Tuesday morning links

'I made a big mistake': American ISIS bride who called for terror attacks at Memorial Day parades and has married three jihadi fighters begs the US to let her go back to Alabama

Posted by Bird Dog in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects at 07:27 | Comments (45) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

QUOTE:

SENATOR ELIZABETH WARREN CALLS FOR COUP AGAINST PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

Warren: “My point here is that if they {the President's cabinet} believe that Donald Trump cannot fulfill the obligations of his office, then they have a constitutional responsibility to invoke the 25th amendment,”

25th Amendment: Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

That's not a coup, but a restatement of the 25th Amendment. Only the Vice President and the President's cabinet can invoke the 25th Amendment.

QUOTE:

Talk of a 25th amendment coup is illegal and unconstitutional.

Uh, no. Talking about or considering whether to invoke the 25th Amendment is obviously protected speech. A Vice President or Cabinet invoking the 25th Amendment because they believe "the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office" is not unconstitutional, but eminently constitutional.

It would be wrong in this case, and clearly won't happen unless Trump shows a significant further deterioration in his mental state.

#1 Zachriel on 2019-02-19 09:55 (Reply)

Let's look at the rest of the 25th, specifically Section 4.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.

Since it's going to take a 2/3rd vote of the entire Congress to remove a President who objects to the finding under the 25th that's he not fit why not just impeach him?

#1.1 Christopher B on 2019-02-19 10:17 (Reply)

Christopher B: Since it's going to take a 2/3rd vote of the entire Congress to remove a President who objects to the finding under the 25th that's he not fit why not just impeach him?

Impeachment is for high crimes and misdemeanors, not disability. However, unless there is significant evidence of disability, there is no likelihood that the President will be removed through the Twenty-fifth Amendment.

Our point was that the claim "Talk of a 25th amendment coup is illegal and unconstitutional," is preposterous. Of course people can talk about it, and even seriously consider it. How else would such a process work other than people talking about it and considering it? In this case, it was considered and discarded. On the other hand, if the Vice President and cabinet were lying in their declaration, then it would not be a constitutional exercise of power.

That people think Trump has a screw loose is not an unusual opinion, even among mental health professionals. Whether that rises to disability is still subject to opinion at this point. But as we already noted, removal under the Twenty-fifth Amendment clearly won't happen unless Trump shows a significant further deterioration in his mental state.

#1.1.1 Zachriel on 2019-02-19 11:04 (Reply)

Leave it to the left to cite the opinion of "mental health professionals" who have never even met Trump, and ignore the respected medical professional who actually administered a cognitive test to the president. (A test which he passed easily, btw.)

Zachriel is obviously suffering from some kind of cognitive handicap himself. Perhaps he is projecting?

#1.1.1.1 Rusty on 2019-02-19 11:41 (Reply)

But the kiddiez cited a "source"... so there.
Along with a a little tap dancing...
Bwahaha!

#1.1.1.1.1 Zachingoff on 2019-02-19 11:58 (Reply)

The 25th is clearly specific to an incapacitated potus.

Liarbot naturally makes a duely elected potus subject to the tyranny not even of the majority but that of a minority of statist apparatchiks and enablers whose whim had nothing to do with incapacity but with opportunism and political ire, and who were not above fabricating the greatest breach and scandal in American history.

It was Her Turn and by gosh, anyone in the way would be subjected to yet another Obama-era abuse of process and power.

https://youtu.be/Vc98IvGF70o

#1.1.1.1.1.1 Liarbots gots no shame on 2019-02-19 12:24 (Reply)

Our point was that the claim "Talk of a 25th amendment coup is illegal and unconstitutional," is preposterous. Of course people can talk about it, and even seriously consider it. How else would such a process work other than people talking about it and considering it? In this case, it was considered and discarded. On the other hand, if the Vice President and cabinet were lying in their declaration, then it would not be a constitutional exercise of power.

Your point, you adolescent? Being perpetually incapable of grasping basic human reason, Liarbot, you're the last cyborg in the data center to opine on the obvious context, which is that given the full set of circumstances - something us humans routinely include as a matter of rather instantaneous habit - talk and consideration of a palace coup against a potus unpopular with the leftovers from the evidently most corrupt administration ever obviously indicts the latter and not the former.

