Army Investigating West Point Grad’s Pro-Communist Twitter Posts

Cadets at the United States Military Academy march out of Eisenhower Barracks Friday, May 31, 1996, for their Graduation Parade at West Point, N.Y. The more than 900 cadets will graduate Saturday. (AP Photo/Jim McKnight)

BY:

September 27, 2017 9:37 am

The U.S. Army announced Tuesday it was investigating a West Point graduate who publicly posted to social media several photos advocating communism, including several that featured him wearing his alma mater’s uniform.

West Point swiftly responded to the posts as they spread rapidly across social media, making clear the messages posted by Second Lieutenant Spenser Rapone “in no way reflect the values of the U.S. Military Academy or the U.S. Army.”

“As figures of public trust, members of the military must exhibit exemplary conduct, and are prohibited from engaging in certain expressions of political speech in uniform,” West Point wrote in a statement. “Second Lieutenant Rapone’s chain of command is aware of his actions and is looking into the matter. The academy is prepared to assist the officer’s chain of command as required.”

In one photo posted to twitter this week, Rapone is holding a military cap with the message “Communism Will Win” scrawled on the inside. A second photo features Rapone wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt under his uniform with the the Argentine communist revolutionary’s iconic mantra, “Hasta la victoria siempre,” posted below.

Several of Rapone’s messages feature the hashtag “Veterans for Kaepernick,” referring to the former 49ers quarterback who sparked the movement of players taking a knee during the National Anthem in protest of racial injustice.

Rapone also boasts his communist views in his twitter bio, referring to himself as a “commie” and member of the Democratic Socialists of America Veterans Working Group.

via Washington Free Beacon

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

NFL Woes Mount as DirecTV Offers Refunds to Customers Offended by Protests

The first shoe has just dropped following the National Football League’s hideously botched reaction to comments by President Trump over national anthem protesters.

The league’s premier television partner DirecTV which provides the popular “Sunday Ticket” package of out-of-market games has announced that it would be providing refunds to customers who may have been offended by the anti-Trump protests that ruined last weekend’s slate of games for millions of fans.

This is a really big deal because it marks the first time that a corporate NFL partner has been made to acknowledge the extent to which the league has offended patriotic Americans. If DirectTV is offering refunds, then there had to have been a huge negative response after Sunday’s fiasco.

The key to getting a refund is linked to specifically mentioning the protests as the reason for the complaint.

As reported by ESPN “DirecTV allows some NFL refunds after anthem controversy”:

DirecTV is offering unprecedented refunds for fans who want to cancel their NFL Sunday Ticket package, if they inform the company that they are doing so due to the recent protests during the national anthem, a source confirmed.

Once the season starts, fans usually cannot cancel their subscriptions, but AT&T, which owns DirecTV, decided to change the policy due to the sensitivity of the issue. The price of the package, which allows fans to get out-of-market games, is about $280.

An AT&T spokesperson declined to confirm the cancellation policy and said the company would have no numbers to share.

The exemption was first reported by The Wall Street Journal.

The company is unwilling to confirm this lest it trigger a run on cancellations but the word is now out thanks to the Wall Street Journal report.

This is proof that NFL sponsor boycotts can be an effective tool to bring an end to the anti-Americanism and the infusion of radical leftist and racial politics into games that not that long ago, offered a brief sanctuary from the woes of the world.

Boycotts aren’t limited to the left who have used their pressure tactics to wage a part of their campaign of cultural cleansing through economic pressure and public shaming of corporations who are typically run by gutless wonders who will quickly knuckle-under at the first sign of adversity.

The NFL’s self-inflicted damage, however, will likely be long-lasting and nothing short of the firing of Commissioner Roger Goodell should be the short-term objective of any such boycotts. It is under his “leadership” that this situation exploded and as the old Greek proverb goes – a fish rots from the head down.

DirecTV wisely chose to honor the wishes of its customers and shareholders can direct their ire at the NFL and Goodell for busting a cap into the goose that laid the golden egg.

