Broward County, Florida, superintendent of schools Robert Runcie says it is “fake news” that his PROMISE school leniency program likely allowed accused school shooter Nikolas Cruz to remain under the radar of law enforcement and, therefore, able to purchase the firearm that killed 17 individuals at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in February.

On the eve of a left-wing-orchestrated event called “March for Our Lives” – an adult-led protest that uses students to advocate for gun control – Runcie defends the PROMISE policy that drove down the number of minority student arrests and suspensions in his school district by allowing threatening and even violent behaviors to go unreported.

In a column at the Sun Sentinel, Runcie – who once worked for President Barack Obama’s education secretary Arne Duncan in Chicago – mocks the attention paid to the Obama-era Dear Colleague letter that coerced school districts into adopting the policy as a means to supposedly end the “school-to-prison pipeline” for minority students.

The Obama administration threatened school districts with the possibility of federal investigation and loss of funding if their statistics showed disproportionately more minority students arrested and suspended than white and Asian students. The Obama administration praised Runcie’s PROMISE program and likely considered it a model for the rest of the country.

Nevertheless, the Broward County superintendent would prefer the focus to be on “easy access to guns” as the reason Cruz was able to obtain his firearm.

Runcie denies his PROMISE program was at all instrumental in Cruz’s shooting.

“Contrary to media reports, the district has no record of Nikolas Cruz committing a PROMISE eligible infraction or being assigned to PROMISE while in high school,” he writes:

PROMISE is part of the district’s Code Book for Student Conduct & Discipline Policy. It is an intervention program for 13 specific non-violent, misdemeanor infractions, such as petty theft under $300, trespassing, vandalism, alcohol use and disruption of campus.

The district has always been explicitly clear that we have no policies that limit or tie the hands of law enforcement in doing its job in addressing school safety.

Max Eden, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, however, tells Breitbart News Runcie’s explanation warrants a closer look.

“Runcie’s careful formulation contains a falsehood, several omissions, and obfuscations,” Eden says. “It doesn’t cover middle school, where Cruz racked up about two dozen offenses and was transferred into an intensive behavior management school – without ever getting an arrest record.”

“Runcie claims that PROMISE only covered ‘non-violent’ offenses,” Eden observes. “That’s just straight false. The 2013 version covered assault and fighting; the 2016 version covered ‘affray,’ i.e., fighting. That means Cruz’s fights were only deemed non-PROMISE eligible based on administrator discretion, not policy.”

“Given that Cruz is alleged to have threatened students, it’s also worth noting that ‘threats’ are a PROMISE-eligible offense,” he continues. “Perhaps those incidents weren’t recorded as threats. Students have reported that Cruz brought bullets and knives to school. Perhaps those incidents weren’t recorded at all. Or perhaps they were and Runcie’s statement eludes them; the discipline matrix doesn’t highlight Class B Weapons as a PROMISE-eligible Incident.”

Eden urges a careful look at “the hurdles Runcie built into the new discipline matrix.”

“After failing to get Cruz involuntarily committed to a mental institution, the school developed a plan: don’t let him bring a backpack because maybe he’ll kill everyone,” he explains. “Then he commits an assault. Used to be, there were four categories for assault and you could call the cops for three. But now, there were three categories and you could only call the cops for the most serious form of assault. So, despite everything about his record and insane behavior, policy prohibited administrators from sending him to law enforcement when he committed that assault … three weeks before he legally bought an AR-15.”

The 2016 PROMISE collaborative agreement among the school district, law enforcement, and community partners – such as the NAACP – also resolves that the parties “follow the letter and spirit of the ESSA [federal Every Student Succeeds Act] provisions to reduce exclusionary disciplinary practices, while implementing prevention and intervention programs for children and youth who are neglected, delinquent, or at-risk.”

“The parties will also follow the Department of Justice and Department of Education Guidelines on School Climate and Discipline,” the PROMISE agreement states.

At a recent Heritage Foundation panel focused on the reported disorder that has resulted from the Obama-era school leniency policy, U.S. Civil Rights Commissioner Gail Heriot, a professor of law at the University of San Diego School of Law, observed that the Obama administration essentially told schools that if teachers and principals are disciplining proportionally more African American students than white or Asian students, “we’re coming after you with massive investigations and threats to cut off your funding.”

“Under this approach it’s not actual race discrimination that gets schools in trouble,” Heriot noted. “It’s having ‘bad numbers.’”

