Claim: NFL Discriminated Against Cheerleader Because She’s a Christian

A former Miami Dolphins cheerleader has filed a discrimination complaint against the team and the NFL with the Florida Commission on Human Relations because she said her Christian faith made her a target of ridicule by other cheerleaders and supervisors, NBC News reports.

Kristan Ann Ware, 27, cheered with the Dolphins for three years. She says after she disclosed that she was a virgin by choice and was going to remain so until marriage, she was ostracized by the organization.

The harassment began in 2015 during a trip to London for a game against the Jets, during which other members of the cheerleading squad were talking about their “sex playlist” on a bus ride. That’s when Ware “was pushed to give her playlist.”

“Kristin told her teammates that she was waiting until she was married because of her personal relationship with God,” the complaint reads.

“She was sensitive to everyone around her having different beliefs and ideals so she further stated that it was her personal conviction.”

That began the ridicule, and it got worse once she put an image of her baptism and a Bible verse on social media. Ware says that cheerleader director Dorie Grogan used the verse to put her faith down during an interview for returning dancers.

“Let’s talk about your virginity,” Grogan supposedly told Ware in April of 2016. “As far as we are concerned you have taken something that was once upon a time pure and beautiful and you’ve made it dirty.”

Ware said she made the Dolphins’ human resources department aware of the situation, but the ridicule continued. The complaint says, among other things, that she was forced to wear “angel wings” during a 2016 fashion show in reference to her faith and was falsely accused of “groping a fan’s breast and butt at an appearance.”

Do you think this is anti-Christian discrimination?

“I felt like I was walking on eggshells, but yet a football player can publicly announce whatever he believes in,” she told CBS.

“Whether it’s kneeling for a political indifference or kneeling because he does have a relationship with God and he wants the pray before a game, he has a right to do that.”

Ware also said she wasn’t allowed to mention God, even though she wasn’t proselytizing.

“She never once witnessed to anyone, she never once asked anyone if they believed in Jesus,” Sara Blackwell, Ware’s lawyer, told NBC. “She is the friendliest person you will ever meet. If she talked about her faith in God, it’s because that’s who she is, not because she is trying to convert anyone.”

RELATED: Seth Meyers Channels His Inner Joy Behar… Attacks Christians in Disturbing Segment

Incredibly, the Miami Dolphins said that the incident was dealt with, even though Grogan remains with the team.

“In 2016, we were made aware of an incident with our cheerleaders that fell short of our standards and expectations,” a source with the Miami Dolphins said. “We immediately addressed the issue and reprimanded the supervisor, who subsequently apologized to the entire team.”

Ware, needless to say, is no longer with the team.

“I loved my job,” Ware said during a Thursday interview with WFLA-TV. “It was great, but after that things just started to change… It became unbearable.”

Apparently, it takes a cheerleader and the specter of the NFL for cases of blatant anti-Christian discrimination to actually get covered by the media, with NBC, CBS and The New York Times, among others, paying attention to the story for once. It didn’t hurt that Ware’s complaint also comes as the league is enduring yet another public relations crisis, this time over how cheerleaders are treated.

A lawsuit, filed by former New Orleans Saints cheerleader Bailey Davis, alleged that the NFL had one set of rules for male players and another set for female cheerleaders, a practice which violates federal anti-discrimination laws. The suit also brought to light questionable practices on the NFL’s part pertaining to cheerleaders, including a “jiggle” test for prospective Buffalo Bills cheerleaders in which they were screened for fat by doing jumping jacks to see if any visible fat would jiggle.

The NFL responded to Ware’s accusation in a typically NFL-ian fashion.

“The NFL and all NFL member clubs support fair employment practices,” a statement for the league read. “Everyone who works in the NFL, including cheerleaders, has the right to work in a positive and respectful environment that is free from any and all forms of harassment and discrimination and fully complies with state and federal laws.”

Lawsuits have been filed over far less than this, and the fact that Ware is only seeking arbitration with the league and a meeting with Roger Goodell ought to be treated as a godsend by NFL officials. In time, maybe the league will come around to see it that way and offer an olive branch to Ware. Maybe the Dolphins will finally fire Dorie Grogan, which they should have done in the first place if Ware’s allegations were substantiated. Maybe they’ll realize that this wouldn’t happen to a player, nor would it be tolerated if it happened to someone of a different faith.

As of now, none of this has happened, and the case of Kristan Ware remains yet another in a long list of reasons to have very serious reservations about the National Football League.