Could lawsuits from fans be far behind?

via Downtrend.com

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

Obama Hauls In Millions From Wall Street, Not A Peep From The Media

He hasn’t made enough yet.

It’s the height of hypocrisy.

Seriously, it could not be any more hypocritical, or it would just sound made up.

Former President Barack Obama is hauling in millions from Wall Street banks — the very institutions he harangued throughout both of his presidential campaigns.

Throughout their political careers, both Hillary Clinton and Mr. Obama berated banks and the “fat cats” who run them as heartless corporations (while filling their own pockets with their cash). Mrs. Clinton made millions giving speeches to the huge financial institutions, swatting away charges of hypocrisy. This apparently didn’t really sell with Mr. and Mrs. America, who didn’t elect her president.

Now it’s Mr. Obama’s turn to make bank.

Last month he spoke to clients of Northern Trust Corp. for about $400,000, a person familiar with his appearance told Bloomberg News.

But that’s not a one-off. “Last week, he reminisced about the White House for Carlyle Group LP, one of the world’s biggest private equity firms, according to two people who were there,” Bloomberg wrote.

Bloomberg went on to note that he would “give a keynote speech at investment bank Cantor Fitzgerald LP’s health-care conference,” which happened Monday.

You can bet they brought a hefty chunk of change: The Cantor Fitzgerald speech was worth about $400,000, according to Agence France-Presse, citing “a person briefed on Obama’s planned appearance.”

And not every paid appearance by Mr. Obama is even known.

“Obama’s appearance at the Carlyle conference in Washington was previously unreported. The private equity giant has enjoyed some of the best political connections in the world, with executives and advisers who have included former presidents, prime ministers and cabinet secretaries. Obama discussed his life and the decisions he made in the White House, the people who heard him said,” according to last week’s Bloomberg report.

At his apparent going rate, just those three speaking engagements we know about brought Mr. Obama a $1.2 million haul. He hasn’t even been out of office a year, and the very places he bashed while in office are paying him big bucks to swing by and speak.

Keep reading…

via Weasel Zippers

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/2s3tLUa

Trump Unleashes Video of McCain Promise That Has Him Scrambling

Politics

Trump Unleashes Video of McCain Promise That Has Him Scrambling

Advertisement – story continues below

Any 30-year career in the Senate is bound to have some highs and some lows. However, for Sen. John McCain, those lows seem to be agglomerating themselves in what are sure to be his final years in office.

While nobody ever thought that McCain was particularly a movement conservative — in fact, RINOs his size were usually only espied at the zoo or on safari — his unreliability became a major issue after he effectively sank Obamacare repeal in the Senate.

If McCain thought that his vote would be forgotten, or perhaps remembered as a profile in courage — well, it certainly doesn’t look that way from here. And, as President Donald Trump reminded everyone, McCain’s vote was a stab in the back to voters who relied on McCain’s repeated promises to repeal Obamacare.

Advertisement – story continues below

In a video posted by the president to Twitter on Monday, McCain is seen saying he would repeal and replace President Barack Obama’s signature legislation over and over again:

This is what McCain supporters are scrambling to hide — it’s not just once or twice. That video is over six minutes long. That’s approximately the average length of one of the deep cuts on The Cure’s “Disintegration.” And, you know what? Listening to it is roughly about as depressing.

Advertisement – story continues below

Yes, I know, John McCain is a war hero. Yes, I know he’s going through a tough time right now with his cancer diagnosis. Yes, I know, he has done some good things for the GOP. He has served his country in both the military and the Senate.

However, now that the GOP-led Congress has given up its final effort to pass Obamacare repeal — a weaksauce, establishment-friendly last-ditch effort at that — it’s instructive to remember who shares the most responsibility for that failure.

All McCain had to do was cast the deciding vote and the Senate’s plan would have gone into conference, where problems could have been hammered out. That’s all he was being asked to do. That’s what he torpedoed at age 81, in what is almost certainly his final term in the Senate.

