Anti-Gun Nuts Go Full Coward Over Former NFL Star’s Innocent, Posed Father-Daughter Photo

The anti-gun left embraces the idea of being cowardly. They revel in it. The anti-gun left wallows in cowardice.

I know, now you’re offended. How dare I? And what the hell am I even talking about?

Look, it’s not to say that a person who refuses to own a gun is a coward, or even that it is cowardly to be anti-gun. It instead means what it says, which is that the anti-gun left embraces being cowardly. They indulge in it.

Before you run off to prove me right on Twitter, at least me explain what I’m saying.

It is frequently the case in life, and particularly so online, that in opposition to something or support of it, people will take up certain rhetorical standards to represent their cause, or that they think help sell it. Likewise, people have a deeply ingrained tendency to revel in the satisfaction one gets from taking something to its extreme, particularly in the face of opposition.

To put it more succinctly, people have a tendency to want to the most thing of whatever thing they’re part of. If one is a Patriot’s fan, one strives to be the most Patriot’s fannest fan of all fans. A geek to be the Platonic geek ideal. Even when the most of something means the worst version of that thing.

I am sure you can think of political movements in this country today where that tendency is regularly on display.

In the case of the anti-gun left, the refrain that guns are inherently dangerous in and of themselves, that they exist as an entity of evil notwithstanding the nature of their possessor, is incredibly pervasive.

I’m sure somewhere in the recesses there is dimly a recognition that this absurd anthropomorphizing of an inanimate object is an extreme overreaction or affected political pose, but only very dimly. In practice, the embrace gets only more extreme and cartoonish as time goes on and peer-feedback remains positive.

So it is that we see irrational reactions to perfectly innocuous behavior. A woman poses for a photo with a handgun safely tucked away, not brandished, and it becomes a national news story as people melt down over it.

An actress (who plays a law enforcement officer) poses with a gun and it becomes a national “shame” moment as people melt down.

A Senator supports the Second Amendment and is called a mass murderer on a CNN townhall.

And now people are melting down over this:

Former NFL kicker and current CBS sportscaster Jay Feely posted this on Twitter.

This is an utterly recognizable trope, a long-standing, exaggerated joke about the protectiveness of daughter by father. The kids, in on the joke, smile. The gun, pointed down and held at arm’s length, to make it more subtle and maybe delay your chuckle when first seeing the picture. Nicely done. Cute, even.


A sampling:

The only surprise in this inane pseudo-feminist take is she didn’t use the hippest word in the English language right now, “agency.”


Look I could post these all day, (be patient, I’m getting to the coward bit.), but I’m sure some of you are gnashing at the bit to dismiss tweets as irrelevant. It’s a pretty nonsense argument on its face, especially if it comes from the left. Obviously they think tweets matter a great deal as you can see if you’ve ever read the replies to a Trump tweet or heard the threats of lawsuits over being blocked by him. And national movements that are recognized on lists of the most influential leaders survive largely on Twitter buzz.

Our natural Luddite inclinations aside, the tweets obviously do matter, both as a barometer and a form of mass communication. More so than the inherent noteworthiness is the fact that, thanks to the replies, this photo in turn becomes a national story.

USA Today has it. Deadspin spins it. WaPo runs it.

The story travels. And as it travels, and people see the reactions, they feed off of them. The people who defend him defend the most. The people “offended” by him are offended the most. The anti-gun left, which must see a gun as a force of evil irrespective of the nature of him to whom it belongs, whose argument against that object is inherently one of extremes, who establish the emotional appeal of their entire movement on the singular basis of fearing that object, must become the most afraid.

Thus, the coward.

There are many examples, but this one you’re about to see is absolutely pristine in its wantonly guttural primal scream qualities, and fantastically compact in its journey from offended to afraid to preposterously overblown reaction. A true gem of the art form.


So, again, the phenomenon of embracing the most absurd caricature of oneself is neither new nor unique to the anti-gun left, but in their case it is particularly striking because of the dark and stupid place it takes them. Being the most Patrioty Patriots fan may be extreme, but it’s not craven. The race to be the most insanely unsettled flower in the garden is objectively more galling and less appealing than almost any other extreme self-caricature. (Relax, I said almost).