What do you think? Scroll down to comment below!

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://conservativetribune.com

Trump’s Joke About How Long He’ll Be in Office Sends Libs Into Complete Panic

It doesn’t take much to send those who have a knee-jerk opposition to President Donald Trump into a tizzy. (See: “Comey, James;” “Daniels, Stormy;” “Sajudin, Dino;” “Putin, Vladimir;” Trump’s Twitter account, etc., etc.)

In fact, it’s gotten bad enough that they can even get themselves into a tizzy over a joke. And said joke doesn’t even need to be offensive. It just needs to rile up the left.

Take, for instance, Trump’s Rose Garden press conference Thursday where he was touting the benefits of tax cuts. During the speech, he joked to a congressman that he would like to be in office for 16 years and they should pass an amendment allowing him to do that.

Take a look at this very obvious joke:

“We’ve cut more regulations in a year and a quarter than any administration, whether it’s four years, eight years or, in one case, 16 years,” Trump said.

“Should we go back to 16 years? Congressman, can we have that extended? The last time I jokingly said that, the papers started saying ‘he’s got despotic tendencies!’ No, I’m not looking to do it, unless you want to do it.”

That’s clearly a joke. You would think that there would be literally nobody who saw that and didn’t see a joke. What happened next proved that we’re not in a post-truth era, we’re in a post-laugh era.

Do you think President Trump is trolling the left?

Take, for instance, Newsweek. You would think they would be used to the concept of the joke, what with all all of the tentacle hentai references their employment contract with Kurt Eichenwald hath engendered. However, in the first sentence of Newsweek’s piece on the wisecrack, writer Jason Le Miere noted that Trump “has previously heralded Chinese President Xi Jinping being enabled to rule for life.”

That particular sentence fragment isn’t just grammatically-challenged, it’s also factually-challenged — at least, if you understand the concept of humor. The comment in question comes from another joke made behind closed doors back in March that the media decided, in spite of what one hopes was their better judgement, to take seriously.

“He’s now president for life,” Trump said regarding Chinese President Xi Jinping. “President for life. No, he’s great. And look, he was able to do that. I think it’s great. Maybe we’ll have to give that a shot some day.”

It wasn’t just Newsweek bringing that quote up, either.

An article from Bustle noted that “Thursday wasn’t the first time Trump has ‘joked’ about becoming a dictator. In March, while addressing a change to China’s constitution that allows its president to serve for life, Trump said that America might have to eliminate presidential term limits at some point as well.” Elite Daily also referenced it in an article which won this week’s contest for most millennial-friendly Trump headline: “Donald Trump Joked About Being President For 16 Years & Just No.”

RELATED: Nunes Wins, DOJ Makes Immediate Move After Learning He’s Willing To Start Impeaching Them

Totes perf, Elite Daily.

So, after consulting Newsweek, Bustle and Elite Daily in hope of some wisdom, I then decided to turn to twitter Twitter in search of a sensible range of reactions, because I’m clearly a masochist looking to extirpate every last vestige of my faith in humanity.

User @Pseudosaurus demonstrated the typical sort of measured response one might expect to find to an obvious joke:

@RogueWHAdvisor, meanwhile, decided this jest was so serious it called for breaking out the caps lock:

Then there were the uninformed…

… and the terminally bitter.

You’re in good company, @MotherResister. Or, well, let’s just say you’re in company.

So, in short, what this proves is that absolutely nobody on the left seems to be able to take a joke when it comes to President Trump. All it gets is a whirlwind of outrage and contempt for those who should know better. Why, it’s almost like Trump and his people are expertly trolling the media and the left to do exactly what they want them to do just to show how deep the bias goes.

I’m not saying that Trump is trolling, mind you. All I’m saying is that if he’s doing this unintentionally, he couldn’t do a better job if he put his mind to it.

What do you think? Scroll down to comment below!

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://conservativetribune.com

Tourist Robbed, Threatened at Knife Point in New York City Over ‘Make America Great Again’ Hat

Tourist Robbed, Threatened at Knife Point in New York City Over ‘Make America Great Again’ Hat

An 18-year-old Danish tourist was robbed at knife point by two men who grabbed his “Make America Great Again” hat and threatened to stab him when he attempted to retrieve it.

According to authorities, the victim was attempting to get on the subway in Union Square just before 6 p.m. on Thursday when the incident took place.