“Nobody disputes that African American students are disciplined at higher rates than white students or Asian students nationally,” she observed. “But what if the reason for that is that African Americans misbehave more often, and what if the cost of failure to discipline those students falls on their fellow African American students who are trying to learn amid classroom disorder?”

Heriot also emphasized that white students get disciplined at rates higher than Asian students and that boys get disciplined at higher rates than girls.

“Yet, no one seems very interested in those bad numbers,” she asserted.

According to Heriot, it is “virtually undisputed that students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds are more likely to misbehave in school than students from middle-class backgrounds.”

However, the U.S. Civil Rights commissioner said research shows that prior problem behavior is the best predictor of who will get suspended from school – and not race.

She observes the Obama-era policy has produced two “severely negative effects”:

First, it’s caused schools to back away from discipline generally, with the result of more chaotic classrooms. Second, it has led to real discrimination, where white and Asian students on the one hand, and African American students on the other, operate under different discipline rules – all in order to make the numbers look good.

Heriot urges the Trump U.S. Education Department to withdraw the Dear Colleague letters establishing the lenient discipline policy and put teachers and principals back in charge.

It is not an overstatement to say that President Trump managed to infuriate a sizable chunk of his base over reneging on vetoing the gargantuan greasy pork sandwich of the $1.3 trillion spending bill.

Once again, we have an example of government at its very worst and yet another cramdown of an obscene giveaway to the special interests that own Congress and are the true constituents of our elected officials.

Let’s face it, our government is a teeming cesspool of corruption and the Republican leaders are totally in on it, when it comes to screw jobs it is always a bipartisan effort to sticking it right up the asses of the American people with Tabasco flake lube and no reach around.

Trump really had no choice but to sign this monstrosity as unpalatable as it is because the swamp is not going to be easily drained – it fights back.

The problem with Trump’s rollover though is that it comes on the heels of some other danger signs from the POTUS – especially on gun control – which show that the New York liberals Kushner and spouse have his ear which has always been a problem with this often chaotic administration.

But as firebrand pundit Ann Colter is quick to point out (and she isn’t the only one) Trump’s failure to veto this monstrosity in an election year could cause serious problems with Republican turnout and the flipping of the House to Democrat control will see an immediate move to impeach him.

CONGRATULATIONS, PRESIDENT SCHUMER!

— Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) March 23, 2018

Via the Washington Examiner “Conservative commentator and author Ann Coulter skewered President Trump in a series of tweets Friday and suggested he will face impeachment after he signed a $1.3 trillion spending bill into law”:

“CONGRATULATIONS, PRESIDENT SCHUMER!” the one-time staunch Trump supporter and author of In Trump We Trust tweeted Friday, bashing the president’s work with Senate Minority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

Coulter, a steadfast supporter of the southern border wall, continued by sending a flurry of tweets bashing the president’s lack of action on building the border and revving up national defense spending instead.

“MASSIVE DEFENSE SPENDING to induct transgenders & build BIG BEAUTIFUL walls … in Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, and Tunisia,” she wrote.

Trump signed the $1.3 trillion omnibus spending bill on Friday despite his displeasure with its provisions and price tag. He cited the military and his duty to keep the U.S. safe as his reason for signing.

In response to him speaking at length about national security, Coulter tweeted: “GOOD GOD! Will @realDonaldTrump talk about ANYTHING but defense spending???? Per Obama: The 1980s called & they want their foreign policy back.”

Coulter is spot on about the defense spending because there is a shitload of money in permanent war and while I am a believer in a strong military, I also am totally against feeding the so-called military industrial complex to shakedown taxpayers to fund unnecessary globalist wars in places where no threat to U.S. interests exists but the potential for profit is enormous. This is something that NEVER changes regardless of who is in the White House. They are all prisoners to this bloated monstrosity but it is very hard to see how any of this horseshit makes America great again and doesn’t just contribute to the larger globalist agenda.

She finished it off with this dagger:

“ I will never sign another bill like this again”

Yeah, because you’ll be impeached.

— Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) March 23, 2018

Joining Coulter is Fox News pundit Laura Ingraham who also warned Trump of the peril that he is soon to face if the House flips to the neo-Stalinists:

Missed opportunity by @realDonaldTrump by signing this spending bill. If he loses the House, Dems will go straight to impeachment. @realDonaldTrump

— Laura Ingraham (@IngrahamAngle) March 23, 2018

In the larger war, one must pick their battles against the formidable threat of an entrenched and corrupt system and I get it why Trump signed off but in doing so, did he step on his dick?