Here is a story, because I don’t think I’ve belabored the point enough. I used to work with a guy here in North Carolina who was pretty … rural. I don’t want to dwell too much on the visuals here, but he was from a place called “Booger Swamp” so you get the picture. One afternoon he earnestly tried to convince us that he didn’t know the alphabet. Had never learned it. “I can read I just don’t know the alphabet,” he kept saying. It was a point of pride for him, you see. He was calling himself “Deplorable”, embracing the worst aspect of the stereotype. Not in defiance, either. In self-indulgence. He wanted to be that stereotype.

I have thousands of examples I could give you along these lines. And in reply to Feely we see the same thing. They want to be terrified of that inanimate object held without menace or malice in Feely’s hand.

It does not matter that he has no ill-will, that it is not only a readily apparent joke based on the visible elements of the photo, but it’s a well-known joke that’s as old as dirt and has been recreated literally thousands of times by fathers everywhere. They know that. They can read. They just want you to think they don’t know the alphabet.

They don’t have any actual fear of Feely shooting a kid. If they did, what kind of monsters would they be simply whimpering about it on Twitter for attention instead of intervening on behalf of those poor kids? Complicit monsters.

“Oh my God he’s threatening to murder a child and holding his daughter against her will like a piece of property. Anyhoo, The Voice is on so I gotta run.” What kind of person is that?

But of course, that’s not what’s happening here. As with most cases of the Twitter mob taking offense, they aren’t actually offended. They’ve merely spotted an opportunity to take offense. To act offended. To embrace the coward.

They’re the online version of sending a child home from school because he bit his sandwich in the shape of a gun.

It’s a shame what we’ve come to. Social media does amplify some of our worst impulses, but they are still our impulse. Our crappy, stupid humanity. And we should try to overcome it.

Be better than a coward. Admit you know the alphabet. Don’t perform the “I’m offended” circus show just because you can. Don’t wallow.

Your first test is to read this and then not whine on Twitter about being called a coward. I expect most of you will fail. Until that changes, expect the polarized atmosphere you sometimes pretend to lament to continue uninterrupted, and resolution for the actual problems society faces to remain unsolved, unresolved and, for the most part, not even rationally or honestly discussed.

Feely, by the way, eventually apologized for taking a humorous photo with his daughter.

What a shame that they shamed him.

As a species, we are being the most worst we can be. The most. The worst. Us.

Oh yeah, also Shania Twain. I almost forgot. Same deal.

The post Anti-Gun Nuts Go Full Coward Over Former NFL Star’s Innocent, Posed Father-Daughter Photo appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

WATCH LIVE NOW: In Georgia, Neo-Nazis March for Hitler’s Birthday, Anti-Nazi Counter-Protesters Face Off

This is a live feed from a clash between a Nazi march and counter protest in Newman, GA, via Facebook.

The town has been bracing for this, and so have state and local officials and law enforcement.

More than 400 federal, state and local law enforcement personnel will be on hand in Newnan Saturday as a neo-Nazi rally, along with counter-protesters, descend on the Coweta County city.

“Our No. 1 priority is the safety of our people and their property,” said Newnan Police Chief Douglas ‘Buster’ Meadows, while discussing what they plan to do to prevent another violent incident like the one last year in Charlottesville, Va.

The National Socialist Movement has received a permit to hold their rally from 3 to 5 p.m. in Greenville Street Park. 11Alive called the man organizing the rally, Jeff Schoep of the National Socialist Movement, whose address on the city permit is only a post office box in Detroit, Michigan. However, he did not respond to phone calls, emails and texts.

“Every citizen has the constitutional right to express their First Amendment freedoms to free speech and protest, but the racist views of neo-Nazis are completely abhorrent,” he said. “I commend Mayor Brady for his work to ensure a peaceful event and urge the entire Newnan community to stand together to show that there is no place for hate or intolerance in Georgia’s 3rd district.”

Deputy Chief of Police Mark Cooper said their department is working with local, state and federal agencies ensure everyone stays safe.

A family friend lives in the neighborhood and tipped me to the Facebook feed. She is currently hunkered down in her house. If there any updates I will try to post them here.

Hopefully it will remain peaceful and there won’t be any need for updates.

