Rep. Jerry McNerney asked, implicitly assuming that white people and brown people are unable to have compassion for each other and that white reporters cannot give accurate information to nonwhite people about natural disasters. Sandoval went on to tout the importance of broadcast media in times of distress when information needs to be distributed to the public when other services such as the internet go down. The California professor offered the Kinkade fires from last year as a case study of broadcast’s importance where the media was able to convey information that the internet could not. “Broadcasting really showed itself truly to be a lifeline, and broadcasting that addresses the needs of diverse communities is particularly important, especially during those times of crisis,” Sandoval said. Sandoval was unclear however, on exactly how a person of color or a woman on air would be better suited to deliver timely or more accurate information during a crisis than a white person. McNerney followed up, inquiring how increasing the sex and racial diversity of the media marketplace would help those without access to internet at all such as older people and those living in rural areas. “If we don’t do more to increase minority ownership of broadcasting stations, what would it mean for individuals living on that side of the divide?” McNerney asked. Sandoval stressed that it’s important to work “simultaneously” to close the digital divide and further argued that failure to change the media landscape to be more diverse would likely lead to people dying. This time, Sandoval used the fire in Paradise, California as an example of where broadcast is important during disaster. When the fire broke out and began to spread across the city, the county did not activate its broadcast alerts. “This is part of what contributed to 85 people dying in that fire… so I think addressing both of these things is really critical to the safety as well as to the economy of our nation.” While the failure to enact broadcast alerts might have been a contributable cause to the unfortunate loss of life, Sandoval was once again unclear as to how picking media personalities based on race and sex could have saved the fire victims. At another point in the hearing, Democratic Rep. Marc Veasey of Texas said it was only fitting that the committee’s hearing took place this week after the recent release of the Oscar nominations and slammed the academy awards for its nominations being too white. “I think it’s really interesting that we’re having this hearing right now because I think you know as the Oscar nominations were just released and there’s been lots of talk about some of the nominees and the lack of diversity with some of the nominees,” Veasey said. “So maybe we can find the solution to hashtag #OscarsSoWhite.” Clint Odom of the National Urban League concurred. “I think your allusion to the ‘Oscars So White’ problem put your finger on is a potential solution,” Odom said to increasing minorities in the media. Odom argued that while creators and distributors had a great deal of responsibility on their own to promote diversity in media, “there is a critical role for government.” Odom urged lawmakers to act quickly in increasing government-encouraced selection of people based on race and sex in anticipation of legal challenges that could take years.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 16, 2020 10:08:12 GMT -6
Acclaimed screenwriter and director Paul Schrader posted a bizarre Facebook message Wednesday in which he pondered the possibility of giving his screenwriting students an assignment about a plot to kill President Donald Trump. Paul Schrader, who is best known for writing the movies Taxi Driver and Raging Bull, asked his Facebook followers if he or his students would face legal trouble with the assignment.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Jan 16, 2020 18:11:12 GMT -6
I can't seem to find anything about this. Can anyone else?