The NYPD told Fox News that the victim was grabbed from behind by two men who proceeded to steal his hat and asked him “what are you doing with that hat on?” When the victim put up a fight, one of the men pulled out a knife.

The men fled with the hat and remain at large.

Police have released a sketch of one of the suspects. He is described as being an almost bald, 6-foot-tall white man in his 20s or 30s, with light facial hair.

According to the New York Post, he was last seen wearing a tan or brown jacket, dark pants and a baseball cap.

The second suspect was described as a white male, with no additional details.

Anyone with information is asked to call the NYPD’s Crime Stoppers Hotline at 1-800-577-TIPS (8477) or for Spanish, 1-888-57-PISTA (74782).

Comments

As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to edit or remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. The same applies to trolling, the use of multiple aliases, or just generally being a jerk. Enforcement of this policy is at the sole discretion of the site administrators and repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without warning. Guest posting is disabled for security reasons.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com

Trump Completely Unloads on James Comey After Book Excerpts Leak to Press

Now, THIS is fire and fury.

As excerpts from former FBI Director James Comey’s new book began leaking into the media this week, President Donald Trump took to Twitter on Friday morning to blast the man he fired from the nation’s top law enforcement agency.

And he left absolutely no doubt about his opinion of Comey — or his job performance.

“James Comey is a proven LEAKER & LIAR,” Trump wrote. “Virtually everyone in Washington thought he should be fired for the terrible job he did — until he was, in fact, fired.”

Judging by the material that’s been released so far, Trump’s rage is understandable.

Comey did more than just characterize Trump as a man “untethered to the truth,” surrounded by sycophants and with a style of leadership more suitable to a mob boss than a president of the world’s greatest country.

He went so far as to question the strength of the president’s marriage, by reprising some of the most salacious accusations that were presented in the now-debunked “Trump dossier,” about Trump engaging in actions with Russian prostitutes that can only be described as disgusting.

From his Twitter posts, the president’s outrage is almost palpable.

 

Comey obviously has an axe to grind against the commander in chief, and he’s willing to stoke even baseless suspicions in order to strike back.

Is James Comey damaging the country just to hurt Donald Trump?

In an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos

published Friday morning

, Comey told the former

Clinton White House toady

that Trump had asked him to investigate the dossier’s claims that Trump had engaged in urination games with prostitutes in Moscow.

Comey said the conversation took place when the two men shared a private dinner in January 2017, a week after Trump’s inauguration.

RELATED: Trump’s Joke About How Long He’ll Be in Office Sends Libs Into Complete Panic

“He may want me to investigate it to prove that it didn’t happen,” Comey said. “And then he says something that distracted me because he said, you know, ‘If there’s even a 1 percent chance my wife thinks that’s true, that’s terrible.’”

A normal person might think that was perfectly understandable. Every man would like to think his wife would not believe such a thing to be possible, but every man wrongly accused would also like to have the evidence of his innocence out for everyone — including his spouse — to see.

Comey chose to view the conversation differently. And it’s tough to believe that his own bitterness at being kicked out of the FBI director’s post isn’t skewing his thinking.

“In what kind of marriage, to what kind of man, does a spouse conclude there is only a 99 percent chance her husband didn’t do that?” Comey wrote, according to the New York Post.

The legions of Trump critics in the media and the Democrat Party are going to lap up observations like that.

But decent people — regardless of their politics — should be disgusted. Judging by the account of the Comey-Stephanopoulos interview published by ABC on Friday, the former FBI director is bent on making his personal grievance against Trump into a national issue based on the tawdriest of accusations.

And considering this is the man who headed the infamously biased investigation of Hillary Clinton’s private email server when she was secretary of state — and publicly declared that she should not be prosecuted when everyone in America who’s not blinded by partisanship knew she was guilty of abusing the nation’s secrets, at the very least — Comey’s judgment has to be taken as suspect.

When Trump was presented with an apparent betrayal by former chief strategist Steve Bannon in the White House gossip-fest “Fire and Fury” by Michael Wolff, his outrage was legendary.

What’s going to come after Comey’s book is officially released is likely to be what real “fire and fury” looks like.

What do you think? Scroll down to comment below!

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://conservativetribune.com

Comey on Letter About Hillary Clinton Email Investigation: I Thought She Would Win, ‘I’m Sorry’ She’s Angry With Me

Former FBI Director James Comey writes in his new book he expected Hillary Clinton to defeat Donald Trump in the 2016 election, saying he was "sorry" she was angry with him for his handling of her private email investigation.