The post WATCH LIVE NOW: In Georgia, Neo-Nazis March for Hitler’s Birthday, Anti-Nazi Counter-Protesters Face Off appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

The Comey Memos: From Hookers to Pee to Fake News and Leaks, Read Them Here

The Comey memos were released to Congress on Thursday, and quickly “obtained’ by various press outlets. A lot of this was already revealed, known, or deduced before the release so, as big revelations go, these aren’t.

They are, however, an interesting look into the meetings that then-FBI Director Comey had with President Trump and then-Chief of Staff Reince Priebus. (Full document embed below, with typed-out excerpts below that.)

They detail, among other things, what Putin had to say about hookers in Russia, Trump’s concerns about people believing the “Golden Showers” story, his feelings about loyalty, his concerns about Mike Flynn, and the general manner in which Trump conducted their meetings.

They also show Comey not only put his trust in McCabe but urged the President to as well. Which may, oddly enough, be the most specifically damning thing in the entire document set.

The most troubling, though, were the Presidents aggressive remarks about jailing members of the press. (page 11 of the document below, excerpt typed out after the embed.)

It’s interesting, not earth-shattering really, and you can read the release below, and after the embed, I’ll highlight some quotes in case you can’t go through the PDF.

The Comey Memos by Caleb Howe on Scribd


“‘I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.’ I replied by saying ‘I agree he is a good guy,’ but said no more.”

This bit was already known before the memo release on Thursday. But Trump also had reservations about Flynn’s judgement.

“He then went on to explain that he has serious reservations about Mike Flynn’s judgment and illustrated with a story from that day in which the President apparently discovered during his toast to Teresa May that [redacted] had called four days ago. Apparently, as the President was toasting PM May, he was explaining that she had been the first to call him after his inauguration and Flynn interrupted to say that [redacted] had called (first, apparently). It was then that the President learned of [redacted] call and he confronted Flynn about it (not clear whether that was in the moment or after the lunch with PM May). Flynn said the return call was scheduled for Saturday, which prompted a heated reply from the President that six days was not an appropriate period of time to return a call from teh [redacted] of a country like [redacted] (“This isn’t [redacted] we are talking about.” He said that if he called [redacted] [redacted] and didn’t get a return call for six days he would be very upset. In telling the story, the President pointed his fingers at his head and said “the guy has serious judgment issues.”


“The President said ‘the hookers thing’ is nonsense but that Putin had told him ‘we have some of the most beautiful hookers in the world.’ (He did not say when Putin told him this and I don’t recall.)”


“I said that…he should have the White House Counsel call the Acting Attorney General and make the request. He said that was what he would do. He then added, “Because I have been very loyal to you, very loyal, we had that thing, you know.” I did not reply, or ask him what he meant by “that thing.”


“I tried to interject several times to agree with him about the leaks being terrible, but was unsuccessful. When he finished, I said I agreed very much that it was terrible that his calls with foreign leaders leaked. I said they were classified and he needed to to be able to speak to foreign leaders in confidence. [NOTE: because this is an unclassified document, I will be limited in how I describe what I said next]. I then explained why leaks purporting to be about FBI intelligence operations were also terrible and a serious violation of the law. I explained that the FBI gathers intelligence in part to equip the President to make decisions, and if people run around telling the press what we do, that ability will be compromised. I said I was eager to find leakers and would like to nail one to the door as a message. I said something about it being difficult and he replied that we need to after the reporters, and referred to the fact that 10 or 15 years ago we put them in jail to find out what they know, and it worked. He mentioned Judy Miller by name. I explained that I was a fan of pursuing leaks aggressively but that going after reporters was tricky for legal reasons and because DOJ tends to approach it conservatively. He replied by telling me to talk to “Sessions” and see what we can do about being more aggressive. I told him I would speak to the Attorney General.”

The post The Comey Memos: From Hookers to Pee to Fake News and Leaks, Read Them Here appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

MUY BUENO: California Border County San Diego Supports Trump Sanctuary City Lawsuit

California’s cities and counties are woke. No really. They’ve been awakened to the absurdity of the sanctuary city idiocy coming from their state leaders. And they aren’t taking it anymore.

San Diego county is just the latest in a rapidly growing number of cities that recognize the inherent problem of being asked to follow a state law and a federal law which are incompatible. It’s an untenable situation the Trump administration is seeking to resolve in court, and city after city is joining with them.

On Tuesday, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors voted 3-1 to support the Trump administration’s lawsuit and will be filing an amicus brief “at the first available opportunity”, reports the San Diego Union-Tribune.