In other words, "talk and consideration" had a focus and no evidence or reason on earth says it wasn't just more gaslighting leftist inversions of language gussied up in faux patriotism, the last refuge of these scoundrels. There was no due talk or consideration. There was a leftover political sentiment aimed at a coup.

Your obsessively pedantic condescension isn't just that. It's a indicator of how completely out of whack your arrogance-to-civility mixture is. You're a disgrace even to leftism, itself a malignancy of parasitic dishonesty and theft of meaning.

#1.1.1.2 Liarbots gots no shame on 2019-02-19 12:37 (Reply)

ZachrielNPC: It would be wrong in this case, and clearly won't happen unless Trump shows a significant further deterioration in his mental state.

Further deterioration. Nice.

Tell us, oh statistical guru, how much has Trump's mental state already deteriorated? 5%? 10%, 50%?

Please cite your sources.

#1.2 Rusty on 2019-02-19 10:40 (Reply)

Please cite your sources.

Bwahaha... stop it... you're killing me... bwahaha...

#1.2.1 Zachingoff on 2019-02-19 10:58 (Reply)

Yep.

Liarbot has been asked probably twenty times to indicate some grasp of leftist philosophy and how it can simultaneously depend on projected tacit goodness on the one hand and a host of symptoms of disorder on the other, among them dishonesty, envy, coveting, theft, power, force, and our favorite, gaslighting.

(Mao, Castro, et al 1949-2001)

#1.2.2 Liarbots gots no shame on 2019-02-19 12:44 (Reply)

If you want to open that Pandora's box, then think long and hard about the repercussions. Imagine the scenario where a future president allows his Secretary of State to run the department as a piggy bank for her future run at her own presidency. Then, when evidence emerges that she is violating laws to keep this under wraps, he orders his Attorney General to drop the charges in order to protect her. All while the established media works to cover it up.

I would argue that this is a better use of the 25th Amendment to remove an unfit president than the case that Warren is making against Trump.

But imagine for a second the shocked and outraged theatrics that MSNBC and CNN would fly into if someone dared to raise accusations like this against The Chosen One.

#1.3 Dangerous Dean on 2019-02-19 11:02 (Reply)

Dangerous Dean: Imagine the scenario where a future president allows his Secretary of State to run the department as a piggy bank for her future run at her own presidency. Then, when evidence emerges that she is violating laws to keep this under wraps, he orders his Attorney General to drop the charges in order to protect her. All while the established media works to cover it up. I would argue that this is a better use of the 25th Amendment to remove an unfit president than the case that Warren is making against Trump.

No. The proper remedy for corruption is impeachment for "high crimes and misdemeanors", then charged under the criminal statute.

You seem to be alluding to Hillary Clinton. There is no evidence she used any funds from the Clinton Foundation for her own use or for her presidential campaign. That the Clinton Foundation helped build business and political networks while doing good in the world is not illegal.

#1.3.1 Zachriel on 2019-02-19 11:09 (Reply)

No he's alluding to Obama, deflectappotamus.

#1.3.1.1 Zachingoff on 2019-02-19 12:03 (Reply)

Is that why they invented the 453th Amendashoppoment to the NAFTA Konstutionalesque CNN-crowd-sourced Statutes of Collective Populism and Skittles for, Liarbot? Some odd, anti-Brexit-like, we-didn't-mean-it, no-punchbacks, do-over, claw-back bullshit orchestrated by the top few at the detriment of a nation?

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/trumps-list-289-accomplishments-in-just-20-months-relentless-promise-keeping

Because if you're really on about mental state, get fucking serious and stop wasting everybody's time. Maybe start here, champ.

https://www.academia.edu/430963/Psychopathology_and_Moral_Implications_-_David_Hume

#1.4 Liarbots gots no shame. on 2019-02-19 12:55 (Reply)

QUOTE:

The List Of Fake Hate Crimes Is Pretty Long (Update)

Unfortunately so, and expected to continue. However, the list of actual hate crimes is much, much longer.

#2 Zachriel on 2019-02-19 09:56 (Reply)

Care to provide it?

With all the hyperventilation in the media we see over the FAKE hate crimes, you'd think that the real ones would be all over the place.

Do we need to import foreigners to do the hate crimes Americans won't?

#2.1 JLawson on 2019-02-19 11:08 (Reply)

JLawson:

Among single-bias hate crime incidents in 2017, there were 5,060 victims of race/ethnicity/ancestry motivated hate crime.