Clinton has consistently assigned blame to Comey for her loss, pointing to his October 28, 2016, letter to Congress announcing newly discovered emails related to her use of a private email server as secretary of state. She argues the letter stopped her momentum and gave Trump the leg up he needed to defeat her in November.

According to the New York Times, Comey writes in A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies and Leadership that he feared he would make Clinton an "illegitimate" president if revelations came out later that he had concealed the new developments.

He added he didn’t know if he would have acted differently if Trump led in the polls at the time:

The book also serves as a platform for Mr. Comey to once again defend his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation and the decisions that for a time made him one of the most despised figures among political liberals and other supporters of Mrs. Clinton.

However, Mr. Comey acknowledges that he thought Mrs. Clinton would win the presidency and said it is "entirely possible" that he decided to reveal that the email investigation had started up again 11 days before the election because he was primarily concerned that if he concealed the renewed investigation, it would make her an "illegitimate president."

Would he have made a different decision if Mr. Trump had been ahead in the polls? "I don’t know," Mr. Comey concedes.

The Washington Post reported Comey writes his wife and daughters voted for Clinton and addressed her "anger" toward him.

"I have read she has felt anger toward me personally, and I’m sorry for that. I’m sorry that I couldn’t do a better job explaining to her and her supporters why I made the decisions I made," he writes.

Comey’s letter resulted in Democrats flipping in their previous praise of him, going from calling him a man of unimpeachable character to saying he was unfit for his position.

Clinton said last year Comey "should have been disciplined" for his handling of her email probe, saying Trump fired him for the wrong reason.

Comey has previously testified he felt "mildly nauseous" at the idea he could have swayed the 2016 electon.

The post Comey on Letter About Hillary Clinton Email Investigation: I Thought She Would Win, ‘I’m Sorry’ She’s Angry With Me appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

via Washington Free Beacon

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://freebeacon.com

Turns out Comey gave Hillary a pass on emails because he thought she would win

James Comey’s memoir, pompously titled A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership, set for release on April 17, is out from the reviewer class, and all but one seems to have missed the bombshell in it: that Comey neglected to prosecute Hillary Clinton for her refusal to properly handle the nation’s top secrets through her illegal private bathtub server, and exposed those secrets to  our nation’s enemies, because he thought she would win the 2016 election.  Some Boy Scout, as he and his allies portray him.


Quite a few of the reviewers focus on Comey’s descriptive powers, something that could make anyone look negative if the view is biased enough, which Comey’s is.  He natters on about Trump’s hand size, the bags under his eyes, his tie being too long, and other stylistics that mark Comey as a vain little man obsessed with looks, little different from David Brooks and his fascination with the crease of President Obama’s pant legs.  Sounds about par for a preening fop, which I guess Comey is.  I didn’t know there were guys who did this.



There also is focus on he-said, she-said exchanges, which, given Comey’s penchant for lying, raises questions as to the accuracy of the supposed recollections.  Supposedly, Gen. John Kelly was all broken up about Comey’s firing.  Well, maybe – he’s a swamp thing, after all, and he’s said to be a nice person, very empathetic, but who knows?


Then there are the pointless anecdotes, which the Daily Wire rightly classifies as “nothingburgers.”  Are we supposed to be surprised that President Trump didn’t like the “pee tape” about himself, in a dossier put together by his enemies and their Kremlin “sources”?  Or to think it unnatural that President Trump wouldn’t want his wife to believe it?  It all seems natural and predictable.  Comey just wants to bring private business to the fore to embarrass Trump.  Comey is again being Comey.


Lastly, there is the elaborate Comey description of President Trump being “a mafia don.”  What comes off here is that Comey is projecting his past experiences onto Trump, particularly with the stylistics he considers so important, and can’t break from his past.  He can see no difference between a mobster and a New York businessman, yet at the same time, he considers President Obama with all his dirty-trick tactics above reproach.  Talk about a guy who can’t discern.  Color me unimpressed.


Here’s what the reviewers, all but one, seem to have missed: that Comey, after playing Boy Scout all through his memoirs, admits he neglected to prosecute Hillary Clinton for her email and server violations and let her off the hook because he thought she would win the election.  I found it buried in the best written of the reviews, the one done by a lefty at the New York Times, which goes beyond the bullet-point takeaways for a more interesting piece.  Put these three paragraphs from it together here (with my boldface of the money quotes):


There are some methodical explanations in these pages of the reasoning behind the momentous decisions Comey made regarding Hillary Clinton’s emails during the 2016 campaign – explanations that attest to his nonpartisan and well-intentioned efforts to protect the independence of the F.B.I., but that will leave at least some readers still questioning the judgment calls he made, including the different approaches he took in handling the bureau’s investigation into Clinton (which was made public) and its investigation into the Trump campaign (which was handled with traditional F.B.I. secrecy).