“We’re talking about people who are crossing the border illegally, coming into this county and committing a crime and them being let loose probably to commit another crime,” said Dianne Jacob, supervisor for the district that covers East County. “That creates a public-safety issue and creates a problem in our neighborhoods.”

If you click through on that article, you’ll note the derisive tone and angry editorializing embedded in the supposed news story. Reporter Kate Morrissey does everything but call the board members racists outright. This attitude among media elites is perfectly representative of the lackadaisical attitude state Attorney General Becerra and Governor Brown have toward both federal law and the integrity of our borders.

The Reuters article continues the partisan jabbing, repeating the phrase “all Republican” about 97 times when referring to the votes of the cities and counties. As if the Republicans did some hostile takeover of these councils rather than being elected by the citizens to do exactly what they are doing: make decisions and represent their voters.

San Diego-Tijuana border. Photo by Sgt. 1st Class Gordon Hyde ( [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

San Diego county and neighboring Tijuana, Mexico comprise the busiest and largest urban area on the U.S.-Mexico border. Border security, and the consequences of border policy, are felt directly by the residents. The residents who, I hasten to remind Reuters and the Union-Tribune, voted for and put in office the Republican supervisors who voted to file the brief.

That’s how government works. You know, as opposed to by unlawful decrees from lawless governors who want to pander to the liberal Emotional-Industrial complex. One can of course support better and even more lax immigration laws without defying the existing ones, and a city or county shouldn’t be forced into untenable situations by an Attorney General who cares more for his political aspirations than the rule of law.

Here’s more (and better) via ABC-10 in San Diego.

Among the laws targeted by the legal action is SB 54, which limits cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities.

Supervisor Dianne Jacob led public opposition to the laws and said she agrees with U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions that they are unconstitutional and undermine public safety.

“This is a politically super-charged issue as you might imagine,” Gaspar told Fox News. “We’re talking about hundreds of emails pouring in from all sides. But let us not forget, let’s take the emotion out of this. We’re talking about following the constitutional laws of our land.”

The words of one of those Republicans, Newport Beach councilma Scott Peotter, kind of say it all: “We want to be a law and order city and a law and order state. We want to comply with federal law and state law. They put us into a situation where we have to choose and we don’t like it.”

Exactly right.

The post MUY BUENO: California Border County San Diego Supports Trump Sanctuary City Lawsuit appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

No Confusion Here: Trump Adviser Larry Kudlow Apologizes for Remarks About Ambassador Nikki Haley

Nikki Haley delivers flawless “boy you messin up” face. Photo credit: AP/Mary Altaffer

White House chief economic adviser Larry Kudlow made an error on Tuesday when he suggested that U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley had some “momentary confusion” regarding Russia. Haley was swift to reply, and did so superbly.

Late Tuesday, Kudlow admitted his error and, correctly, apologized for the remark.

Nikki Haley doesn’t get confused. The only confused people were the ones who failed to notify her that the President had capriciously and characteristically changed his mind. The sort of thing you might brief someone about.

Kudlow, for his part, seems to be the only person who actually “got ahead of the curve” when he decided to speak for what Haley was thinking.

In any case he’s sorry. Now if only he’d apologize for offering that breaking news to the New York Times first instead of to a conservative outlet. It’s incongruous how the President routinely bashes the NYT as fake news while his administration routinely offers them exclusives and comment.

Come on, Larry. You did the right thing here with Ambassador Haley. Now stop putting the NYT at the head of the line.

Anyway, the point is “Don’t Mess With Nikki Haley” should be a bumper sticker on every military vehicle from now on. I’m just saying.

Future. President.

The post No Confusion Here: Trump Adviser Larry Kudlow Apologizes for Remarks About Ambassador Nikki Haley appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

THE COMEYCLYSM: From “Stain” to “Hookers”, James Comey’s Super Interview and Book Promo Extravaganza Drops

Highly anticipated. Abuzz. Blockbuster. These are words that were floating around yesterday ahead of ABC airing the George Stephanopolous interview of former FBI Director and current Trump foil James Comey.

Not to mention the unspoken one from Loretta Lynch: dishonest.

On Sunday night, the big interview aired, and of course all the more buzz and gossip followed. The most talked-about moment was when Comey called President Trump “morally unfit” for office.