The left is energized as never before and has been itching to avenge Hillary and impeaching Trump will be like Christmas morning to them. I would hope that people would not abandon Trump now because this movement has always been about more than him as a man but as a symbol but if Coulter and Ingraham are right, the country is set to become a very hostile place for conservatives who will be hunted down and punished for their dissent.

What do you deplorables think?

In the last week, liberal corporations and anti-gun interests have launched a new salvo in the gun control battle.

But this time they are not merely advocating gun control policies or limiting the sale of firearms in certain stores. Instead, they are attacking America’s gun culture itself. By gun culture, I mean the culture that appreciates the value of firearms, promotes the lawful use of firearms, and respects the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Two different developments have occurred.

First, the Kroger retail giant announced that it was removing from its stores any magazines or publications that feature “assault rifles.” Kroger wasn’t specific about which magazines would go, but that could potentially remove everything from Guns & Ammo to Outdoor Life. Kroger owns nearly 3,000 supermarkets and retail stores including Kroger, Dillon’s, Fred Meyer’s and Harris Teeter. Unlike restricting the sale of firearms to buyers 21 or older, this move attacks the very notion that firearms can be the subject of collecting, sport shooting, hunting use, and popular interest. In other words, it rejects the fact that reasonable people have a legitimate interest in reading about guns.

Second, YouTube announced that all videos that demonstrate firearms, promote the sale of firearms, or provide instruction on the assembly of firearms will be banned from its platform. That is a major change that will affect millions of gun owners. Gun owners often check out reviews and demonstrations posted on YouTube before buying a firearm, just like other consumers check out reviews on YouTube.

It’s also unclear just how extensive the YouTube ban will be. I and many other gun owners sometimes check out instructional videos on gun maintenance on YouTube. Those videos demonstrate firearms and sometimes involve the assembly of firearms. Will they be banned as well? And what about gun safety videos? Hunting videos? Those too involve the demonstration of firearms, and they indirectly promote the sale of firearms.

YouTube has become a virtual public square where millions of Americans communicate with each other on a variety of topics. It appears that this public square will soon exclude communication that involves firearms in any demonstrative way.

Both of these moves are designed to inhibit the expression of ideas that is an important part of the gun culture in America. Our Founding Fathers appreciated the importance of an armed citizenry. Indeed, they declared in the Second Amendment that it was “necessary to the security of a free State.” But an armed citizenry requires a culture that supports the safe and lawful use of guns by a significant portion of the population. That culture is now under threat.

Kris W. Kobach is the elected secretary of state of Kansas. Prior to becoming secretary of state, he was a professor of constitutional law at UMKC Law School from 1996 to 2011. An expert in immigration law and policy, he coauthored the Arizona SB-1070 immigration law and represented in federal court the ten ICE agents who sued to stop President Obama’s 2012 DACA amnesty. During 2001-03, he was Attorney General John Ashcroft’s chief adviser on immigration law at the Department of Justice. He is also a 2018 candidate for the office of governor of Kansas. His website is kriskobach.com.

One of the students who survived the attack at a Florida high school last month where 17 students and staff were killed mocked teens who disagree with the premise of the March for Our Lives protest taking place on Saturday in Washington, DC to demand more restrictive gun laws.

A host of National Public Radio’s Morning Edition asked Cameron Kasky, 17, about young people who disagree with him about guns.

“I’ve read some really interesting op-eds by students about your age who say, you know, ‘I’m growing up in rural America. Guns are part of my family’s culture. I like target shooting. I don’t think guns are a bad thing,’” Noel King noted.

“What do you say to a 17-year-old who fundamentally disagrees with you about some of this stuff?” King asked.

“Well, I say we’re marching to protect you from other people like you who have guns,” Kasky said. “And I say that target shooting, while it is a sport, we’ve become the targets.”

“We’re the targets now,” Kasky said. “We are running away from people like you.”

The interview gave Kasky the opportunity to assert that the march, which is expected to draw as many as 500,000 to the nation’s capital and hundreds of other cities around the country and even some abroad, was still controlled by the students from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.

But when asked about the protest’s left-wing supporters, Kasky admitted that adults helped pull off the D.C. event, which requires a federal permit, massive logistical support, and lots of money, including millions in insurance costs.