…and…


Those characteristics can sometimes be seen in Comey’s account of his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation, wherein he seems to have felt a moral imperative to address, in a July 2016 press conference, what he described as her “extremely careless” handling of “very sensitive, highly classified information,” even though he went on to conclude that the bureau recommend no charges be filed against her.  His announcement marked a departure from precedent in that it was done without coordination with Department of Justice leadership and offered more detail about the bureau’s evaluation of the case than usual.


As for his controversial disclosure on Oct. 28, 2016, 11 days before the election, that the F.B.I. was reviewing more Clinton emails that might be pertinent to its earlier investigation, Comey notes here that he had assumed from media polling that Clinton was going to win.  He has repeatedly asked himself, he writes, whether he was influenced by that assumption: “It is entirely possible that, because I was making decisions in an environment where Hillary Clinton was sure to be the next president, my concern about making her an illegitimate president by concealing the restarted investigation bore greater weight than it would have if the election appeared closer or if Donald Trump were ahead in all polls.  But I don’t know.”


In other words, Comey was watching the elections closely and very concerned as to their impact on the Clinton email investigation.  When he thought Hillary had it in the bag, he announced his re-opening of the case in the last week of October, following pressure from the New York cops who had found that the classified emails had spread to Anthony Weiner’s pervert-filled computer, where his proclivities for little girls eventually put him in the can.  The information from the cops was going to spill out anyway.  And the fix was in that Hillary would be let off the hook, by Comey, as he conspired with Attorney General Loretta Lynch, as emails uncovered by Sharyl Attkisson revealed last January.


The implication is that he gave her the initial pass on the emails because he wanted her to win.  He was focused on her “legitimacy.”  Busting sailors for careless photos was all fine with him, but he had no problem with Hillary opening a private server illegally in some guy’s bathroom because it was all about her winning.  He’d give her a stern warning instead of an arrest warrant in the name of his “integrity,” yet there was no way he wouldn’t protect her “legitimacy,” which wasn’t his job.  It’s always OK if the person in power does it, the person he wants to  win does it, right, James?  Laws are for little people.


What we learn here is that Comey was as political an animal as it was possible to be in his decisions about investigating both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.  He didn’t succeed with this philosophy, so now he’s doing his memoirs.  Let’s hope they make a quick trip to the remainder bins.


James Comey’s memoir, pompously titled A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership, set for release on April 17, is out from the reviewer class, and all but one seems to have missed the bombshell in it: that Comey neglected to prosecute Hillary Clinton for her refusal to properly handle the nation’s top secrets through her illegal private bathtub server, and exposed those secrets to  our nation’s enemies, because he thought she would win the 2016 election.  Some Boy Scout, as he and his allies portray him.


Quite a few of the reviewers focus on Comey’s descriptive powers, something that could make anyone look negative if the view is biased enough, which Comey’s is.  He natters on about Trump’s hand size, the bags under his eyes, his tie being too long, and other stylistics that mark Comey as a vain little man obsessed with looks, little different from David Brooks and his fascination with the crease of President Obama’s pant legs.  Sounds about par for a preening fop, which I guess Comey is.  I didn’t know there were guys who did this.


There also is focus on he-said, she-said exchanges, which, given Comey’s penchant for lying, raises questions as to the accuracy of the supposed recollections.  Supposedly, Gen. John Kelly was all broken up about Comey’s firing.  Well, maybe – he’s a swamp thing, after all, and he’s said to be a nice person, very empathetic, but who knows?


Then there are the pointless anecdotes, which the Daily Wire rightly classifies as “nothingburgers.”  Are we supposed to be surprised that President Trump didn’t like the “pee tape” about himself, in a dossier put together by his enemies and their Kremlin “sources”?  Or to think it unnatural that President Trump wouldn’t want his wife to believe it?  It all seems natural and predictable.  Comey just wants to bring private business to the fore to embarrass Trump.  Comey is again being Comey.