Not exactly going out on a limb there but a newsworthy soundbite I guess.

There were other highlights worth noting. ABC News released some of the top moments from the interview. Watch.


STEPHANOPOLOUS: “What will it mean if President Trump tries to fire Robert Mueller?”
COMEY: “It would I hope set off alarm bells that this is his most serious attack yet on the rule of law.”


STEPHANOPOLOUS: “Do you think people tied to President Trump colluded with the Russians?”
COMEY: “I don’t know, is the honest answer.”
STEPHANOPOLOUS: “Do you think the Russians have something on President Trump?”
COMEY: “I think it’s possible. I don’t know.”


STEPHANOPOLOUS: “You had another mob flashback?”
COMEY: “Yeah, I did.”

And of course, the morally unfit moment, which Susan has posted here. He pegged him as a repeat liar (true), said he treats women like “meat”, and brought up Trump’s lack of distinction between bad actors in the Charlottesville white supremacy protest.

All of that more than fair game. Click through to Susan’s post to watch the clip and read more.

There were other notable moments for which we don’t yet have clips, and some of which didn’t air Sunday night. It was a five hour interview, of which only an edited hour aired.

The New York Times has the full transcript, and released an annotated summary of highlights from it. Here’s are two excerpts from their reporting.

On the President’s Request To “Let Go” of the Flynn Investigation

‘It’s certainly some evidence of obstruction of justice.’

It’s certainly some evidence of obstruction of justice. It would depend and — and I’m just a witness in this case, not the investigator or prosecutor, it would depend upon other things that reflected on his intent.

Perhaps the most consequential exchange between Mr. Comey and Mr. Trump occurred when the president cleared the Oval Office of his staff — including the vice president — and asked to speak with Mr. Comey alone. It was in that session that Mr. Comey says that the president asked him to “let go” of the investigation into Michael T. Flynn, the national security adviser who had just been fired.

Mr. Comey makes it clear what he thinks the president’s motivations were.

“Really? The president just kicked out the attorney general to ask me to drop a criminal investigation. Wow, the world continues to go crazy.”

This one’s pretty crazy.

On The “Steele Dossier”

‘Do I look like a guy who needs hookers?’

And then I started to tell him about the allegation was that he had been involved with prostitutes in a hotel in Moscow in 2013 during the visit for the Miss Universe pageant and that the Russians had — filmed the episode. And he interrupted very defensively and started talking about it, you know, “Do I look like a guy who needs hookers?”

The public has known for months that Mr. Comey privately briefed the president about the so-called Steele dossier, which contained salacious and unverified information about the president’s activities. But it’s one thing to know that; it’s another to hear Mr. Comey describe the conversation in detail.

Mr. Comey notes how odd it felt to be talking with the incoming president about allegations that he had been with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel room.

Mr. Comey asserts that he and other intelligence officials believed it was important for Mr. Trump to know that the information about him was in circulation and might soon become public. But it’s clear from his description of the conversation that Mr. Trump’s anger toward him began that day.

You can read more from the NYT transcript here.

On the flip side, Comey did say he considers President Trump to be of “above average intelligence” and also stipulated that he doesn’t believe the Donald is physically unfit or ill in some way. So there’s that.

I don’t like Comey. On Twitter he exhibits a cloying self-regard that is at once irritating and pitiable. I think this book tour bonanza is hurting the FBI right when they need that the least.

I don’t much like Trump, either. And a lot of what Comey inappropriately discusses rings true.

It’s almost one of those moments when you grab popcorn and root for injuries, but for the fact that the consequences to our country of this public food fight will be long-term and damaging.

Nevertheless, the laundry is being aired, and as Americans we’re bound to watch, either in fascination, horror, or out of a genuine need to know the character and activity of those in power.

Whatever the case, rest assured there will be a lot more news from the Comey-Trump wars. That’s how reality TV works.

The post THE COMEYCLYSM: From “Stain” to “Hookers”, James Comey’s Super Interview and Book Promo Extravaganza Drops appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch Slammed James Comey Ahead of Big ABC Interview

Just hours before his big interview aired, former Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch released a statement attacking former FBI Director James Comey.

Like other Clinton loyalists, Lynch is not happy with statements in Comey’s book about the Clinton investigation, and in a blast of Democrat on Democrat violence, she let everyone know before his big moment.