President Trump isn’t going to forget that McCain singlehandedly killed the last chance to accomplish what the Arizona senator has been promising for years. Neither should you.

Advertisement – story continues below

Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter with your thoughts on this video.

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/2gEOIzE

BACKLASH: Pittsburgh Steelers Gear Store Faces Boycott Over Anthem Protests

As more than a tenth of NFL players were refusing to stand for the national anthem on Sunday in “solidarity” with other anthem kneelers and in “resistance” to President Trump, a few teams, including the Pittsburgh Steelers, opted to stay in the locker room during the performance of The Star-Spangled Banner. The Steelers’ decision — prompted by head coach Mike Tomlin’s desire to “protect” his players from having to choose how to handle the situation — was complicated when Steeler and former Army Ranger Alejandro Villanueva defied his coach’s orders and stood at the edge of the tunnel to show respect to the country he’d laid his life on the line to protect.

While the millionaires and billionaires in the NFL have chosen to fully embrace the politically and racially charged anthem protests — which a majority of fans find distasteful — the average Americans who make a living off of the NFL are already feeling some of the impact of that decision. As highlighted by Penn Live, one of those middle class Americans already experiencing some of the blowback from #TakeTheKnee Sunday is Susan Moedinger, owner of Steel City Sports, a Steelers merchandise store.

In an interview with Penn Live, Moedinger describes the strong response her store has already suffered due to the league and the team’s handling of the anti-patriotic anthem movement. On Monday, the day after over 180 players kneeled during the anthem, Moedinger’s store was flooded with calls and social media posts from prior customers declaring that they’d never shop there again. WATCH ​(h/t PJ Media):

VIDEO

Other businesses are also experiencing backlash over the protests, including DirecTV, which has taken the unprecedented step of offering refunds to NFL package subscribers who are disgusted by the league’s official endorsement of the anti-anthem movement.

​After making headlines and selling a lot of jerseys (in fact, his jersey instantly become the top-selling jersey in the NFL), Villanueva eventually apologized for having supposedly thrown his team “under the bus” by his simple display of patriotism.

“I made coach Tomlin look bad, and that is my fault and my fault only. I made my teammates look bad, and that is my fault … only,” he said.

Villanueva’s apology came after Tomlin chided him for breaking with the team on his response by wanting to show honor to his country.

via Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/1TJbF1r

Jihad-loving Muslim who murdered a US soldier has a prison-diet demand. And a judge is listening.

Who is the inmate and what was his crime?

  • Abdulhakim Muhammad is serving a life sentence without parole for his 2009 drive-by shooting of two soldiers — killing one, Pvt. William Long of the U.S. Army — outside a military recruiting station in Little Rock, Arkansas.
  • He pleaded guilty to capital murder, attempted capital murder and 10 counts of unlawful discharge of a firearm from a vehicle, Arkansas Online reported.
  • Before his conversion to Islam, Muhammad was a “middle-class, Baptist kid from Memphis, born Carlos Bledsoe, who played youth basketball and worked at Chuck E. Cheese’s,” the Knoxville News-Sentinel reported.

Why did he carry out the shooting?

  • He was preparing for jihad, the News-Sentinel said.
  • In his own words, “It’s a war out against Islam and Muslims and I’m on the side of the Muslims point blank. … The U.S. has to pay for the rape, murder, bloodshed, blasphemy it has done and still doing to the Muslims and Islam. So consider this a small retaliation the best is to come Allah willing. This is not the first attack and won’t be the last,” the News-Sentinel added.
  • Muhammad sent seven handwritten letters to the Memphis Commercial Appeal regretting his failure to do more harm, the News-Sentinel noted.
  • A law enforcement official told The Associated Press that Muhammad had been under investigation by an FBI-led terrorism task force since his return from Yemen earlier in 2009, the News-Sentinel added.