Lastly, there is the elaborate Comey description of President Trump being “a mafia don.”  What comes off here is that Comey is projecting his past experiences onto Trump, particularly with the stylistics he considers so important, and can’t break from his past.  He can see no difference between a mobster and a New York businessman, yet at the same time, he considers President Obama with all his dirty-trick tactics above reproach.  Talk about a guy who can’t discern.  Color me unimpressed.


Here’s what the reviewers, all but one, seem to have missed: that Comey, after playing Boy Scout all through his memoirs, admits he neglected to prosecute Hillary Clinton for her email and server violations and let her off the hook because he thought she would win the election.  I found it buried in the best written of the reviews, the one done by a lefty at the New York Times, which goes beyond the bullet-point takeaways for a more interesting piece.  Put these three paragraphs from it together here (with my boldface of the money quotes):


There are some methodical explanations in these pages of the reasoning behind the momentous decisions Comey made regarding Hillary Clinton’s emails during the 2016 campaign – explanations that attest to his nonpartisan and well-intentioned efforts to protect the independence of the F.B.I., but that will leave at least some readers still questioning the judgment calls he made, including the different approaches he took in handling the bureau’s investigation into Clinton (which was made public) and its investigation into the Trump campaign (which was handled with traditional F.B.I. secrecy).


…and…


Those characteristics can sometimes be seen in Comey’s account of his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation, wherein he seems to have felt a moral imperative to address, in a July 2016 press conference, what he described as her “extremely careless” handling of “very sensitive, highly classified information,” even though he went on to conclude that the bureau recommend no charges be filed against her.  His announcement marked a departure from precedent in that it was done without coordination with Department of Justice leadership and offered more detail about the bureau’s evaluation of the case than usual.


As for his controversial disclosure on Oct. 28, 2016, 11 days before the election, that the F.B.I. was reviewing more Clinton emails that might be pertinent to its earlier investigation, Comey notes here that he had assumed from media polling that Clinton was going to win.  He has repeatedly asked himself, he writes, whether he was influenced by that assumption: “It is entirely possible that, because I was making decisions in an environment where Hillary Clinton was sure to be the next president, my concern about making her an illegitimate president by concealing the restarted investigation bore greater weight than it would have if the election appeared closer or if Donald Trump were ahead in all polls.  But I don’t know.”


In other words, Comey was watching the elections closely and very concerned as to their impact on the Clinton email investigation.  When he thought Hillary had it in the bag, he announced his re-opening of the case in the last week of October, following pressure from the New York cops who had found that the classified emails had spread to Anthony Weiner’s pervert-filled computer, where his proclivities for little girls eventually put him in the can.  The information from the cops was going to spill out anyway.  And the fix was in that Hillary would be let off the hook, by Comey, as he conspired with Attorney General Loretta Lynch, as emails uncovered by Sharyl Attkisson revealed last January.


The implication is that he gave her the initial pass on the emails because he wanted her to win.  He was focused on her “legitimacy.”  Busting sailors for careless photos was all fine with him, but he had no problem with Hillary opening a private server illegally in some guy’s bathroom because it was all about her winning.  He’d give her a stern warning instead of an arrest warrant in the name of his “integrity,” yet there was no way he wouldn’t protect her “legitimacy,” which wasn’t his job.  It’s always OK if the person in power does it, the person he wants to  win does it, right, James?  Laws are for little people.


What we learn here is that Comey was as political an animal as it was possible to be in his decisions about investigating both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.  He didn’t succeed with this philosophy, so now he’s doing his memoirs.  Let’s hope they make a quick trip to the remainder bins.






via American Thinker Blog

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/

Shock: ABC, CBS Taken Aback By ‘Petty,’ ‘Personal’ Comey’s ‘Score Settling’

In a surprising twist, ABC and CBS journalists on Friday were taken aback by the “petty” and “personal” way in which James Comey goes about “settling some scores,” even comparing him to J. Edgar Hoover. On CBS This Morning, Jeff Pegues highlighted Comey “taking shots at the President… talking about  his height and some of his physical characteristics. This is James Comey definitely settling some scores here.” 

Co-host John Dickerson pointed out the hypocrisy in the new book A Higher Loyalty: “Comey is trying to say there are standards and a certain ethical bar that the President is beneath. But, you know,  he makes little digs about the size of the President’s hands, talks about the color of his skin.”  

 

 

Dickerson added: 

The question is whether those morals he’s trying to write this book about get caught up in what is just a political fight and therefore they look like another tool in that fight, which actually brings down their ability to measure the standards of our lawmakers. Turns them into just another thing to use in a back and forth. 