Here’s an excerpt.

I have known James Comey almost 30 years. Throughout his time as Director we spoke regularly about some of the most sensitive issues in law enforcement and national security. If he had any concerns regarding the email investigation, classified or not, he had ample opportunities to raise them with me both privately and in meetings. He never did.

That’s not mild, that’s political. But it is an attack on both his integrity and his word, and it was strategically released right before his big moment in the sun. She might as well have called him “morally unfit.”

On Comey’s revenge and get rich tour, the Stephanopolous interview was set to be one of the feathers in his media blitz cap. And Clintonista and former Obama AG Lynch deliberately stomped on it.

Here is Lynch’s statement in full:

Over almost two decades as a federal prosecutor I have aggressively prosecuted drug dealers, violent gangs, mobsters, and money launderers, upheld the civil rights of all Americans, and fought corruption of all types –– whether by elected officials from both sides of the aisle or within organizations like FIFA. Through it all I have never hesitated to make the hard decisions, guided by the Department of Justice’s core principles or integrity, independence and above all, always doing the right thing.

The Justice Department’s handling of the Clinton email investigation under my leadership was no exception. It was led by a team of non-partisan career prosecutors whose integrity cannot be overstated and whom I trusted to assess the facts and make a recommendation – one that I ultimately accepted because I thought the evidence and law warranted it.

Everyone who works for the Department of Justice has an obligation to protect the confidentiality and integrity of the work of the department. That is why, at the critical early stages of this case, I followed the departments long-standing policy of neither confirming nor denying the fact of an ongoing investigation. This policy both pre-dates my tenure in the Department and will live on long after the current debate is over. It neither misleads nor misinforms, but instead both protects investigations and guarantees equal treatment of those under scrutiny, whether well-known or unknown. Any suggestion that I invoked this bed rock policy for any other reason is simply false.

Throughout the process I did what I always do: rise above politics and uphold the law. At no time did I ever discuss any aspect of the investigation with anyone from the Clinton campaign or the DNC.

I have known James Comey almost 30 years. Throughout his time as Director we spoke regularly about some of the most sensitive issues in law enforcement and national security. If he had any concerns regarding the email investigation, classified or not, he had ample opportunities to raise them with me both privately and in meetings. He never did.

A lot of padding in there. The gist is she’s basically claiming “I’m morally fit and professionally competent and you’re not.” Ouch.

Comey really knows how to make enemies.

The post Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch Slammed James Comey Ahead of Big ABC Interview appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

How Much Are Chris Matthews and the Rest of MSNBC Talking About “Wag the Dog”? [WATCH]

A heinous chemical attack in Damascus left dozens dead in Syria just eight days ago, including women and children. The images were horrific. A truly abominable attack.

In the intervening time, there have been U.N. Security Council meetings, there have been phone calls and discussion between the heads of state of the nations amassed in Syria fighting ISIS during that country’s devastating civil war. The United States, France, and the UK have named the brutal Syrian government as the perpetrator of the inhuman chemical attack, not the first such attack for Syrian dictator Assad.

Russia, friendly to Assad and aligned with his government, have in turn run a disinformation campaign, going so far as to claim the attack was perpetrated by the British in order to frame Assad and his regime.

Speeches have been made, lines have been drawn, and ultimately, the three nations leading the alliance of countries fighting ISIS and attempting to bring stability, the United States, France, and the United Kingdom, launched a missile strike against chemical weapons targets in the country.

Also during those eight days, MSNBC has spent an incredible amount of time talking about a movie.

“Wag the Dog” is a film by Barry Levinson, and it’s been coming up an awful lot. The movie and the phrase are the same thing: the idea that a President would go to war to avoid a domestic scandal.

How much is MSNBC talking about it?



Although O’Donnell, Maddow, and Matthews seem fully bought in, there’s reason to suspect the network execs are pushing the topic as well, as several of the guests in the video, and least one of the hosts (Hewitt) are clearly skeptical if not downright put off by the idea.

Not Matthews, though, as I noted. In fact, you should really catch the longer clip, from this morning’s “Politics Nation” with Al Sharpton, where he goes on about it.