|
|
bk2x
Quarantined
Posts: 68
|
Post by bk2x on Jan 16, 2020 19:04:23 GMT -6
I can't seem to find anything about this. Can anyone else? Just missing important facts is all. Yea the dude went ape shit in Iraq, but he did not sever the Isis fighter's head.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 17, 2020 7:30:18 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/cnn-freaks-out-after-martha-mcsally-rips-their-reporter-mcsally-fires-back-in-interviewArizona Republican Senator fired back at far-left CNN on Thursday night after the network devoted significant news coverage to McSally calling one of their reporters a “liberal hack” earlier in the day, saying during an interview that she isn’t backing down from the comment and she doubled down on it later in the day. “Manu, you’re a liberal hack, I’m not talking to you,” McSally told CNN’s Manu Raju earlier in the day. During an appearance on Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle” with host Laura Ingraham, McSally responded to CNN’s outrage throughout the day over the comment. “Senator, do you regret what you said?” Ingraham asked. “Uh, no Laura, I do not,” McSally responded. “And I said it again actually as I went, I said, ‘you’re a liberal hack, buddy.’ As you know, these CNN reporters, so there’s many of them around the capital, they are so biased, they are so in cahoots with the Democrats, they so can’t stand the president, and they run around trying to chase Republicans and ask trapping questions.” McSally continued, “I’m a fighter pilot, you know, I called it like it is, and that’s what we see out of the mainstream media, especially CNN, every single day, so obviously I’m going to tell the truth and I did it today and it’s laughable how they’ve responded.” “They should probably be filing FEC reports with the DNC, right?” McSally later added about CNN. “In kind contributions.” Raju lashed out on Twitter as he recalled the event by prefacing what happened by mentioning that McSally was “a Republican facing a difficult election race.” “Sen. Martha McSally, a Republican facing a difficult election race, lashed out when I asked if she would consider new evidence as part of the Senate trial,” Raju wrote. “‘You’re a liberal hack – I’m not talking to you. You’re a liberal hack.’ She then walked into a hearing room.” McSally doubled down on Twitter, writing: “A) you are. B) here’s the video.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 17, 2020 7:37:14 GMT -6
thefederalist.com/2020/01/17/martha-mcsally-is-now-a-dangerous-media-critic-for-calling-a-cnn-reporter-a-liberal-hack/Martha McSally Is Now A Dangerous Media Critic For Calling A CNN Reporter A ‘Liberal Hack’ JANUARY 17, 2020 By Emily Jashinsky Sen. Martha McSally (R-Ariz.) called a CNN reporter a “liberal hack.” This is very bad, I am told. When asked by Manu Raju on Thursday whether the upper chamber should “consider new evidence as part of the impeachment trial,” an exasperated McSally replied, “Manu, you’re a liberal hack. I’m not talking to you.” Footage of the exchange, which occurred in the hallway of a Senate building, was aired on CNN. To be clear, Raju’s question was legitimate and he had every right to ask it. I’m glad he did. The press exists to hold lawmakers like McSally to account, confronting them with the questions they don’t want to answer. That said, McSally’s dig was both hilarious and deeply satisfying. More importantly, it just wasn’t all that outrageous. As far as I can tell, her major crime was daring to insult a reporter who happens to be well-liked by his peers. If you think Republican lawmakers get a fair shake from the Washington press corps, you’re probably hopelessly delusional. If you can at least accept the premise they do not, as most fair-minded people should be able to do, we can agree McSally is entitled to a moment of frustration. While Beltway journalists rushed to uphold his credibility (and he seems like a nice enough guy!), Raju’s record of fairness isn’t exactly sterling. Consider the examples here and here and here and especially here. That isn’t even to address the problems with his network, which I could not find a way to condense into a single sentence. All of this is to say the outpouring of criticism for McSally, offered eagerly by the coterie of Very Serious journalists on Twitter, has been predictably obtuse and disproportionate. It was as if every member of the mainstream media felt he had a personal duty to defend the press against the notoriously dangerous Martha McSally. Erik Wemple called the incident “chilling.” A verbal attack that is 1. False and 2. Unwarranted. Totally fair Q. t.co/BmNElqsVBF— Michael Barbaro (@mikiebarb) January 16, 2020 I don’t even know @mkraju personally, but I see every day how hard he works. You’re seeing so many reporters express outrage over his shabby treatment by Sen. MCSally because the dude is just universally respected and embodies hustle as he hunts the halls on the Hill. — Hunter Walker (@hunterw) January 16, 2020 #McSally, who calls an excellent journalist, @mkraju, a “liberal hack” & tweets the video because she has decided better “Trumpian” than truthful & tactful to win a contested Senate race. t.co/6TyHIiqmVW— Maya Wiley (@mayawiley) January 16, 2020 Wolf Blitzer just now on Sen. McSally’s “liberal hack” comment to @mkraju: “It was disgusting. It was awful. She should know better.” pic.twitter.com/2S00zVKI8B — Paul Farhi (@farhip) January 16, 2020 Instead of answering a serious question about impeachment, Republican Senator Martha McSally calls Manu Raju “a liberal hack.” If the law is on your side, pound the law. If the facts are on your side, pound the facts. If neither is on your side, pound the reporter? t.co/18R9vmoiAJ— Keith Boykin (@keithboykin) January 16, 2020 Apparently daring to ask a straightforward question of a senator makes a reporter a "liberal hack." t.co/ju4kKw72en— Peter Baker (@peterbakernyt) January 16, 2020 .@mkraju of @cnn: “Senator McSally, should the Senate consider new evidence as part of the impeachment trial?” @senmcsallyaz: “You’re a liberal hack. I’m not talking to you.” Really? A reporter’s “a liberal hack” for asking a fair question? t.co/J1iuIrgPkQ— EJ Dionne (@ejdionne) January 16, 2020 Apparently to Senator McSally, Liberal hack= someone who considers new evidence in a trial. Or worse yet, someone who asks if she’ll consider it. At least we know this won’t be a partisan affair with a preordained result. t.co/Cr0GoMFBEk— Bryan Behar (@bryanbehar) January 16, 2020 What's behind Martha McSally's chilling insult to CNN's @mkraju? @theplumlinegs has a compelling answer: t.co/dEGVqcEmEz— ErikWemple (@erikwemple) January 16, 2020 McSally didn't do this for the people she represents. She did this to get Trump's attention and to own some libs. Truly disgusting behavior. — Jessica Huseman (@jessicahuseman) January 16, 2020 My God — what happened to the Martha McSally we knew? t.co/kOT5gbpkn2— Tim Steller (@senyorreporter) January 16, 2020 Josh Rogin of the Washington Post claimed the moment constituted an “insult” to Sen. John McCain’s legacy. As the Post itself reported in the wake of McCain’s passing, his “dyspeptic side was occasionally aimed at reporters.” In fact, those occasional digs were a legendary part of McCain’s savvy relationship with the media. McSally doesn’t share that same rare dynamic with the fourth-estate, but that doesn’t make Rogin’s point more valid. This is an insult to the ideals and integrity of the Senate seat she inherited from John McCain. t.co/slxbk7p8Qz— Josh Rogin (@joshrogin) January 16, 2020 The bulk of media coverage is not fair to Republicans. Raju has not always been fair to Republicans. McSally vented. Save your tweets for more interesting things, like #AppreciateADragonDay. If McSally had a habit out of dismissing perfectly legitimate stories or reporters as “fake news,” and the “liberal hack” dig was part of an unfair broader trend, that might warrant concern. But she’s just a moderate Republican senator who believes this particular reporter is a “liberal hack.” Even by pre-Trump standards, that’s neither abnormal nor unreasonable. Treating it as both is silly. The vast majority of voters are offline, and won’t notice this back-and-forth between McSally and the press. But it’s in moments like these where journalists display tendencies like insularity and self-importance that actually do affect their credibility when the circumstances matter more. Registered Republicans outnumber Democrats in Arizona, and only 32 percent of Republicans find CNN “credible.” A good chunk of McSally’s constituents would probably have a different reaction to the dust-up than Beltway Twitter. That’s why she doubled down and fundraised off of it. Those voters don’t actually have many voices in Congress willing to publicly confront members of the press face-to-face. To the extent McSally’s insult matters at all, it’s probably that. Plus, the more sanctimonious criticism McSally receives from the media, the more easy it is for her to fundraise off the incident, fueling the anti-media sentiments that make so many members of the press anxious. Besides being disproportionate, it’s not even practical to attack her. The salient question to ask would actually be, “Why do people distrust us so much that a senator is able to fundraise off this?” Was McSally’s barb polite? Not at all. But you may remember that Washington Republicans’ deferential politeness to people who don’t deserve it was something of a factor in the 2016 primary race. If anything, Washington politicians are too friendly with the media. Maybe there’s some middle ground between “hack” and “no comment” McSally could have found in the moment. I honestly just don’t care enough to think about it, and neither should you.