Co-host Gayle King, no conservative, chided that “it looks like pettiness too.” She quickly added though, “That said, I can’t wait to read that book.” 

Journalist Cecilia Vega on ABC’s Good Morning America was shocked by how rough the ex-FBI Director sounds in his new book: 

I’m also really struck by the language that Comey is using to describe the President. He calls his presidency a forest fire. The President himself, he says, is ego driven. And he gets really personal. He talks about the President’s appearance, saying that he appeared shorter in person. And this line was wow to me, he said that he appeared —  the President appeared orange from tanning.

GMA co-host George Stephanopoulos, who will interview Comey on Sunday night, marveled: “Even made comments about the size of his hands.”  ABC journalist Pierre Thomas even went so far as to invoke liberal boogeyman J. Edgar Hoover: 

I spoke to a critic last night who said that the book had an unseemly tell-all quality to it, especially for a former FBI director, and was indicative of Comey’s own ego and desire for the spotlight. Make no mistake, Comey is a lightning rod, perhaps the best known and most controversial FBI director since J. Edgar Hoover. 

However, to Stephanopoulos, this makes Comey simply a “man on a mission,” rather than someone lowering himself to Trump’s level. 

A transcript of the CBS coverage is below. Click “expand” to read more.  

CBS This Morning
4/13/18
7:07am ET

JOHN DICKERSON: Justice correspondent Jeff Pegues is outside FBI headquarters. Jeff, good morning. Let me ask you about this book. What strikes you? The news that is in the book or the scathing tone and judgment from the former FBI director?  

JEFF PEGUES; Well, all of those things strike me about this book. This is Comey not holding back. He is definitely settling some scores in this book. You know? He talks about some of his interactions with President Trump, especially during that briefing in January of 2017 before the inauguration where he was briefing President Trump or candidate or President-Elect Trump on the context of that dossier that was compiled by the former British spy and the Russian investigation. So, there are new details there. He’s talking about the interactions with the President and, though, he’s taking shots at the president, too, with these personal slights, talking about  his height and some of his physical characteristics. This is James Comey definitely settling some scores here. 

8:02:14

DICKERSON: Fired FBI Director James Comey says President Trump threatens much of what is good in this nation. Comey writES about the president in his new memoir, A Higher Loyalty.” The Republican Party calls it self-serving. 

GAYLE KING: The book addresses the possibility that Mr. Trump obstructed justice in part by asking Comey to let go of the investigation of fired National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. But Comey writes this: “The behavior I saw while disturbing and violating basic norms of ethical leadership may fall short of being illegal.” 

NORAH O’DONNELL: Comey also looks at the Hillary Clinton e-mail server investigation. Republicans have condemned his handling of the case. Some Democrats say he cost Clinton the presidency by reopening the probe just before the election. Comey says that after the election, then-President Obama told him, “I picked you to be FBI director because of your integrity and your ability. I want you to know that nothing, nothing has happened in the last year to change my view.” 

DICKERSON: And the President has just tweeted in response to this, saying “Comey is a leaker and a liar. You know, what’s interesting about this book, Comey is trying to say there are standards and a certain ethical bar that the President is beneath. But, you know,  he makes little digs about the size of the President’s hands, talks about the color of his skin. The question is whether those morals he’s trying to write this book about get caught up in what is just a political fight and therefore they look like another tool in that fight, which actually brings down their ability to measure the standards of our lawmakers. Turns them into just another thing to use in a back and forth. 

KING: And it looks like pettiness too. But that said, I can’t wait to read that book. 

 

via NewsBusters – Exposing Liberal Media Bias

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.newsbusters.org/

Donald Trump Goes to War: James Comey a ‘Weak and Untruthful Slime Ball’

Donald Trump Goes to War: James Comey a ‘Weak and Untruthful Slime Ball’



President Donald Trump reacted to the torrent of leaks emerging from former FBI Director James Comey’s book, dismissing him as a “weak and untruthful slime ball” and a “proven leaker and liar.”

“James Comey is a proven LEAKER & LIAR,” he wrote. “Virtually everyone in Washington thought he should be fired for the terrible job he did-until he was, in fact, fired.”

Trump said Comey should be prosecuted for leaking classified information.

“He leaked CLASSIFIED information, for which he should be prosecuted,” he wrote. “He lied to Congress under OATH. He is a weak untruthful slime ball who was, as time has proven, a terrible Director of the FBI.”