Contrary evidence – like the fact that all of these other nations are involved, like the fact that Matthews and the rest of MSNBC have already found Trump guilty of collusion with Russia not conspiring against them, like the fact the chemical attack happened before the Cohen raid, like the fact that our Generals and Sec. Mattis aren’t bald-faced liars who would risk American lives to distract from a sex scandal, like the fact, as one MSNBC guest (a writer with Axios) pointed out, that for someone trying to distract from Mueller and Cohen Trump sure spends a hell of a lot of time talking about them and drawing attention to them – don’t matter to true believers.

Like numerologists they will continue to talk about the timing. They saw the movie and it was just exactly what they want to think about Republicans, and so they simply do.

Once they’re called on it, they’ll try to ex post facto nuance it up, but what they believe they’ve already said. And their fans and viewers are saying it on social media and in blogs and articles. It is in the early stages of becoming a Known Fact.

Just watch. In a year it will be treated as “common knowledge” that three world powers launched a military attack following a chemical weapons horror all for the sake of distracting the American population from a Trump scandal that he himself constantly draws attention to.

Because that is how dumb sh** is these days.

The post How Much Are Chris Matthews and the Rest of MSNBC Talking About “Wag the Dog”? [WATCH] appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

James Comey is Hurting the FBI

FBI Director James Comey pauses while making a statement at FBI Headquarters in Washington, Tuesday, July 5, 2016. (AP Photo/Cliff Owen)

Political grandstander James Comey, obviously anxious both to curry favor with the hard left and to exact revenge on the Trump administration, is only hurting his former professional home with his new book.

Agents and officials at the FBI who spoke with CNN Special Correspondent Jamie Gangel are “not happy” with his book, she told Wolf Blitzer last week. They find it “crosses the line of professionalism” and is basically the last thing they need.


“I’ve talked to quite a few former FBI high ranking sources. They are not happy about this, because they feel it crosses the line of professionalism. They are worried about their reputation. They’ve been under attack, the organization has been under attack. And they’re afraid when he says these things and goes this far, it further hurts their reputation short term and long term.”

A totally understandable position. The FBI is a law enforcement agency. They’re on the front line in the War on Terror. According to conservative think tank Heritage, they’ve done a pretty decent job of that. But they’ve been under institutional attack from all sides since the campaign season in 2016.

It comes from all sides. For example, if ever you’ve said anything in defense of the FBI on social media, you’ve surely been met with scornful Trumpist martyrdom. “Oh excuse me, I didn’t realize the precious FBI was above reproach.” You see this whiny remark in dozens of articles at certain websites. It’s projection, really. They must cartoon your position because their is a cartoon.

Substantive praise, like substantive criticism, should be taken in context. Of course, in the new “it’s a binary choice” America you can either condemn the entire agency and all within it, or you must worship them as holy warriors above reproach.

On the flip side, Hillary Clinton, and her many columnist and blogger minions, never ever ever EVER stop blaming Comey and the FBI for her losing the election. Aside from the fact that the Comey revelations didn’t sink her, there’s something perverse about blaming the person who exposed your wrongdoing for the the subsequent fallout, rather than blaming yourself for doing wrong in the first place.

Nevertheless, when not praising the FBI as the new and righteous warriors against the Red Menace, the left can’t stop trashing the FBI as activist or incompetent in having single-handedly sunk the otherwise destined by prophecy presidency of her pristine and flawless majesty Hillary.

In such an environment, it’s perfectly natural to resent this personal power play by Comey, who is no savior of Democracy but essentially a peddler of gossip and grudges. Writing the book was unprofessional, and discourtesy to those who still work there.

Of course the truth is that the FBI has many problems, amid much to admire. This is true of all our intelligence agencies, which are full of dedicated men and women who risk their lives on our behalf. You might have forgotten that under the barrage of criticism they relentlessly endure, most recently (and justifiably) over the failures in Parkland, Florida, lately of Trump and his devotees generally, and previously of Democrats broadly and Clintonistas specifically who didn’t like Comey saying mean things about her. (Things which I personally think he’s been trying desperately to make up with them over ever since.)


As an aside since we’re on the topic here, I think it’s important to always note something. Namely, that Comey and McCabe are bad apples. They make the whole agency look bad. But the whole agency is NOT bad. And it’s not trivial to make that point. It doesn’t “go without saying” when ranting about the FBI that you don’t mean every single agent. You should say that. It’s exactly what conservatives demand of liberals who bitch about the police.