FBI Hate Crime Statistics.

{Only when a law enforcement investigation reveals sufficient evidence to lead a reasonable and prudent person to conclude that the offender’s actions were motivated, in whole or in part, by his or her bias, should an agency report an incident as a hate crime.}

#2.1.1 Zachriel on 2019-02-19 11:14 (Reply)

Simply not true.

Those stats are well documented that they are falsified.

Why do you post only lies?

#2.1.1.1 DrTorch on 2019-02-19 13:28 (Reply)

Hate crimes are determined by third parties...what is the third parties political affiliation? Political correctness drove the designation of "hate crime" and like Title IX it is administered by the politically correct. All crimes are hate crimes and we already know who commits the most crimes per capita...just check those FBI statistics that you don't wish to expose.

#2.1.1.2 indyjonesouthere on 2019-02-19 14:47 (Reply)

DrTorch: Those stats are well documented that they are falsified.

Yet you forgot to provide a citation to the documentation.

indyjonesouthere: Hate crimes are determined by third parties

Yes, by law enforcement through an investigation of the facts of the case. Nor is it sufficient to show racial or religious bias, but that the criminal act was motivated by the bias.

#2.1.1.3 Zachriel on 2019-02-19 16:33 (Reply)

Mostly by LEO's appointed by political mayors that make sure you have been properly educated in the social sciences at the local university and have the proper attitudes to affirmative action, white privilege, and diversity. Otherwise you won't even get close to making any decisions on hate crime.

#2.1.1.3.1 indyjonesouthere on 2019-02-19 18:54 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: Otherwise you won't even get close to making any decisions on hate crime.

Judges and juries make decisions on hate crimes all the time.

#2.1.1.3.1.1 Zachriel on 2019-02-20 09:01 (Reply)

JLawson: With all the hyperventilation in the media we see over the FAKE hate crimes, you'd think that the real ones would be all over the place.

Man bites dog.

#2.1.2 Zachriel on 2019-02-19 11:22 (Reply)

And yet - THESE hate crimes don't make the news. Seeing the low bar the media has for anything sensational, you've got to wonder about that.

The FBI's a bit shy on giving info on what exactly qualifies as 'hate'. So - if a Mexican robs a Black and hits him and insults his ethnicity and sexuality, is that a hate crime, a robbery, an assault, an assault with a side of robbery and hate, or would the media see it as a Happy Meal?

Could it be that, having manufactured a particular species of 'OMG, this makes it even WORSE' qualifiers, that they're going to be using it whenever they can even remotely justify it? "Yep, the assailant called him a fag, so we can tack in 2 years for the hate aspects." - And the FBI jots down another 'hate crime', where before it was a simple robbery.

Apparently some hate crimes are more worth attention than others.

"Under the authority of section 534 of title 28, United States Code, the Attorney General shall acquire data, for each calendar year, about crimes that manifest evidence of prejudice based on race, gender and gender identity, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity, including where appropriate the crimes of murder, non-negligent manslaughter; forcible rape; aggravated assault, simple assault, intimidation; arson; and destruction, damage or vandalism of property."

So altogether there were about 8400 'hate crimes' in the US.

Done by 6,400 criminals. (Well, some folks like being offensive, I guess.)

Out of a population of 350 million here in the US. By my calculation - we're looking at about 0.00017% of the population committing those hate crimes. (Give or take a 0 or two.)

Ideally the number would be 0 - on both 'hate' crimes and illegal activities. But 6k out of 350 mil - when there were over 17,000 murders in 2017 - doesn't exactly seem like a real problem but more like form-filling by the AG in order to make a case.

#2.1.2.1 JLawson on 2019-02-19 12:09 (Reply)

Are you suggesting that the hate crimes in the FBI report are so frequent as to not be newsworthy?
If so, how does the media distinguish between the “man bites dog” variety of hate crimes from those less newsworthy incidents?

#2.1.2.2 Louis miller on 2019-02-19 12:09 (Reply)

Another "source".
Boy, the kiddiez are on their game today.

#2.1.2.3 Zachingoff on 2019-02-19 12:15 (Reply)

Hey, is this a hate crime?

https://www.wvlt.tv/content/news/Tenn-man-accused-of-pulling-gun-on-people-wearing-MAGA-hats--506002311.html

#2.1.2.4 JLawson on 2019-02-19 13:23 (Reply)

JLawson: And yet - THESE hate crimes don't make the news.