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 17, 2020 9:49:04 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/culture-war-in-the-courts-federal-appeals-panel-divides-on-transgender-pronounsOn Wednesday, a divided panel of the New Orleans-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled, in 2–1 fashion, that a transgender litigant — a biological male who suffers from gender dysphoria and subjectively feels that he is a female — cannot require a court to address him using female pronouns. The case, U.S. v. Varner, pitted Reagan nominee Judge Jerry E. Smith and Trump nominee Judge S. Kyle Duncan in the panel majority, against Clinton nominee Judge James L. Dennis as the lone dissenter. What made the opinion particularly fascinating was that Duncan’s majority opinion used male pronouns, whereas Dennis’ dissent used female pronouns. Alas, the latest and most disputatious, headline-grabbing front of our ceaseless culture war has fully hit the federal judiciary. As highlighted by legal blogger extraordinaire and Ethics and Public Policy Center President Ed Whelan noted yesterday at National Review’s “Bench Memos” blog, Duncan’s majority opinion provided three distinct reasons for denying the plaintiff Varner’s motion for the “use [of] female pronouns when addressing” him: First, no authority supports the proposition that we may require litigants, judges, court personnel, or anyone else to refer to gender-dysphoric litigants with pronouns matching their subjective gender identity. … Second, if a court were to compel the use of particular pronouns at the invitation of litigants, it could raise delicate questions about judicial impartiality. … Increasingly, federal courts today are asked to decide cases that turn on hotly-debated issues of sex and gender identity. In cases like these, a court may have the most benign motives in honoring a party’s request to be addressed with pronouns matching his “deeply felt, inherent sense of [his] gender.” Yet in doing so, the court may unintentionally convey its tacit approval of the litigant’s underlying legal position. Third, ordering use of a litigant’s preferred pronouns may well turn out to be more complex than at first it might appear. … [O]ne university has created this widely-circulated pronoun usage guide for gender-dysphoric persons. Duncan then inserted the “pronoun usage guide for gender-dysphoric persons,” borrowed from the “LGBTQ+ Resource Center” at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, which is a colorful five-by-nine matrix. This is potentially confusing, to say the least, as Duncan noted, and “[d]eploying such neologisms could hinder communication among the parties and the court.” Duncan then referenced New York City’s regulation that “prohibit ‘intentional or repeated refusal’ to use pronouns including ‘them/them/theirs or ze/hir’ after person has ‘made clear’ his preferred pronouns” as an example of his point that “[w]hen local governments have sought to enforce pronoun usage, they have had to make refined distinctions based on matters such as the types of allowable pronouns and the intent of the ‘misgendering’ offender.'”
Ultimately, Duncan concluded, “[c]ourts would have to do the same. We decline to enlist the federal judiciary in this quixotic undertaking.”
It was something of a proverbial “mic drop” moment for the Louisiana-based judge, who has been on the Fifth Circuit for less than two years. Formerly the general counsel for the prominent Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, Duncan was confirmed by the U.S. Senate in April 2018 by a narrow 50–47 margin.
Along with fellow Trump-nominated Fifth Circuit Judges Andrew S. Oldham and James C. Ho (for whom, in the interest of full disclosure, I previously served as a judicial law clerk), Duncan has frequently been mentioned as someone who should be added to any new Supreme Court nominee “list” produced by the Trump administration. In fact, in some ways, Duncan seemed to be following the lead of his colleague Ho. Duncan’s opinion cited twice a March 2019 opinion, Gibson v. Collier, written by Ho, which similarly used male pronouns to refer to a biological male individual who subjectively felt that he was a woman.