What is his dietary demand being heard in federal court?

  • Muhammad said the Arkansas Department of Correction is violating his right to religious freedom by refusing to provide him a “halal diet” in accordance with his Muslim religion, Arkansas Online reported.
  • “Mr. Muhammad sincerely believes as a practicing Muslim he must consume a halal diet,” his attorney, Jess Askew, told the outlet.
  • Askew told Arkansas Online that such a diet requires daily consumption of halal meats, which could be fish or other meats except for pork.
  • Muhammad complained in a 2015 lawsuit that court decisions in 2002 and 2006 led the department to begin serving kosher food for inmates whose religions required it, but that it won’t accommodate him in the same way, the outlet said.
  • A judge began hearing testimony Monday, the outlet said.

(H/T: Town Hall)

via TheBlaze.com – Stories

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

Communist West Point Graduate Called Mattis An ‘Evil, Vile F***’

Mattis is possibly the most well-loved military men to come along in a while. Communist is not only evil, but wrong. The real question is who nominated this evil character for West Point and are there more?

Via Daily Caller:

Communist West Point graduate 2nd. Lt. Spenser Rapone called Secretary of Defense James Mattis the most “evil, vile f***” in the entire Trump administration.

After reports emerged tying Rapone to the Twitter account @punkproletarian on Monday, West Point issued a statement distancing itself from Rapone’s tweets, which included calling for political violence against the right, referring to Trump as a fascist, and openly promoting communism while in uniform. West Point also noted that Rapone’s chain of command had opened an investigation.

But one of the tweets which has so far escaped attention is Rapone denigrating Mattis in the most vulgar of terms.

Keep reading…

via Weasel Zippers

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/2s3tLUa

Special Counsel Mueller Uncovered a Long List of Obama Administration Crimes – Will He Investigate?

Guest post by Joe Hoft

Yesterday on The Rush Limbaugh Show, Rush shared post by the Gateway Pundit headlined: “Mueller Investigation Desperate As More Information About Obama’s Illegal Spying Is Uncovered.

 According to Rush, the reason the Mueller investigation keeps hiring people is because they can’t find a crime.

As Rush explained, there wasn’t a Trump crime that got the special counsel going, and yet the special counsel regulation, specifies that the Attorney General or Acting Attorney General has to have an underlying crime for which a special counsel is to pursue.

Mueller’s investigation is based on a lie and Obama used the same lie to get Trump investigated.

What Rush concludes is that he wouldn’t be surprised if Mueller is uncovering plenty of crimes by the Obama Administration.  Rush is right. The Obama Administration has a track record of dishonest and criminal actions while Obama was President so the likelihood that Obama oversaw hundreds of illegal spying activities cannot be far from the truth.

In order for the Obama team to illegally spy on individuals, it had to involve abuse of the FISA court.  The FISA Court was put in place in 1978 when Congress enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA):

The Court sits in Washington D.C., and is composed of eleven federal district court judges who are designated by the Chief Justice of the United States. Each judge serves for a maximum of seven years and their terms are staggered to ensure continuity on the Court. By statute, the judges must be drawn from at least seven of the United States judicial circuits, and three of the judges must reside within 20 miles of the District of Columbia. Judges typically sit for one week at a time, on a rotating basis.

Pursuant to FISA, the Court entertains applications submitted by the United States Government for approval of electronic surveillance, physical search, and other investigative actions for foreign intelligence purposes. Most of the Court’s work is conducted ex parte as required by statute, and due to the need to protect classified national security information.

We know that every single judge on the FISA Court from May 2016 through President Trump’s inauguration was appointed during Obama’s Administration and all were still on the court through May of 2017.

We know that current Chief Justice John Roberts appointed all the judges to the FISA court.  Judge Roberts is famous for supporting Obamacare in two radical positions, one of which Justice Antonin Scalia, in his withering dissent, refered to as “applesauce”.  Knowing this, it is concerning that Judge Roberts is responsible for the makeup of the current FISA court.