Trump criticized Comey’s handling of Hillary Clinton’s email investigation, which resulted in zero prosecutions despite her willingness to share classified information over her private email server.

“His handling of the Crooked Hillary Clinton case, and the events surrounding it, will go down as one of the worst ‘botch jobs’ of history,” Trump wrote. “It was my great honor to fire James Comey!”

ABC News released the first clip of their exclusive interview with Comey on Friday in which he detailed meetings with the president about the salacious “dossier” of fake accusations, including one about Trump with prostitutes in Russia.

Comey described the meeting as “really weird” and an “almost out-of-body experience.”

“I never said, ‘I don’t believe it,’ because I couldn’t say one way or another,” he said.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.breitbart.com

Coffee Shop Attacked, Vandalized, Closed After Posting Happy Sign Libs Didn’t Like

Talk about a sign of the times.

Vandals smashed a window. The words “white coffee” were spray painted in a cruel joke on the building’s exterior.

And a coffee shop that had been doing business in Denver for three years without any problem suddenly found itself a target — and apologizing — for making its neighborhood a better place.

The reason the shop known as Ink! Coffee was in liberal crosshairs was that it committed the sin of “gentrification” — and maybe the bigger sin of being proud of it — two sins that are apparently unforgiveable to the modern liberal.

The confrontation that closed Denver’s Ink! Coffee for a week took place in November in an area of the city called Five Points, which was once largely black, according to The Associated Press, but has “become one of Denver’s trendiest neighborhoods filled with breweries, restaurants and apartments.”

“Breweries, restaurants and apartments” is what liberals would call a dog whistle. Along with “gentrification,” it usually means white people — young adult white people with decent-paying jobs.

So, when Ink! Coffee put out a sign lightheartedly making a reference to “gentrifying” the area, the “progressive” forces hit hard.

It was a clapboard sign on the sidewalk like a million other signs that have stood outside coffee shops and restaurants, carrying messages like the day’s specials or happy hour drink prices. This one said, “Happily Gentrifying the Neighborhood Since 2014.”

It didn’t take long for liberals to notice and start a social media campaign like this Twitter post that declared: “We are not cool with this sign on 29th and Larimer. Bad decision. Bad design. BAD. W.T.F.”

As Helen Raleigh wrote in a piece published by The American Conservative on Tuesday:

Do you think liberals lie about gentrification?

“The sign didn’t go over so well with some residents, many of whom congregated outside the little coffee shop in an angry mood. Hundreds showed up during a subsequent weekend to protest against the gentrification of their neighborhood, which they said had pushed out longtime minority residents. The shop building was sprayed with graffiti; at least one window was broken; the offending sign was carted off. The protesters demanded that the shop be shut down. Some wanted it replaced with a community center dedicated to helping residents with housing and other issues stemming from rising living costs in their neighborhood.”

Unfortunately, the events that played out in Denver last fall are just a symptom of liberals’ refusal to face the reality of what “gentrification” is.

It’s just the way cities naturally evolve because areas that are cheaper to live in tend to attract outsiders. When those outsiders spruce it up enough, the area’s property values go up and it can turn into one of the premier neighborhoods in the city. That’s how Brooklyn, N.Y., became a “hipster heaven,” as NYULivewire once put it.

RELATED: 2nd Largest US Bank Declares War on Gun Owners

The anti-gentrification movement in the Big Apple got so bad that even the liberal Daily News found itself publishing a column headlined: “The left lies about gentrification.”

In the Denver dust-up, not only were the “protesters” (meaning criminals) wrong about the gentrification involved, they missed the point entirely that the shop was just expressing an opinion — as the First Amendment guarantees every American the right to do.

It’s been clear for some time now that the left has no qualms about attacking conservatives on, say, a college campus, but an attack on a coffee shop for expressing an opinion is pretty far outside the pale.

And finally, the coffee shop wasn’t just celebrating itself — it was celebrating its neighborhood, too. And that presumably would include some of the thugs who broke a window and spray painted racist graffiti on the outside of the building.

It’s an almost certain bet that the owners of Ink! Coffee aren’t Donald Trump supporters.

But it’s now an America where Trump opponents feel entitled to disregard the rights of anyone who steps outside what’s perceived to be the progressive circle.

And in this case, that means opening a successful business, bringing money and visitors into a previously underprivliged area and having the temerity to be proud of it.

The attack on Ink! Coffee might have been six months ago, but they’re really a sign of the times.

What do you think? Scroll down to comment below!

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://conservativetribune.com