Every time there is police misconduct, conservatives take to the internet to say “not all cops are bad” or “blue lives matter”. It is strange to me that this same care for specificity doesn’t seem to make it to the near-daily bashing of the FBI. There is bad leadership, or was. There have been big mistakes. But FBI lives matter and not all agents are James Comey. It’s not hard to say that.

The point is, you can criticize the parts without condemning the whole.

Or I guess you can go the Ann Coulter route and start trashing them as more guilty of 9/11 than the terrorists.

Or you can go the James Comey route and stab them in the back and hang the body out to dry.

And if you don’t think that’s the route the great and long-suffering James Comey is taking, you should listen to what the people who work there, or worked there in the past, actually think. That’s what Jamie Gangle did. And it’s what NRO’s Jim Geraghty did last week.

Now, Gagliano says he was once a “mild fan” of Comey, but has been unhappy with the former director’s decision to venture into the public eye, writing a tell-all book and promoting it on a highly visible press tour.

“This current effort to meet the president in the public square, at his own game of slinging mud and punching and contributing smugness to the debate, it’s a bad look for him,” Gagliano says. “I think it’s going to diminish the FBI, and I think it’s going to diminish whatever’s left of Comey’s reputation.”

Former special agent Bobby Chacon, who now works in Hollywood as a technical advisor and story consultant, has had a similar change of heart. Back when President Trump didn’t even tell Comey that he was fired in person or by phone, Chacon bristled. “Nobody deserves to be treated like that,” he told the Guardian. But since then, he has come to concur that Comey is burning through the goodwill he accumulated over the course of his career in the bureau.

“I liked him when I worked at the bureau, although who the director was never really impacted my day-to-day life in the bureau too much,” Chacon says now, adding that he began to develop some concerns about Comey beginning with the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails. He wondered why a grand jury wasn’t empaneled in that investigation, a move that he contends would have somewhat insulated the bureau from political controversy by leaving the decision to indict or not indict in others’ hands.

James Comey’s publicity and revenge tour is bad for the FBI. It’s a law enforcement agency, not a springboard to left-wing stardom. Or it shouldn’t be, anyway. His inglorious tweeting and self-serving behavior since getting fired have only served to erase any doubt that his firing was justifiable.

I would say “he should stop” but of course there’s not a remote chance of that. His utility as a bludgeon is irresistible to “The Resistance.” It’s enough that we point it out. And that we remind people that he is not the whole FBI, nor is the whole FBI him, nor does it even like him.

The post James Comey is Hurting the FBI appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


Damascus skies erupt with anti-aircraft fire as the U.S. launches an attack on Syria targeting different parts of the Syrian capital Damascus, Syria, early Saturday, April 14, 2018. Syria’s capital has been rocked by loud explosions that lit up the sky with heavy smoke as U.S. President Donald Trump announced airstrikes in retaliation for the country’s alleged use of chemical weapons. (AP Photo/Hassan Ammar)

Russian Ambassador to the United States Anatoly Antonov has posted the first official response from the country regarding the allied strikes on chemical weapons targets in Syria that took place late Friday night.

“A pre-designed scenario is being implemented,” he warns.

This is a screenshot of the Facebook post from the Russian Embassy, and below that is the text typed out, followed by Gen. Mattis predicting exactly what Russia is doing.

Statement by the Ambassador of Russia to the USA Anatoly Antonov on the strikes on Syria

The worst apprehensions have come true. Our warnings have been left unheard.

A pre-designed scenario is being implemented. Again, we are being threatened. We warned that such actions will not be left without consequences.

All responsibility for them rests with Washington, London and Paris.

Insulting the President of Russia is unacceptable and inadmissible.

The U.S. – the possessor of the biggest arsenal of chemical weapons – has no moral right to blame other countries.

These were coordinated strikes by the United States, France, and Britain. Secretary Mattis reported that the payload was much heavier this year than similar strikes last year.

He also warned that there would be disinformation. Though he didn’t specifically say Russia, he was clear in what he was referring to. Russia earlier on Friday attempted to frame the chemical attacks as essentially a frame job. Mattis references that in his remark.

It’s going to get worse before it gets better.

Here are the President’s full remarks on the strikes.

The post BREAKING: RUSSIA RESPONDS appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State