We know that according to ABC News:

More than a thousand applications for electronic surveillance, all signed by the attorney general, are submitted each year, and the vast majority are approved. From 2009 to 2015, for example, more than 10,700 applications for electronic surveillance were submitted, and only one was denied in its entirety, according to annual reports sent to Congress. Another one was denied in part, and 17 were withdrawn by the government.

As noted above, all applications to the FISA Court were signed off on by the Attorney General and therefore all applications that were processed in Obama’s second term were signed off on by Loretta Lynch.  This means that Lynch signed off on all requests for wire tapping President Donald Trump during the Presidential race.

We know that Lynch requested that the Head of the FBI, according to his sworn testimony, refer to the Clinton email investigation in 2016 as a ‘matter’.  Lynch also later released a video calling for the need for more marching, blood and death on the streets.  Perhaps this was her asinine attempt to overthrow the government so she doesn’t go to jail.

We know that the Obama Administration spied on reporters like Sharyl Attkisson and others who condemned the Obama Administration.  Susan Rice spied on Trump officials and requested their unmasking.  Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan targeted Americans to spy onObama UN Ambassador Samantha Power sought to unmask over 260 Americans in 2016.  Why would a UN Director ever need this information?  Obama’s former DNI Director James Clapper, famous for lying in front of Congress and denying that the US spied on Americans in the movie “Snowden“, denied knowing that Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort was spied on after stating he would absolutely know if a FISA warrant existed.

Even a low level former Assistant Defense Secretary admitted spying on Trump and leaking to the press.

Many if not all these actions by the Obama Administration were politically motivated and therefore criminal. 

Spying, lying and denying under oath are all criminal acts.  It will be another crime for the Mueller investigation not to bring charges against the Obama Administration.

 

The post Special Counsel Mueller Uncovered a Long List of Obama Administration Crimes – Will He Investigate? appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/SIPp5X

Can We Please Stop Pretending the NFL Protests Have Anything to Do with Free Speech?

Following the lead of the now unemployed Colin Kaepernick and on the heels of some fiery rhetoric from President Trump on the matter, more National Football League players than ever knelt during the National Anthem on Sunday in order to protest the institutional white racism in America that they presume exists. 

Invariably, there are the stock defenders of their actions invoking the First Amendment as an enshrined protection for their actions.  Even some unlikelier defenders, such as National Review, have framed this as a free speech issue.

To be perfectly clear, doing so is an exercise in stupidity.  The First Amendment provides Americans protection to enact displays of protest, certainly.  The question that goes continually and aggravatingly unaddressed is, protection from whom?

It would be wishful thinking, I suppose, to imagine that Americans who support the NFL protesters might take the fifteen or twenty seconds necessary to google and read the First Amendment. 

It reads:

Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

“Congress shall make no law.”  The framers inscribed a document related to the powers and limitations of the federal government.  Therefore, it is only logical to understand that this refers to the federal Congress.  The federal Congress shall make no laws to infringe upon these rights.

So where is the federal law that outlaws kneeling during the National Anthem at a pro football game?  If there were such a law, it would run afoul of the First Amendment.  But there is no such law.

Also, I’m not aloof to the fact that judicial precedent in case law evidences a much broader interpretation of the First Amendment, suggesting that it applies to the state and local governments as well.  Even considering that broader scope raises another question: who is rushing to arrest the kneeling sports star for his violation of any such standing law at the state level?  No one.

So what has the First Amendment to do with any of this? 

Nothing.  Not one single thing.  Anyone with half a brain and thirty seconds to digest the meaning of the First Amendment should be able to understand that without difficulty.

Now let’s move on and consider what these National Anthem protests actually mean.

The kneelers argue that they do not mean to disrespect the flag, or those who have fought and died for this country, or America as a whole.  Of course, their actions certainly disrespect all of those things, and suggesting otherwise should be ridiculous on its face. 