Good for Judge Duncan for both adhering to the letter of the law and for defiantly standing athwart the modern cultural Left’s pernicious insistence on gaslighting the American citizenry into thinking that words may not mean what they so clearly do, in fact, mean.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 17, 2020 10:00:53 GMT -6
thefederalist.com/2020/01/17/if-cnn-cant-take-punches-they-shouldnt-be-throwing-them/If CNN Can’t Take Punches, They Shouldn’t Be Throwing Them JANUARY 17, 2020 By David Marcus The powers that be at CNN were in full outrage mode yesterday after Republican Sen. Martha McSally called Manu Raju, one of their congressional correspondents, a “liberal hack,” and refused to answer his questions. After the incident, much of the minimal airtime left over from trashing Donald Trump all day was expended in defense of Raju and the network, which they clearly feel, has been unfairly besmirched. I’ve got two words for them: toughen up. A statement from their PR department said, “It is extremely unbecoming for a U.S. Senator to sink to this level and treat a member of the press this way for simply doing his job.” Oh no, not unbecoming. What is it when Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez calls Fox News’ Tucker Carlson a “white supremacist sympathizer?” Is that unbecoming or is that speaking truth to power? Speaking of Fox News, or as your anchors like to refer to it, “a different network,” usually with a smug smirk of superiority and some quip about how CNN only trades in facts, what should we make of your attacks on that network? Your media critic Brian Stelter has an HBO special coming out called, “After Truth: Disinformation and the Cost of Fake News.” Whoa, whoa, whoa. Fake news? I thought that was dangerous rhetoric that threatens the republic. How dare you undermine the institution of the news media? As a guy who grew up in Philly I’d like to inform CNN that you don’t get to come to the playground, smack everyone around and then run to the teacher when they hit you back. So here are a few jabs for you purveyors of pure, unbiased truth. Lets run down the list of people you told viewers are likely to take down Trump over the past few years. James Comey, Robert Mueller, Michael Cohen, Michael Flynn, Michael Avenatti, the whistleblower, the SDNY, Andrew McCabe, Stormy Daniels, and now John Bolton and Lev Parnas. The mathematical probability of being that wrong, that often while acting in good faith falls somewhere between zero and zero. Do they hate their viewers? Its like they are in an abusive relationship with them where they prey on their emotions, contently promising a better, Trump-free tomorrow, constantly disappointing that expectation. But you know what the real problem is? It’s that these heroes actually believe their own nonsense. They bash the bias of the conservative media but at least we own it, it’s why it’s called conservative media. CNN’s ridiculous claims of objectivity and impartiality, all while ridiculing the right at every turn borders on mental illness. Remove the chryon from thy own eye. Look, Manu Raju seems like a nice fellow, and nobody likes to get called mean things, but if CNN can’t understand why GOP lawmakers don’t want to stop and chat with people whose sole purpose is to make them look bad, then it needs a reality check. The network sees itself as a font of unvarnished truth, the Oracle of Atlanta, but it’s really a propaganda machine for Democrats and Never Trumpers. CNN likes to dish it out. Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo love to look stunned at conservative media’s mendacious lies, but when they get called out for being the biased outlet they obviously are, they cry foul and hide behind the cloak of sacred journalism. That’s not how it works. Martha McSally did everyone a huge favor by calling these clowns out. The visceral hypocrisy of CNN clutching their pearls when Trump attacks the news media while they themselves throw haymakers at conservatives and accuse them of duping the American people needs to be exposed, and it needs to be exposed often. For decades the left has demonized Fox News and other right wing outlets, the response from the conservative movement in the past has been to say, “come on guys, we’re not that bad.” Well that time is over. There is a new conservative movement and this one doesn’t play that game, this one is ready to punch back just as the good senator from Arizona did Thursday afternoon.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 17, 2020 16:50:39 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/mcsallys-liberal-hack-remark-triggers-cuomo-acted-like-a-punk-ted-cruz-trashes-cuomo-clutching-his-pearlsOn Thursday morning, as The Daily Wire reported, Sen. Martha McSally (R-AZ) triggered a media firestorm after she refused to answer CNN’s Manu Raju question about the impeachment proceedings against President Trump, instead calling him a “liberal hack.” As The Federalist noted, Raju asked, “Senator McSally, should the Senate consider new evidence as part of the impeachment trail?” McSally responded, “Manu, you’re a liberal hack, I’m not talking to you.” Raju pressed, “You’re not going to comment about this?” That prompted McSally to reiterate, “You’re a liberal hack, buddy.” Raju tweeted that McSally “lashed out” at him, writing, “Sen. Martha McSally, a Republican facing a difficult election race, lashed out when I asked if she would consider new evidence as part of the Senate trial, ‘You’re a liberal hack — I’m not talking to you. You’re a liberal hack.’ She then walked into a hearing room.” That exchange set off CNN’s Chris Cuomo on Thursday night, who ripped McSally, saying she “acted like a punk today; she did a disservice to herself and the seat that she holds, which was held by John McCain.” He claimed McSally insulted Raju because she wanted to “impress” President Trump. On Friday morning, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) fired back at Cuomo on Twitter. He began by tweeting, “NY Dem royalty Chris Cuomo declares ‘I can’t believe people would vote for’ McSally, or McConnell, or any GOP candidate. Clutching his pearls, in the very same breath, he says he can’t understand why anyone might think CNN are liberal hacks….” Then Cruz offered some free advice for Cuomo: “Pro tip: real ‘journalists’ don’t (1) kiss up to every Dem, (2) refuse to ask them hard Qs, (3) relentlessly attack every Republican, (4) lie when doing so & (5) always, always push the prevailing Dem narrative of the moment. You know this, as does Manu. You just choose not to.” Cruz has been on a roll this week; on Thursday, after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who hypocritically insisted along with other House Democrats that the job of impeaching President Trump was a sad and somber duty, celebrated sending off the articles of impeachment on Wednesday by smiling and offering taxpayer-funded golden pens to those who attended, Cruz (r-TX) had a golden response of his own characterizing the Democrats as buffoonish and childish, which he sent via Twitter: “Given the circus in the House, I’m surprised she didn’t use crayons.” He added on Fox News, “Once the president is able to defend himself, I am confident that the result of that is that the president will be acquitted, and the reason is that these articles of impeachment, on their face, are ridiculous; they don’t satisfy the constitutional standard of high crimes and misdemeanors. And so we’ve moved out of Nancy Pelosi’s world. It’s why she delayed this for so long, because she knew that once the House no longer had it, that they wouldn’t be able to put on a kangaroo court like they have, and instead we’re going to move in the Senate, where I hope and believe we’re going to follow the law, and that means we’re going to acquit the president.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 22, 2020 11:52:41 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by redrex on Jan 22, 2020 15:12:59 GMT -6
I hate mindless Liberals
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 23, 2020 8:36:59 GMT -6
UN rules that climate refugees can not be returned to their home countries lol: tibet.net/climate-refugees-cant-be-returned-home-says-landmark-un-human-rights-ruling/It is unlawful for governments to return people to countries where their lives might be threatened by the climate crisis, a landmark ruling by the United Nations human rights committee has found. The judgment – which is the first of its kind – represents a legal “tipping point” and a moment that “opens the doorway” to future protection claims for people whose lives and wellbeing have been threatened due to global heating, experts say. Tens of millions of people are expected to be displaced by global heating in the next decade. The judgment relates to the case of Ioane Teitiota, a man from the Pacific nation of Kiribati, which is considered one of the countries most threatened by rising sea levels. He applied for protection in New Zealand in 2013, claiming his and his family’s lives were at risk. The committee heard evidence of overcrowding on the island of South Tarawa, where Teitiota lived, saying that the population there had increased from 1,641 in 1947 to 50,000 in 2010 due to sea level rising leading to other islands becoming uninhabitable, which had led to violence and social tensions. He also spoke of the lack of fresh water and difficulty growing crops due to salinity of the water table causing serious health issues for his family. He said that as Kiribati was predicted to be uninhabitable in 10 to 15 years, his life was endangered by remaining there.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 24, 2020 5:30:17 GMT -6
Gets set straight:
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 24, 2020 7:39:19 GMT -6
dailycaller.com/2020/01/23/puerto-rico-protesters-guillotine-governors-mansion/Puerto Rican Protesters Bring A Guillotine To Governor’s Mansion Puerto Rican protestors carried a “symbolic” guillotine to the American territory’s governor’s mansion on Thursday to protest leaders’ handling of disaster relief supplies. As earthquakes continue to rock the island leaving thousands without power, Puerto Ricans are still suffering the effects from Hurricanes Irma and Maria. Late last week, residents of the city of Ponce discovered “a warehouse filled with water, cots and other unused emergency supplies,” NBC News reported. The unused supplies had been there since 2017. Although Governor Wanda Vázquez fired several officials with oversight, including the U.S. territory’s housing secretary and Office of Emergency Management director, it wasn’t enough to stop massive protests Thursday, including one in which several protesters carried a guillotine to the governor’s mansion. Potash, who