They do make the news, but because they are so frequent, they rarely make the national news. Man bites dog.

JLawson: The FBI's a bit shy on giving info on what exactly qualifies as 'hate'.

No. They have a specific definition.

JLawson: So - if a Mexican robs a Black and hits him and insults his ethnicity and sexuality, is that a hate crime ...?

Per the FBI definition, it is not sufficient to show racial or religious bias, but that the criminal act was motivated by the bias. In that case, it would probably not qualify as a reportable hate crime.

JLawson: Apparently some hate crimes are more worth attention than others.

The reason hate crimes carry additional penalties is because an attack on someone for their race or religion is an attack on the entire community. They only lynched a few thousand blacks out of millions in the South during Jim Crow. It was only necessarily to lynch someone from time to time to make the point that blacks had no defense against the racist majority.

Louis miller: Are you suggesting that the hate crimes in the FBI report are so frequent as to not be newsworthy?

As noted above, there were over 5000 racial bias crimes reported to the FBI in 2017. So, no. Most incidents don't receive a lot of coverage in the national news, but they are often reported in local news coverage.

JLawson: Hey, is this a hate crime?

It's not a racial or religious hate crime, but it would certainly be "wanton endangerment" as alleged.

#2.1.2.5 Zachriel on 2019-02-19 16:55 (Reply)

I think that from now on tweets should not be deletable after, say, 48 hours. Time to start forcing people to build a record.

#3 RonF on 2019-02-19 10:13 (Reply)

Never having seen Twitter in the flesh, I'm going to stick my neck out and say that all tweets should be deleted automatically 3.5 nanoseconds after posting.

#3.1 BillH on 2019-02-19 11:43 (Reply)

Fake hate crimes are more easily exposed thanks to social media and alternative reporting. It seems to be epidemic now that it is regularly exposed. Logic tells us that this has always been true but we simply didn't know it. The fake hate crime is itself a hate crime and should be punished. It is incredible how easy it is to lie and act out the outrage and be believed. There is a lesson here for those who simply believe and tell us all to believe when a sympathetic figure makes a claim of a crime being committed.

#4 Anon on 2019-02-19 10:20 (Reply)

re Smollett

The Jussie Smollett Hoax and the Media’s Tribal War on America

QUOTE:

These days the media isn’t biased. It’s tribal.

. . . In a liberal society, people from different tribes can agree to disagree because they recognize their mutual humanity. In a tribal society, the ‘other’ is less than human. Tribal narratives are about the superiority of ‘our’ people to ‘their’ people. Outrage at selective incidents is used to dehumanize the ‘other’ tribe, to call for violence against them, and then to urge their utter destruction.

. . . Tribal superiority is reinforced through ritualistic acts of humiliation of the other side.

. . . It’s easy to see what we have lost by what we now have. A tribal society is governed by mysteries and absolutes. Morality is relative and contradictory. The only real absolute truth is the superiority of the group. Divisions between tribes are therefore absolute. Unity is possible only against a common enemy.

And so we’ve lost science and replaced it with scientism. Science was a set of techniques for testing the accuracy of answers. Scientism is the conviction that anything a politically correct PhD says about the entire planet or the universe must be believed with a religious fervor because it makes you a more moral person.

Religious tolerance and tolerance for all different ideas have also become casualties.

In a tribal society, the other tribe is evil because of its ancestry and beliefs. These two are intermingled, as they were in Nazi Germany or among the leftist exponents of ‘white privilege’. Your tribe is superior because of its ancestry and beliefs. The enemy tribe is evil because of its race and its beliefs.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/272912/jussie-smollett-hoax-and-medias-tribal-war-america-daniel-greenfield

#5 feeblemind on 2019-02-19 10:30 (Reply)

The take away from the Smollett incident is "Don't mess with the United States Postal Inspector Service." see the link
“This is not a whodunit. It’s a how-many-people-dunit.”
on Chicagoboyz, Craig Says:
February 19th, 2019 at 2:03 pm
Smollett threat letter called “enormous mistake”; …….. Federal charges “certain”
In a conversation on Feb. 8th, before police met with brothers Ola and Abel Osundairo, a leading source within the Smollett attack investigation called the hate crime a “false flag” and said “There is a direct line between (the letter) and (the purported attack).” In the same conversation, the source hinted at what was to come: “This is not a whodunit. It’s a how-many-people-dunit.”
https://www.cwbchicago.com/2019/02/smollett-threat-letter-called-enormous.html

#5.1 FromChicagoboyz on 2019-02-19 16:49 (Reply)

re: the Isis girl, two old sayings come to mind.
1. You made your bed, you can lie in it.
2. F#ck off and die.