So why, exactly, are they kneeling?

Those kneeling assert that there is an epidemic of white police officers who work their beat every night with the explicit intention to murder innocent black people.  They are suggesting that there is an epidemic of institutional white racism in this country going unaddressed, and that the only way to draw attention to this, the Black Lives Matter narrative, is to kneel during the National Anthem at pro football games.

There is no convincing evidence that either claim is true, and it is a malicious narrative that has arguably already led to a death toll among police officers being targeted for their presumably widespread racism and brutality. 

The left argues that the players’ demonstrations force me to recognize that this narrative exists, as if I’m not forced to recognize the existence of this narrative with the myriad protests and riots infused with this Black Lives Matter-inspired rhetoric and impetus.  They imagine that I and millions of other Americans don’t accept this narrative only because it’s not being adequately thrown in our faces.

I, among millions of other Americans, refuse to accept that.  I therefore find those kneeling during the National Anthem in order to advance that narrative despicable, entitled babies for whom I have no respect and who are undeserving of my financial support.   

Rush Limbaugh’s comments encapsulate my feeling on this matter.  For me, it is sadness more than anger.  But the NFL has, regrettably, created these circumstances.

The aforementioned “free speech” argument touted by defenders of the NFL and the protesters fails on another front, beyond the immediate substance of the First Amendment.  That is, the NFL is quite comfortable censoring free speech, though it’s unmistakable that the speech they choose to prohibit runs afoul of a leftist ideological impulse.  In 2016, the NFL threatened to fine teams who decorated their cleats with a “Never Forget” logo commemorating the 15th anniversary of the September 11th attacks.  They prohibited the Cowboys from wearing helmet decals honoring the five police officers killed by a Black Lives Matter advocate.

Yet while stifling this “free expression,” they have no problems whatsoever with the Rams players taking the field with the “Hands up, Don’t Shoot!” gesture, which was based on an entirely fictitious and dangerous narrative that led to those five Dallas police officers being slain.  And now, when players choose to disrespect the flag and our nation on the fans’ time and the fans’ dime to perpetuate that very same narrative, the NFL is equally conciliatory in allowing it.

And the NFL has the audacity to suggest that the current politicization in football was created by Donald Trump?  Though I don’t agree with him using his platform as president to call for the firing of kneeling players or for a boycott of the NFL, these are certainly not circumstances of his design.

On Monday Night Football this week, the Dallas Cowboys and the Arizona Cardinals both locked arms and knelt before the National Anthem, acknowledging the protesters’ position.  Then they stood and locked arms during the National Anthem.  It was a charade all too obviously meant to placate fans, while still giving a platform to espouse the dangerous and entirely untrue Black Lives Matter narrative.  “Unity” was the theme.  More “division” is what you can expect.

The most troubling thought crossing my mind?  That somewhere, Colin Kaepernick is smiling, quite pleased with himself.

William Sullivan blogs at Political Palaver and can be followed on Twitter.

Following the lead of the now unemployed Colin Kaepernick and on the heels of some fiery rhetoric from President Trump on the matter, more National Football League players than ever knelt during the National Anthem on Sunday in order to protest the institutional white racism in America that they presume exists. 

Invariably, there are the stock defenders of their actions invoking the First Amendment as an enshrined protection for their actions.  Even some unlikelier defenders, such as National Review, have framed this as a free speech issue.

To be perfectly clear, doing so is an exercise in stupidity.  The First Amendment provides Americans protection to enact displays of protest, certainly.  The question that goes continually and aggravatingly unaddressed is, protection from whom?

It would be wishful thinking, I suppose, to imagine that Americans who support the NFL protesters might take the fifteen or twenty seconds necessary to google and read the First Amendment. 

It reads:

Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

“Congress shall make no law.”  The framers inscribed a document related to the powers and limitations of the federal government.  Therefore, it is only logical to understand that this refers to the federal Congress.  The federal Congress shall make no laws to infringe upon these rights.