posted several videos of the day’s activities, contended he was “99% sure” the guillotine was just “symbolic” and not usable. Another Twitter user posted a picture of the set-up guillotine along with the island’s black flag of resistance. (RELATED: Puerto Rico College Republicans Are Raising Money For A Trump Statue) Guillotine with Puerto Rico’s black flag of resistance in front of the capitol building. ?: @sarahmolinari pic.twitter.com/Mw7UtQl1MM — J.Meléndez-Badillo (@jorellmelendezb) January 23, 2020 A Puerto Rican guillotine of the resistance flag. Worth noting, Puerto Rico has one of the highest indices of income inequality in the world. Protester tells me that they want to move up elections now to remove the current government. “We gave them a chance, and they struck out.” pic.twitter.com/f4ca0OBoG2 — Arelis R. Hernández (@arelisrhdz) January 23, 2020 CBS reporter David Begnaud tweeted video of police using tear gas to remove protesters, who are reportedly demanding the resignation of the U.S. territory’s governor and also its Senate president, Thomas Rivera Schatz. This was the moment, a short time ago, that police used tear gas to disperse protesters in front of the Puerto Rico Governor’s mansion. They are demanding the resignation of Governor @wandavazquezg and Senate President Thomas Rivera Schatz. pic.twitter.com/X3DK2TRVEz — David Begnaud (@davidbegnaud) January 24, 2020 Tags : puerto rico wanda vazquez garced
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 24, 2020 7:57:11 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/23/exclusive-you-fcking-cnt-stephanie-grisham-inundated-with-sexist-hatred-threats-as-establishment-media-pile-on/Exclusive—‘You F*cking C*nt’: Stephanie Grisham Inundated with Sexist Hatred, Threats as Establishment Media Pile OnWhite House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham has seen an increased level of overtly hateful messages and sexist threats since the establishment media have intensified criticisms of her in recent weeks, Breitbart News has learned exclusively. “F*ck you,” one person wrote in red ink to Grisham in one such message. c*nt,” read a postcard addressed to “Stephanie C*nt Grisham” at the White House. “You were remembered in prayer,” another note, with the implication that she was going to be killed, sent to Grisham read. One person sent her a teddy bear covered in what looked like blood. The teddy bear never made it to her, as the Secret Service intercepted it before it was delivered to her—and all she got was a photo of the maimed teddy bear. The White House provided Breitbart News with these and other samples of hate-filled vitriolic messages Grisham has been receiving—most sent to the White House address, but some she has been receiving at her home address—in recent weeks and months. They have intensified as CNN, the Washington Post, and the New York Times have published a steady stream of attacks against her, whining that she has not done an on-camera briefing since taking the job. All three outlets have engaged in a series of hits ripping her, and as they have done so, the threats against her have increased. Breitbart News is publishing images of the threats here, and redacting personally identifying information that could reveal who sent them to the White House or Grisham’s personal address. They include postcards, letters, social media messages, and even the apparently bloodied teddy bear. These images are graphic in nature, filled with vile and disgusting language, and are just a small sample of the broader attacks Grisham has endured since taking the job as President Donald Trump’s White House press secretary. Grisham, one of Trump’s top aides who has been at the president’s side since early in the 2016 presidential campaign, told Breitbart News for this story that she understands part of the job is dealing with unprecedented opposition, but the media hatred directed at her is making it worse. Several top allies of the president, including a number of women who work throughout the administration and on the president’s re-election campaign, as well as other outside allies of the White House, defended Grisham from this hateful vitriol in exclusive statements to Breitbart News on Thursday evening as well. Someone wrote in a handwritten postcard to Grisham with a postmark in Texas: I am tired of lies. I am tried of racism. I am tired of the swamp. I am tired of ‘alternative facts.’ I am tired of cover for the Drumpf. I am tired of bully tactics. I am tired of rapists. I despise dictators. I wonder will you kiss the ring? the ass? The Putin-lover, the dictator-lover? You have already, I know. Are you going to kick out journalists? Are you a Sarah Sanders wannabe? Will you always praise the racist in chief? Are you a racist? I know… you don’t care either, do you? Watch your pussy. Another postcard with a return address sticker with a woman’s name and an address in Michigan printed on it, addressed to Grisham, said: AKA Braindead Lying Twit Pretending to be a Press Secretary a la Fox News” in “America’s House of Treason” with the White House address, called her a “treacherous b*tch,” referred to Grisham’s predecessor Sarah Huckabee Sanders as “F*ck-a-Me,” and said anyone who works in President Trump’s White House has their “brains melt into puddles of turds.”
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Jan 24, 2020 12:56:04 GMT -6
|
|