#6 dwyprov on 2019-02-19 10:37 (Reply)

Now, now. In the spirit of the Trump era, let's make a deal with her: She can come back to New York, Minneapolis, Seattle, Portland, or San Francisco if she promises to stay within the corporate limits of whichever city she chooses.

#6.1 BillH on 2019-02-19 11:48 (Reply)

More Fake Hate Crimes:
https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-rileys-farm-lawsuit-oak-glen-20190219-story.html
The kids love Riley's Farm; California's snowflakes don't.

#7 Robert Brennan (Link) on 2019-02-19 10:43 (Reply)

It is interesting that the MSM are claiming that 1000 farmers will have their land seized to build Trump's wall. How much land was seized in California's attempt to build a high speed rail and why wasn't that a story?

#8 Anon on 2019-02-19 10:56 (Reply)

Anon: How much land was seized in California's attempt to build a high speed rail and why wasn't that a story?

It was a story, and was one of the reasons why the construction was way behind schedule and way above cost.

#8.1 Zachriel on 2019-02-19 11:10 (Reply)

How'd you feel about the Kelo v. New London holding?

#8.1.1 BornSouthern on 2019-02-19 12:09 (Reply)

BornSouthern: How'd you feel about the Kelo v. New London holding?

Few are fond of eminent domain. Kelo v. New London hinged on the distinction between public use and public purpose, but the Supreme Court found that eminent domain encompassed public purpose. The solution is legislative. The federal government and about half the states have passed limits to eminent domain, but eminent domain still exists in one form or another. That means, one day, the government can insist you sell them your house or commercial building.

#8.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2019-02-19 17:25 (Reply)

So, what you are saying than is that eminent domain is reasonable and justified to build a wall on our border. Certainly you would agree that national defense is more important than real estate profits in New London?

#8.1.1.1.1 Anon on 2019-02-19 20:31 (Reply)

That's just crazy talk, you hater...

#8.1.1.1.1.1 Zachingoff on 2019-02-19 23:49 (Reply)

Liarbot isn't known for making value judgements, especially where they could be found to conflict with leftwing cant and dogma. Liarbot also doesn't answer questions in a strictly value- or principle-centered manner.

Liarbot instead reads scripts like some pedantic robot lecturing what it thinks are toothless idiots, as if for practice at being human too. The practice of constantly deflecting, evading, obstructing, and of begging questions like a maniac gives it license to never touch on any matter thoughtfully, fundamentally, or philosophically.

Humans believe that if it were human, this daily mechanical display would most resemble arrogance, dishonesty, and an almost practiced want of self-awareness and embarrassment.

#8.1.1.1.1.1.1 Liarbots gots no shame on 2019-02-20 06:12 (Reply)

Anon: So, what you are saying than is that eminent domain is reasonable and justified to build a wall on our border.

Eminent domain is certainly constitutional. However, people have the right to contest eminent domain in the courts and in the public sphere. The former can delay the exercise of eminent domain and raise the cost, while the latter can cause social friction and political resistance, all of which can cause problems with large projects. Even authoritarian China has had trouble with "nail houses".

As for whether a long border wall is justified; the border is not static. There is a huge flow of legal goods and people across the border, so the problem is controlling and regulating the flow. A modern system is multi-layered and technological, though walls can be useful in places. In other words, a long border wall is not the best or even a practical solution.

—

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." — H. L. Mencken

#8.1.1.1.1.2 Zachriel on 2019-02-20 09:15 (Reply)

WEB Griffin has given me many hours of reading pleasure. When my daughter was graduating from the FBI Academy in Quantico, they had WEB Griffin novels in the police series in the Academy bookstore.

#9 Mike K on 2019-02-19 13:42 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Tuesday, February 19. 2019

Tuesday morning links