So where is the federal law that outlaws kneeling during the National Anthem at a pro football game?  If there were such a law, it would run afoul of the First Amendment.  But there is no such law.

Also, I’m not aloof to the fact that judicial precedent in case law evidences a much broader interpretation of the First Amendment, suggesting that it applies to the state and local governments as well.  Even considering that broader scope raises another question: who is rushing to arrest the kneeling sports star for his violation of any such standing law at the state level?  No one.

So what has the First Amendment to do with any of this? 

Nothing.  Not one single thing.  Anyone with half a brain and thirty seconds to digest the meaning of the First Amendment should be able to understand that without difficulty.

Now let’s move on and consider what these National Anthem protests actually mean.

The kneelers argue that they do not mean to disrespect the flag, or those who have fought and died for this country, or America as a whole.  Of course, their actions certainly disrespect all of those things, and suggesting otherwise should be ridiculous on its face. 

So why, exactly, are they kneeling?

Those kneeling assert that there is an epidemic of white police officers who work their beat every night with the explicit intention to murder innocent black people.  They are suggesting that there is an epidemic of institutional white racism in this country going unaddressed, and that the only way to draw attention to this, the Black Lives Matter narrative, is to kneel during the National Anthem at pro football games.

There is no convincing evidence that either claim is true, and it is a malicious narrative that has arguably already led to a death toll among police officers being targeted for their presumably widespread racism and brutality. 

The left argues that the players’ demonstrations force me to recognize that this narrative exists, as if I’m not forced to recognize the existence of this narrative with the myriad protests and riots infused with this Black Lives Matter-inspired rhetoric and impetus.  They imagine that I and millions of other Americans don’t accept this narrative only because it’s not being adequately thrown in our faces.

I, among millions of other Americans, refuse to accept that.  I therefore find those kneeling during the National Anthem in order to advance that narrative despicable, entitled babies for whom I have no respect and who are undeserving of my financial support.   

Rush Limbaugh’s comments encapsulate my feeling on this matter.  For me, it is sadness more than anger.  But the NFL has, regrettably, created these circumstances.

The aforementioned “free speech” argument touted by defenders of the NFL and the protesters fails on another front, beyond the immediate substance of the First Amendment.  That is, the NFL is quite comfortable censoring free speech, though it’s unmistakable that the speech they choose to prohibit runs afoul of a leftist ideological impulse.  In 2016, the NFL threatened to fine teams who decorated their cleats with a “Never Forget” logo commemorating the 15th anniversary of the September 11th attacks.  They prohibited the Cowboys from wearing helmet decals honoring the five police officers killed by a Black Lives Matter advocate.

Yet while stifling this “free expression,” they have no problems whatsoever with the Rams players taking the field with the “Hands up, Don’t Shoot!” gesture, which was based on an entirely fictitious and dangerous narrative that led to those five Dallas police officers being slain.  And now, when players choose to disrespect the flag and our nation on the fans’ time and the fans’ dime to perpetuate that very same narrative, the NFL is equally conciliatory in allowing it.

And the NFL has the audacity to suggest that the current politicization in football was created by Donald Trump?  Though I don’t agree with him using his platform as president to call for the firing of kneeling players or for a boycott of the NFL, these are certainly not circumstances of his design.

On Monday Night Football this week, the Dallas Cowboys and the Arizona Cardinals both locked arms and knelt before the National Anthem, acknowledging the protesters’ position.  Then they stood and locked arms during the National Anthem.  It was a charade all too obviously meant to placate fans, while still giving a platform to espouse the dangerous and entirely untrue Black Lives Matter narrative.  “Unity” was the theme.  More “division” is what you can expect.

The most troubling thought crossing my mind?  That somewhere, Colin Kaepernick is smiling, quite pleased with himself.

William Sullivan blogs at Political Palaver and can be followed on Twitter.

via American Thinker

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/TYiPDP