King: You are working with progressive groups, though – right? – like Indivisible, which is a movement to resist the Trump agenda. You have dipped a toe into politics here.

Kasky then said race is an issue in school shootings.

Kasky: You know, our story was told because we are an affluent white community. And we have to shine the spotlight that was given on us on everybody in the world who has to deal with this on a daily basis. So people like Indivisible, who represent students who are in lower-income communities and don’t get to speak out the way we do because people don’t listen, we have to connect with these students.

“So the leadership of this movement still is teenagers?” King asked.

“Yes,” Kasky claimed. “And while we have people who help us, while we have people who can help us book hotels and get city permits, those aren’t the people controlling our message. Those aren’t the people writing our words. The only reason this has worked and the only reason this will continue to work is because we don’t let ourselves get bastardized by others.”

In fact, a wide coalition of left-wing groups have been involved in organizing, promoting, and funding the march, including the anti-gun group Giffords, Move On, and Women’s March LA.

When a company fails, who do you blame — its individual employees or the boss up top?

………………………………… ……………………………………………………. ………………………………………………….. ……………………

………………………………… ……………………………………………………. ………………………………………………….. ……………………

Though some wish to pretend that President Donald Trump deserves either limited blame or no blame for the ginormous $1.3 trillion omnibus spending bill that he signed into law Friday, I call bullshit.

I remember Trump frequently touting his allegedly prodigious deal-making skills during the last presidential election: “It’s give-and-take,” he said in an interview with Business Insider five months after he announced his candidacy in 2015. “But it’s gotta be mostly take. Because you can’t give. You gotta mostly take.”

Yet the bill he signed into law “gave Democrats everything they wanted, including half a billion dollars to Planned Parenthood,” but failed to fully fund his proposed southern border wall. Trump took it, alright. He took it right in the ass.

If you think I’m being too rough on him, let me just give you a small taste of how some of his most fervent supporters reacted:

CONGRATULATIONS, PRESIDENT SCHUMER!

— Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) March 23, 2018

“ I will never sign another bill like this again”

Yeah, because you’ll be impeached.

— Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) March 23, 2018

The Democrats gave you the rope, Mr. President, and you just hanged yourself with it. #ByeByeGOP2018 https://t.co/Hw5tgnAbc9

— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) March 23, 2018

And it wasn’t just famous people either. Nearly every caller who dialed into conservative radio show host Rush Limbaugh’s show Friday expressed an equal dose of disgust and outrage.

“We got snake-bit as far as I’m concerned. Anyway, I’m damn mad — as a conservative, I’m damn mad — and I don’t have to take it anymore. I think the man has lost principle totally, and I just will not vote for him again and I’ll be looking for somebody else to be our Republican president in the next election,” said William from Ogden, Utah.

“Listen, I’m so fed up with this whole government stuff now. They’ve just rolled our president, the one that I voted for. I live in California and I voted for Donald Trump. I’ll never do it again,” added Pat from California.

Limbaugh tried to quell their anger by claiming “(t)his is exactly what the establishment in Washington in the Congress — this is exactly the reaction they want. They want you blaming Trump for this. They want you thinking Trump has failed.”

“They want you thinking Trump has been compromised. They want you thinking Trump has been eaten up and swallowed by the swamp. They want you think Trump has sold you out.”

As caller Dan from Michigan rightly pointed out, however, “He did [fail].”

Limbaugh further tried arguing that the omnibus was “no different than how any other budget legislation would get done with any other Republican president in Washington.”

“This is exactly how it happens with any Republican in there. This isn’t game changing,” he said.

That’s the point, Mr. Limbaugh. Trump won the election in part because of his promise to be a genuine maverick. But the Trump we saw Friday evening, Friday afternoon, last September, last May and countless other times isn’t a maverick. He’s a soft, weak-kneed, bleeding-heart chump, and yeah, I said it!

Have I personally given up on him yet? Of course not. But I have definitely chosen to stop excusing his bullshit.

Look, folks, you can’t act like Trump is some topnotch, Godfather-like bossman, and then turn around and whine that he’s failing because Republicans aren’t supporting him enough and blah, blah, blah.

He’s the damn president and commander in chief, and if he wants to win reelection in 2020, he better man up and start acting like it!

Personal Note: Due to an impending pay cut at Downtrend.com spurred by Adolf Zuckerberg’s war on conservative thought, I need YOUR help to keep writing here. If interested, please check out my Patreon account here.